Posts by robbery
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I think the way forward is to make paying for and accessing very high quality, DRM free, ubiquitously playable media so blindingly easy that you'd be foolish to open your bittorrent client.
Why do you specifically want it to be rights management free?
don't you just ant it to be rights managed in a transparent way that doesn't infringe on you the rightful owners use of it? or do you specifically want to be able to pirate it if you chose? -
Robbery, some of your arguments seem to ignore the fact that digital media is dead easy to share.
isn't that the whole point of the concept of DRM?
making it less easy to share.
and it is possible but so far infringes on the ease of use.
in Software Logic audio managed to make their software bloody difficult to crack, so much o that it reduced the number of people using it. They opted to allow it to be more crackable so they could expand their user base, get people hooked on the platform. expect them to re install the uncrackable bits once they've got enough users.Protools also has a very good DRM system in their Ilok device.
I personally think there are many flaws in it in that it is a flimsy plastic key that protects the software manufacturers but leaves the end user very vulnerable to damaged key or theft. They don't seem to care about that though.
some people have done small plugin cracks etc but yu cant really run protools without buying it. part of it is that the interface is the dongle. it doesn't work without it. So reasonably airtight DRM is possible, but can be invasive.
Digital producers will weight the invasiveness against how much they're prepared to piss their customers off for where they sit in the market. If the music market gets to the point that no one is paying for music and there is no reliable model to emerge from the myths then they've got nothing to lose from looking for invasive Rights management systems.You could easily develop a standalone no outputs playback device that does not have digital outputs on it. media is only playable on the one device.
Yep you can have a headphones out where u could record it into a computer but how many people have gone to the bother of real time recording analogue sources. I do it for a living and its a pain in the arse. you could also develop various forms of encryption that make none of the outputs straight analogue,you could do all of this with technology available now, if you really wanted to fuck off your listening base. Apparently all other options have not been exhausted, yet.
-
I think the problem that the music industry faces, is that as soon as they move their music to a new hardware, people will come up with a way to strip it out.
it was a short sighted and massive mistake to share mediums with computer data in the first place. it all might have played out a lot differently if every computer didn't have a drive that also read CDs.
and you're right, you most likely could just play the new medium into your computer and capture it that way, but that's one generation, real time play back capture and maybe just enough of a hassle for the average joe to not be bothered. hard core piraters like finn and techno heads like myself will of course find ways around it but many people probably won't.
people re being naive if they think that they're going to get their music for free from now on in though.
-
move towards the light Rob
don't u mean the dark?
-
You've cited the dvd model: if that's safe, give me peril...
I'm not saying its safe, I'm saying it makes it slightly more difficult than it is without it. ie you have to have a dvd stripper program and have some knowledge of how to deal with the resulting material.
in some ways after all the hassle of stripping a dvd, buying a dual layer dvd burner, going through miss-burns etc, you're better off buying a legit copy.The ideal for Music would be to make it just difficult enough to take the simple as "shop lifting with no one watching, and no security cameras" angle away.
I can think of a number of ways that might work. developing a delivery medium that is not easily stripable in a computer would be a start, yes you could do a real time a to d copy of it, but the bummer bout that is it takes time, its a hassle.
-
What is DRM? Why is it useful in any way? That might be a good place for us to start to get this sorted out.
why don't you answer that question first.
I'll get you started though finn.
digital rights management.what do you think it is and why do you think it might be useful?
-
Robbery, sometimes I do have to question your ability to read what people have written on this subject over and over again.
I've no problem reading what you write finn, I'm just dissagreeing with it and giving you multiple examples to illustrate my point.
There is no superior DRM design,
yet, as I said, there is no good DRM, that doesn't mean the concept of DRM is bad, it means the implementation of it is. you're trying to push the view that just because companies have failed so far they should give up completely. go for this mythica other model of steady income that no ones managed to outline properly yet, in over 10 years of trying.
re-engineering the modern PC.
no thats your concept of what drm needs to do. Remember reasonably effective drm exists on modern dvds. it is bypassable but its a minor hassle. I'm sure if music manufacturers could make drm that worked and was a minor hassle to bypass they'd be happy. just because they haven't found that solution yet doesn't mean they won't.
Expanding on Kyle's live only album They could make music delivery on a format that doesn't play on pcs. some different device that can only be downloaded direct inot your ipod (which remember is a one way device, you can not up load off an ipod, so they successfully blocked that piracy hole already)
it's trying to compete with something that people actually like
and you're failing to grasp it doesn't matter what you like doing, its what you're allowed to do. presently piracy is illegal, but it efficently unpolicable for now.ie you can get away with it, sort of.
there are a number of much worse implementable measures that could be taken (the afore mentioned internet traffic monitoring and control, and remember the internet is a much more policable beast than it used to be. they know how to track ip addresses and filter content now, and they didn't 15 years ago)
disregarding all of that though one of my main points is that it is short sighted to think that a free for all is good for anyone in the long run. as both mr kneebone and mr weir said in their statements. its unsustainable
-
Robbery, sometimes I do have to question your ability to read what people have written on this subject over and over again.
I've no problem reading what you write finn, I'm just dissagreeing with it and giving you multiple examples to illustrate my point.
There is no superior DRM design,
yet, as I said, there is no good DRM, that doesn't mean the concept of DRM is bad, it means the implementation of it is. you're trying to push the view that just because companies have failed so far they should give up completely. go for this mythica other model of steady income that no ones managed to outline properly yet, in over 10 years of trying.
re-engineering the modern PC.
no thats your concept of what drm needs to do. Remember reasonably effective drm exists on modern dvds. it is bypassable but its a minor hassle. I'm sure if music manufacturers could make drm that worked and was a minor hassle to bypass they'd be happy. just because they haven't found that solution yet doesn't mean they won't.
Expanding on Kyle's live only album They could make music delivery on a format that doesn't play on pcs. some different device that can only be downloaded direct inot your ipod (which remember is a one way device, you can not up load off an ipod, so they successfully blocked that piracy hole already)
it's trying to compete with something that people actually like
and you're failing to grasp it doesn't matter what you like doing, its what you're allowed to do. presently piracy is illegal, but it efficently unpolicable for now.ie you can get away with it, sort of.
there are a number of much worse implementable measures that could be taken (the afore mentioned internet traffic monitoring and control, and remember the internet is a much more policable beast than it used to be. they know how to track ip addresses and filter content now, and they didn't 15 years ago)
disregarding all of that though one of my main points is that it is short sighted to think that a free for all is good for anyone in the long run. as both mr kneebone and mr weir said in their statements. its unsustainable
-
If governments came together and dictated that the internet would be controlled in this matter, then someone would just write a new protocol and we'd all switch over. 'The internet' wouldn't accept it, it would adapt, and overcome.
that's a very romanticised view of it all but as I said, its already going that way. your internet traffic is controlled already. and they can control it more. and they're doing it at the bottle neck that you at present can't get past. which is your internet provider. There is absolutely no reason why your internet provider if required to couldn't shape your use of the internet more. they already do it in other ways by filtering out objectionable newsgroups, turkey is presently filtering out all of you tube because it has content that is critical of one of its founders. its totally doable and is being done to some extent everywhere, its just not done to the level that would completely control piracy, although the filtering of P2P traffic is an obvious step in this direction although not for legal reasons, just cos IPs want to keep traffic volume down.
The Customer won't adapt, they'll take what they're given and what they are allowed to get away with. at the moment a level of priracy is possible, it won't necessarily always be that way, but for now it is.
-
point to a single service that actually competed with the illegal digital alternatives on quality of service delivered, or with CDs on price in a way that realistically reflected the differential in distribution costs.
does buying a bar of chocolate compete with slipping it in your pocket and walking out the door? how can you compete with that, there is no competition. you're not offering a legal alternative.
(AllOfMP3) actually involved people putting their hands in their pockets and paying up. They aren't an acceptable solution because they pocket the artist's share due to some dubious Russian legal grey areas,
hahaa finn you aren't actually giving me this as a valid example are you. there is one thing so much worse than stealing for personal use and thats stealing for personal profit. so a bunch of ruskies have got themselves a big catalogue of music and their country isn't yet towing the line on policing piracy so they can get away with selling pirate copies of music, just like any thai or malaysian market stall.
That's not something to be admired.interestingly in bangkok they have the MBK shopping mall which is a nice air conditioned typical big city mall and it had a bunch of stalls that sold every piece of pirated software dvd and cd you could want, all with nice colour photocopied covers and disc art.
The Thai police finally raided the lot of them and closed it down. They were sitting out their in plain view just like any normal shop and normal purchaser would go up and make their orders like buying a legit item and the police left them alone. till last week.
I agree someone should develop a model that caters to the joy of sharing music legal with your friends at an affordable price. as it has been pointed out, its part of our culture and should be able to be done at an affordable rate. and you're right the remaining majors have kept their price to high and download prices are too high for a reduced quality product. I completely agree with you.
But no DRM is helping no one in the long run. yes it has been invasive to normal use and that is more to do with inferior drm design than that DRM is the problem.