What is Digg?Sponsored by Guitar Center
When Heavy-handed Hints Fail--Guitar Center Wishlist Posters view!
guitarcenter.com - Cool personalized designs send a friendly reminder that a new Stratocaster would rock, thanks.
113 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+77Me to Hollywood: No we don't.
- edzieba, on 10/12/2007, -3/+64"DRM is impossible to hack now. "
El oh el. DRM requires you to have both the encrypted data and the key in your possession. Therefore you have all you need to decrypt it. It's an inherent flaw in the concept. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -17/+75If it wasn't for Steve Jobs and the success of iTunes, the MPAA and RIAA may have abandoned DRM by now. Unfortunately, Apple loyalists have shown that they're willing to buy DRMed content in vast quantities, thus giving the MPAA and RIAA no reason to try to be more open with consumers.
As the industry leader in online music/video retail, Apple should take charge and dictate the terms. Too bad this company has a long history of proprietary and closed platforms and services. - chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -0/+49makes me laugh that they think DRM will stop piracy.
someone wanna send these guys a letter (since the obviously don't have a computer) and explain. - velvethead, on 10/12/2007, -9/+56"If it wasn't for Steve Jobs and the success of iTunes, the MPAA and RIAA may have abandoned DRM by now."
No, we would have been forced into some dreadful MS DRM, probably only allowing us to 'rent' our music. We would not be allowed to burn playlists at all, and we would pay for the privilege of having our music on each device we own.
Apple has a DRM monopoly no doubt, and its why I'm not selling my stock anytime soon. And I'm not saying its right either. But without Apple, the MPAA, RIAA, and Microsoft would be enforcing some pretty Orwellian terms on us by now. The industry isn't pissed that DRM became dominant, they are pissed that it went to the one company that won't completely roll their customers to them. - TritonX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+45Users to Holywood, we are the distributors now. So lower your prices and restrictions and you might get back lost business. If the offer is too high you are allienating your public. And in case you didn't learnd it already, DRM won't stop anyone, it's just wasting cpu cycle.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+40Consumers to Hollywood:
(the finger) - sishgupta, on 10/12/2007, -5/+45***** Hollywood.
- wm2010russ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+33exactly. drm doesnt stop piracy, it actually encourages it. and for the first time in history, hollywood is actually upset that people want to watch their crap? wow. i guess hollywood truly has devolved from an institution of spreading art and ideas to just another corrupt, greedy company that will sue 9 year old girls just to make an extra dime.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+35***** Hollywood...
Tips to avoid Piracy:
Cut movie ticket prices in HALF.
Cut Pay for everyone except the movie extras down to 1/4 what they pay now.
Cut DVD movies costs to 1/4 what they are now.
Hollywood isn't even really Hollywood anymore. All of these movies are filmed in Canada or Australia nowadays... All to avoid paying UNION wages in California for Grips and Gaffers. - xXShadowstormXx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+27What the hell. No we don't. DRM doesn't stop piracy, it only hurts legitimate consumers. Defectivebydesign.com.
- DanmanD87, on 10/12/2007, -0/+27You forgot something:
Increase the writers wages so we get some decent stories - goat2, on 10/12/2007, -6/+30im sure apple will too
- chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19@junkmail02
does it really? they already have HD version of Serenity online. - BeeWolf, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21You forget that prior to Apple's FairPlay DRM people couldn't burn CDs of the music they bought. And if they could, they were limited to one burn. And if they stopped paying their subscription, they'd lose their music for good. I'll admit that I'd rather have no DRM if you can admit that Apple's iTunes is successful precisely because it was the first (and only) to strike the first balance which tempted the content providers to let go a little and tempted consumers to actually buy a little.
There are those who believe that if Apple hadn't come along and been successful at this then the RIAA would have abandoned DRM entirely by now. This is nonsense. Here's what would have happened. Everyone would still be trying to sell heavily DRM'd music online and nobody would be buying it. Meanwhile in an effort to stop the P2P downloading, the RIAA would have gone full-steam ahead with their plans to DRM store-bought CDs and they'd all be that way by now. Sound good to you? - cmiz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17I specifically refuse to buy from iTunes because of their DRM. A lot of times, it's even harder to get my hands on a song, and I'd have absolutely no problem paying the $.99 for the song if it were DRM free... but DRM = no money, I just flat out refuse.
- jsg7, on 10/12/2007, -14/+28In theory, there's nothing wrong with DRM. It's mainly an issue with making it easy to use and not unwieldy or obnoxious.
I don't blame the music and movie industry for wanting it. They want to stop piracy. I just blame them for being so draconian about it. Frankly, if pirates want it enough then no DRM is secure. But a little DRM will keep normal computer users from doing it... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Hopefully Jobs won't bend over and spread to these greedy ***** like M$ did with Vista. Hollywood won't be happy until all content is pay per view.
- Mekun, on 10/12/2007, -12/+26What are you smoking, apple is just as bad as MS. Damn fanboi's. Apple just makes it seem like its not so bad,.
- ekso, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13This guys are like dinosaurs struggling against the meteor of Progress...
- clyde2801, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Hollywood and Nashville to Steve Jobs: Bill Gates is now our bitch. Now it's your turn to suck it (unzips pants).
Kinda funny how Microsuck can't protect Vista from malware, but they can protect the content producers. Tells you where their priorities are, doesn't it? - bieber, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12@ junkmail
...you can... - vhold, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15igotnotime:
That's actually a somewhat hilarious part of the iPod. Unless my estimation skills are wildly busted, to fill up an 80 gig iPod with iTunes music would cost somewhere between 12-16 thousand dollars.
80 gigs = 81920 megs / 6megs-a-song * 1 buck a song = $13,653
If that's not an implicit catering to people with pirated music, what is? - ninsei, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Canada bad?
- readme, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11"Certainly much less time than it will take Microsoft and the recording industry to realize they're playing a losing game, and that trying to make digital files uncopyable is like trying to make water not wet." -- Bruce Schneier
http://www.schneier.com/essay-126.html - zephc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Because those in Hollywood live in a fantasy bubble where cotton-candy clouds float above gumdrop fields and chocolate candy streams. They don't have to interact with reality.
- drjson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10What they need to realize is that to most people Digital = Disposable and their current pricing and distribution isn't working. Sell people the content DRM free so they can use it how they want at a price that's viable for them to consider purchasing.
Or start a new distribution model that uses DRM in a reasonable manner. As a consumer, with devices like AppleTV, I'd love to have a netflix type service, and I honestly wouldn't mind having DRM on that data. It makes sense to me in that model.
However, I don't see why I'm paying a 'convenience' fee on movies I download through iTunes or whatever else so I can use it in fewer places and can't use the data how I want to. I'm paying nearly the same for the DVD either way, atleast I know with the DVD, as long as I have it in hand I can use it. - Fosnez, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11@ jsg7 7
"In theory, there's nothing wrong with DRM"
And in theory, there is nothing wrong with communism... - ...---..., on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I think thay they are just dumb to restrict it so much. I mean, the amount of people that might go through the hassle of ripping & pirating a movie is small compared to the number of people that will actually pay for it as long as it is easy to download and load on to their players. The industry cuts it's nose off to spite it's face.
They said the same thing with every freakin' new media that has come out - from cassettes, VCR, video disc - now digital formats. Haven't they learned? The easier it is for people to get it, the more sales there are - DUH! - zetsurin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10They need to remove noisy idiots from the cinemas as well.
- PueSi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9DRM is DRM.
If i pay for the content I want to do whatever the ***** I want with it. If I want to listen to it on my toilet I have the right to do so.
Do they even realize that you can get the exact same content online without DRM, FOR FREE?
Why would I pay for something that's less that the pirate content? - monkeyrun, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12"If it wasn't for Steve Jobs and the success of iTunes, the MPAA and RIAA may have abandoned DRM by now."
Yup, instead we'll be paying the studios every time we buy a Zune. - dsmx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9To quote south park "are you high or just incredibly stupid" How could hollywood not of at least caught on slightly to the fact that people don't want DRM content, all they'll succeed in doing is increasing piracy. Well done hollywood you still haven't learned from your mistakes.
- mikeroySoft, on 10/19/2009, -0/+7Maybe do away with test screenings too. It's impossible to please everyone, so ***** them and let the artists make the movies they want to make, let the chips fall where they may after that. If they didn't sink $100M into making a movie, it wouldn't be a big deal if it didn't capture the wallets of every living person.
- ScottMaximus1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I get all my music for free
- igotnotime, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I hear ya VHold, for sure. I could claim I own every CD in mine. LOL
Seriously though since I got mine I have my personal library of about 40GB and the rest are some videos. But to be honest the only thing I use it for now are podcasts, I haven't hardly listened to my own mp3's yet. Catering yes I agree they are. I'll be damned if I am going to pay $46 for a season of ANY show to watch on my iPod and computer alone. DRM is the only reason I won't buy anything from iTunes. - Hoov, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9One word: Revolución!
- TimSee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6There's a reason very expensive commercial software *isn't* protected by DRM. The technology industry as a whole realized long ago it was a losing battle and a waste of time. The only thing the the RIAA and MPAA are accomplishing is that they are pissing off their customers. Every DRM that's been put to market has been cracked. To make it future-proof inherently makes it economically infeasible.
I once heard Michael Dell say at a technology conference that "we will never protect a legacy business model". This particular comment was in reference to proprietary mainframe and UNIX systems but it struck me as (not only smart) exactly the OPPOSITE of what the recording and movie industries are trying to do with DRM. It points out the fallacy that is at the core of all DRM.
Some day, maybe not for a while, but SOME day there will be something better than the iPod and iTunes. At that point, a few hundred million customers who have spent (literally) BILLIONS of dollars will realize that DRM really sucks. Kudos to Apple for making Fairplay invisible to the Average Joe...but at some point Joe is going to figure out all the music he "bought" won't work outside the Apple infrastructure and then all hell is going to break loose. - Beaver6813, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Yeah, Canada are pushing through even stricter copyright rules.
- vhold, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11@velvethead
"No, we would have been forced into some dreadful MS DRM, probably only allowing us to 'rent' our music. We would not be allowed to burn playlists at all, and we would pay for the privilege of having our music on each device we own."
The problem with that is that we wouldn't be forced into anything. The original commenter's point is that people forced themselves into Apple's DRM. If people hadn't done that, it doesn't necessarily mean they would have forced themselves into something else. If people had rejected DRM outright from the start, do you think it would have survived? - BeeWolf, on 10/12/2007, -15/+20The Apple way is to give them just enough DRM to make them go along with it, while making the actual restrictions as liberal as possible so people will still buy. Worked with music on iTunes.
The Microsoft way is to give the content providers their wet-dream list of restrictions. And then nobody buys anything. - igotnotime, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Forgive me 2.5 songs sold on iTunes for each iPod sold.
http://digg.com/apple/1_billion_songs_purchased_iTunes_songs_plotted_on_a_graph - daines88, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Crawl out from under your rock, CDs have DRM on them too.
- gotamd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Except that the DRM on CD's is hilariously easy to circumvent and the quality is better.
- weirdlookinguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4WHEN is Hollywood going to LEARN that the consumer wants cheap, no-strings-attached media?! If songs were $.50 to $.75 and had no DRM, I would not resort to P2P for my music if they did this! However, at the moment, the single best solution for buying music is the DRM'ed crap from Apple. Want to string it to your network media player hooked up to your stereo? Sorry, it doesn't work with DRM AAC. Have to go through several motherboard changes on your laptop, making iTunes think it was a different PC every time, 5 times? (This happened to me) Sorry, you're locked out because your music can only go on 5 PC's Max. Don't tell me I can have Apple disable them all and I can get 5 more PC's, I shouldn't have to do this. I shouldn't have to burn my music onto a CD and re-import it to use it as a soundtrack for my home movies. When will Hollywood LEARN? If music was cheap and non-DRM, I wouldn't mind paying! Until then....
- digitalrhino, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@igotnotime
"However when I traded my Zune up for an iPod I lost that luxury only to find that Rhapsody and Yahoo both would not even work with my new lovely ipod."
Odd you never noticed that neither of those services worked with your Zune either. - SamsLembas, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Well, I will just continue using my "If it ain't on iTunes, get it off file sharing" strategy. I don't much care whether they put it on iTunes or not. I would like to get it legally, but I can't say I am always disappointed when I cannot find something on iTunes.
As long as Jobs does not give in, I'm happy. - 3dom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4***** hollywood and the rest of them. Piracy, the best choice.
- Beaver6813, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I have turned to legally buying music again after a while now, but initially i found it actually really much harder to buy legal music than to get hold of illegal music. Legal music comes with so much restrictions that even with the will power to go legal, you end up searching through every God damn site and then end up settling on the music that comes with the least DRM. Its not the way it should be, thanks to DRM i am now having to buy non-DRM CD's. They seem to be the least DRM infected material i can find -_-
I hate DRM protected downloads, its makes it so much easier to just download it illegally than to try and obtain it legally whilst not being restricted to playing it on X amount of ipods and x amount of computers.
Please... fight the power Steve :) You're DRM is restrictive enough, we dont need it anymore. (We dont really need it at all actually...) - elpepe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3DRM is a joke. It literally only stops its target audience -- people who are willing to pay -- from enjoying their paid content. People who believe that all information should be free are going to find ways around any DRM, because -- Newsflash, here: if you can view it or listen to it, you can copy it. There has never been or will never be any DRM scheme that can stop copying and sharing.
This is an opportunity for content providers to unlock all their content. People who would fileshare will still fileshare, and sales will go up from people who will pay. You see this with a lot of smaller artists who post entire albums on their Web sites for free download. Then they also give you the option of buying a physical CD to support them. Why would anyone buy the CD when they can just burn what they've downloaded? Well, convenience, for one. It's easier. Some people still don't know how to burn CDs and never will learn. Yet others feel better about supporting the artist. These big studios have a lot to learn from the smaller artists who do this. -
Show 51 - 100 of 113 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is