What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Insignia(R) HDTV view!
bestbuygiftadvice.com - Best Buy(R) Twelpforce(TM) Carolers tout the 2-year warranty as great reason to buy the Insignia HDTV.
47 Comments
- Cstew, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14I support their cause and I'm glad that the Defective by Design people are doing it, but I think this is a war that they are not going to win.
- Hellfire51, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Or someone who wants to use their music how they want to on their devices.
- mancat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6There is a point where you go so over the top in the way that you present your message, that people cannot possibly be prepared to take you or your message seriously. These guys not only crossed the line, but deficated all over it.
- montagg, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Agreed. Unfortunately, without some sort of obvious oppression going on, it takes more than education to counter the profit interests of large companies.
- colincornaby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Keep all your music in MP3 in iTunes. Then you can move it to whatever you want.
I don't get the sync thing. One way or another, automatically or by hand, you're going to have to "sync" music in iTunes. My music collection is so large I can't manage it by hand anyway. I just let iTunes move everything I have over, that way I'm always carrying what I want with me. When I want to listen to music on another machine, I tell iTunes to play from my iTunes server. I haven't had a problem with this setup so far. - colincornaby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Ironically, by your own definition, virus scanning software would be a virus because it would prevent your computer from doing things and impede on the user.
Look, in the end, the content holders get to decide how to distribute their content. If you don't want to buy content from content holders that use the iTunes Store, then don't. Users don't like being told we're wrong, or we're dumb, or we like and enjoy something that's dumb, or that we just spent a bunch of money on something that's dumb. These Day Against DRM people just come off as pompous asses who "know better than us."
Maybe instead of telling users how stupid it is to be buying music from artists who support DRM, they should tell us what good artists don't support DRM, and hand out music from them. People aren't going to go "OMGZ DRM" when the only content they want is only available in DRM'd formats. You have to make them want content that is DRM free.
And they're targeting the wrong people. Apple has a gun to their head when it comes to distributing music. You thought Apple's price hike battle with the RIAA was bad? Watch what would happen if Apple stopped using DRM. - mikesol, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You are advising people to have a rootkit installed on their computers, and controlled by a company. Are you ***** insane? Do you really want Sony or Apple to know every single thing you're doing?
DO NOT WORRY, CITIZEN, IF YOU DO NO WRONG YOU HAVE NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT
Thanks, Big Brother. Nice to know you're there for me, protecting me from Fair Use. - FullHazard, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Actually, we kinda do have a right to music in america. it's this crazy law about 'fair use' or something, and basically what it says is that we have the right to use copyrighted material within fair limits.
When you get right down to it, DRM-fighting has nothing to do with music. It has to do with wether or not you can illegalize people using files and software they buy however they want. I bought a song with DRM on it = I bought DRM = I should be able to do whatever I want with that DRM without it being illegal. At worst, you should be charged with breach of contract for breaking DRM (assuming they gave you a ridiculous EULA), not ***** jail time for modifying software that is on your computer. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5drm isn't an infection what you're saying is that software protection and copyrights should be thrown out the window, the whole software industry would collapse. I don't know many techies that make a living doing in the techie world that would support getting rid of drm
- pierrefilms, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Their problem is that they protest at places like Apple Stores when they should be going to the RIAA headquarters!
SERIOUSLY, Apple does not control the DRM. Apple did not ask for DRM. Steve Jobs has said before that your music should be your own which is why he dislikes the subscription model because it is "renting" music. If you want to do anything you should THANK Apple and Steve Jobs. It is because of his refusal to completely bend over and give in to the RIAA that iTunes has the LEAST restrictive DRM of any online music store.
iTunes DRM:
On up to 3 computers
Put it on AS MANY iPods as you want. (UNLIMITED)
Burn it to AS MANY CDs as you want. (UNLIMITED + REMOVES DRM)
The only complaint I can see is not being able to put it on the 8 computers you have in your house (ha-ha).
If it weren't for the RIAA iTunes wouldn't have DRM anyway. Apple does not profit from iTunes. They profit from the iPods themselves. More than half of every $.99 made from an iTunes song goes to the RIAA. A smaller amount to the artist and then the last amount goes to Apple who uses it to pay for the service and all the bandwidth (that stuff isn't free folks).
So I give them a small round of applause for their efforts, but they're doing it in the wrong places and to the wrong people which is ruining their reputation and making them look like attention seekers like Greenpeace. - ElectricGrandpa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Protest the prices? What's wrong with them?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5@ElectricGrandpa
sure, "nobody but geeks" care, but if noone makes their point about DRM, no geek is going to make those useful P2P programs u use - kelly, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5An open source DRM kindof negates the whole premise of DRM. The people enforcing its use are the ones that want knowledge of its ability to be coded (i.e. decoded) restricted to as few entities as possible.
Those that advocate this either just haven't thought the issue through or are trying to push an agenda that advocates the prospect of breaking DRM. - montagg, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Some unbought music isn't illegal, you know.
- kelly, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6That falls into category 3
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"You are advising people to have a root kit installed on their computers, and controlled by a company. Are you ***** insane"
Agreed...And keep in mind, if said company can slip in the back door, so can anybody else. And "anybody else" could include the companies "associates", criminals, your ISP,etc.
And once someone else has control of your computer via said root kit, they can do anything they bloody well want...
I've said it before and I'll say it again..it's MY computer and *I* decide what goes on it and who puts it there.
No company via a root kit or DRM or WGA will tell me how I will use my computer.
- kob2040, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2so you won't protest when your president wiretaps you, tortures people in secret and without charge, but if you're not able to copy some music then you take to the streets ?
- ChahLi, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7I believe we (the consumers) should treat DRM just like we treat computer viruses and/or spyware: like an infection. In fact, It would be really cool if "Defective By Design" provided free scanning software to help users detect if their MP3, music / video files are infected with DRM.
The tech community can help as well by always referring to DRM as an infection. In other words, instead of saying "Does it have DRM?", you'd say, "Are you sure that file isn't infected with DRM?". We should help create buzz in a way that the public begins to associate DRM with such things as spyware and viruses. Remember the days before "spyware" was a common term? Well, welcome to the day of DRM, the new infection!
Spread the word. DRM, viruses and spyware should be avoided. - Hellfire51, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Perhaps you see DRM related stories on the front page frequently because people care about it?
- kelly, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6People advocating this fall into one of the following categories:
1) A Music Thief who sees DRM as making his life difficult
2) An Apple Hater
3) A person who wants the option to switch to an inferior product
4) A competitor to Apple - nazadus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@thespace:
Fight one battle at a time. Fight the one that means most to YOU. This, apparantly, means a lot to think. Much like the tree huggers do their thing. They aren't a lot of people and make only a little bit of change -- but they still try. That's what matters. Most people don't care about recycled paper or all that stuff, but we each have our own desires. - ElSizzle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3DRM sounds like it sucks but aren't lots of people going to think this is just a joke when they see people wearing hazmat suits?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Im anti DRM regardless of the product i choose to put it on. If i buy it, i should be able to do what i want with it. Lately, im starting to like the idea of getting away from itunes/ipod. I actually own a 60gb ipod video, and its not really that great. Itunes is annoying, having to "sync" music to my ipod.
What if i decide i want a different brand mp3 player, i should just buy new music? since my itunes music wont let me play it on a non apple player? - Newfie41, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4@montagg
Agreed, but education is a start. - drakethegreat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4As long as its education and not just targetting of Apple alone. If you are gonna march on Apple stores then you have to march on the Microsoft campus and record company headquarters. The reality is that all of them are the blame and when you target Apple, people think Apple is the sole cause of this problem. They may endorse it by selling the music but you must educate users about the whole problem.
- dzee, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4DbD and Creative Commons are two great steps forward in my opinion. DRM isn't without flaws and issues. It's as rediculous as Atrac only mp3 players from Sony only with extra risks involved.
- r3zonance, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"What if i decide i want a different brand mp3 player, i should just buy new music? since my itunes music wont let me play it on a non apple player?"
Well you knew that before you bought the music from iTunes Store, and if you say otherwise you are just lying, cos everyone has been bleating about it right from the start. - Newfie41, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5It's not about the fact that you "Can" download free music, thats not the point. Its the fact that publishers and the like are invading your privacy and limiting what you can do. In a perfect world, you should be able to buy music and do what you want with it. In our world, we are restricted, andwhat we do is being watched (like in the case of sony's rootkit, but there are others out there). I support the cause as we should be able to retain our right to privacy. Not all of us are pirates that burn off CD's for a profit. If I want the music that I bought on MY MP3 Player, then I should be allowed to, hell, I should be able too regardless. I say enough is enough.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4open source DRM? your an idiot
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Ummm... Why hazmat suits? Why all the theater? Doesn't that just dilute the message?
- t3hX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yeah, open source DRM'd be great. Let's just comment out the DRM part of it, and compile :)
- DasPope, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2speaking of a false security for profit
theres a norton advertisement on the page for me
i just think its funny - DoubtfulSalmon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Warning folks, there's someone, probably an RIAA shill, working through all the posts on this post modding down anything that's anti DRM or pro DefectiveByDesign.org.
If you find a post that's been buried by this shill, please check it, and mod back up if you think it appropriate to do so. - pierrefilms, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Whoops. Slight mistake. It's actually 5 computers.
- r3zonance, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"You don't think DRM is wrong? What if i want to use a different MP3 player than an iPod with my legally purchased songs some point in the future?"
Everyone knows you have to purchase the music again, but still they buy it, so it's a bit of a moot point really.
"There are ten million valid arguments against DRM and no valid arguments for it. It cannot be implemented correctly (it is a cryptographic impossibility to do so). It will never stop piracy."
The valid argument for DRM is to HELP protect the rights of the copyright holder. If I sell music I spent ages writing I wouldn't want people ripping it off really easily without paying me for it.
"All DRM will ever do is hurt legitimate customers. These people, myself included, are fighting for your rights. The ***** least you could do is learn that you have those rights in the first place."
I'm a legitimate customer and I haven't been hurt by DRM yet. And have been buying music off iTMS since it opened in the UK.
Those legitimate customers know what they are buying into when they purchase music from iTMS, so in the end they only have themselves to blame. I'm happy with it the way it is. - mikesol, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I cannot believe the arrogance and ignorance being professed by people here. Half of the comments are "WHY ARE THEY PICKING ON APPLE".
They're picking on Apple because Apple is the biggest seller of DRM'd music, that's why.
You don't think DRM is wrong? What if i want to use a different MP3 player than an iPod with my legally purchased songs some point in the future?
There are ten million valid arguments against DRM and no valid arguments for it. It cannot be implemented correctly (it is a cryptographic impossibility to do so). It will never stop piracy.
All DRM will ever do is hurt legitimate customers. These people, myself included, are fighting for your rights. The ***** least you could do is learn that you have those rights in the first place. - Backwards2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This isn't going to get much traction among consumers, because what consumers will be comparing against is non-computer forms of media.
For example, consider audio books from Audible.com. They have DRM. Let's compare an Audible.com book to a physical book purchased from the local B&N.
One of the evils of DRM is that if I lose my copy, I'm screwed. But the same thing happens if I lose my physical book. B&N isn't going to give me another copy. (And actually, Audible.com *will* let me download again...they keep track of your purchases and you can download them at will). And I can easily make backup copies of the audio book, to lessen the chance of losing it.
Another evil of DRM: hard to make copies. Well, it's also hard to make copies of the physical book. Copies of short passages are easy with a photocopier and a stack of coins, but copies of short sections of the audio book are easy, too, with a blank CD-R. Copying the whole audio book that way is hard, because it will take several discs, but copying a whole physical book at the photocopier is also a pain.
Another evil of DRM: hard to share with friends. With the physical book, I can loan it to friends. But wait--I can loan the audiobook to friends. They just plug their iPod into my computer, and I load the book onto it. And, unlike the physical book, I've still got it, too.
The DRM does limit me to using the Audible book on authorized computers (my home desktop, my work desktop, my laptop...I don't know what the limit is because I ran out of computers before hitting it), and on as many iPods as I want. The physical book I can use anywhere I happen to have the book. So, here is one thing where the DRM'ed Audio.com book loses to the physical book. I can't use it on random other computers--just mine. But when I'm not at home, I'm most likely going to be using an iPod, not a computer, for my audio books, so when I copy the book to an iPod, it is basically just like the physical book as far as where I can use it (anywhere I bring it).
From a consumer point of view, the audio book, compared to the physical book, comes out about the same--slightly less convenient in some ways, and more convenient in others. So, if the consumer accepts the limitations of physical books, they are not going to see anything wrong with audio books having similar limitations. Nothing apparent to the consumer would lead consumers to expect sane people to dress up in funny suits and treat DRM'ed media as if it were hazardous waste. The net result is that the consumers will write off these protesters as just another kook group. - uownedge, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I support what this group stands for, but I do not support their line of thinking, or their means of protest. As stated above, Apple does not control the DRM, thus, there's no reason to protest against Apple. They're being stupid about the situation. If you really want to make a difference, get people together to rally against the RIAA and MPAA. It's great that people want to make a difference, but you have got to be smart about the actions you take, and sadly, these folks just aren't.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2WHY AREN'T THEY PROTESTING MUSIC PRICES?!?!?
I don't get it, this all sounds like they have their own agenda, it would be much more effective if they protested prices. People don't know what DRM is and don't care, protest prices. - ElectricGrandpa, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5Seriously. Nobody but geeks really care about DRM. Hazmat suits? It's just a big nerdy joke as far as I'm concerned.
- Newfie41, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2No, its part OF the message. They are trying to say that the company is "Infected" with DRM, therefore the suits are part of this as they are ward against infection. Their mission is to remove this "Infection" so in a way it makes sense.
- addicted68098, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1I don't think DRM is bad the biggest flaw of internet content is the fact that publishers have no control of the files. I think DRM should be a simple root kit (yay root kit!) that ID's all your songs if a song has many of the same ID it would be deleted.
- Almadiel, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2I would rather see an open source, highly portable DRM solution that can compete with the highly proprietary types we see now. You can't just wish technology away, it never works.
- pupppet, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2I am completely for Day Against DRM because I feel music needs to be easily stolen and I should have a say in how an artist distributes their own work.
- patience, on 10/12/2007, -12/+6@i440: I agree. Plus this is the second front page story about this tired issue in the last month.
Most of the people who complain about this do not own a byte of legal music anyway. (Grunge cd's bought in the 90s don't count).
If you don't like it, don't buy. You do not have a right to music. - killinger777, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1why pay when you can just get it for free? go tigers
- i440, on 10/12/2007, -22/+10If you are truly willing to complain about not being able to convert your music into any format you wish (even when you can simply buy CDs and do so), you need to get out more
