A RealNetworks executive has claimed that Linux risks being excluded from the consumer market if it does not add support for copy-restriction technologies. But the Free Software Foundation Europe countered this claim on Thursday, saying that consumers have made it clear that they do not want DRM restricting their use of digital media.
Stop playing their stupid game people! If nobody watches drm’ed crap it’ll be dumped faster than betamax.
that arguement doesn’t work anymore when there is no other choice for music. It’s a matter of time before the CD format is dumped and the music is an install program to DRM the songs into your DRM player anyway, car cd players go away and instead have a jack for your mp3/drm player to go to play.
“that arguement doesn’t work anymore when there is no other choice for music.”
Giving up, already? You have choice: don’t buy it. It sucks sometimes, with some albums not available in a good format.
“It’s a matter of time before the CD format is dumped and the music is an install program to DRM the songs into your DRM player anyway”
So don’t buy a player that requires DRM (or replace the firmware)! Don’t buy media you know has DRM tech used on/from it.
“car cd players go away and instead have a jack for your mp3/drm player to go to play.”
That is plain old FUD. That jack has been in tape and CD players for ages: it’s called a line-in. They’ll continue to do just what they do now: call them something special, like an iPod port.
You have a choice. The situation is getting worse, but don’t give up on it: use it to inform people you know about how it’s crap, and will get them screwed in the long run.
“You have a choice. The situation is getting worse, but don’t give up on it: use it to inform people you know about how it’s crap, and will get them screwed in the long run.”
true. Fortunately for me my music tastes have changed anyway as I’ve aged. I listen to more celtic/modern folk, vocal, and world music now which there is (so far) plenty of on the DRM free sites such as mp3tunes. The ones that aren’t have hit the big time; Haley Westenra for example I’m content with buying the physical CD and then ripping it to FLAC.
But I do believe I’m right on that RIAA is planning on killing the normal music cd just like they killed 8 trac when cassette came out, and then cd’s took over and so on. PBS Frontline ran a special that examined the real causes of RIAA’s financial issues on a program called “The Day the Music Died” and it talked about how their numbers are largely based on fictional numbers. The “high profit years” were due to people replacing their cassette’s with cd’s. Then after a few years the cycle was done and their profits settled down to a normal level. RIAA then cried wolf and claimed they were losing money due to piracy. The show also revealed the litterally millions wasted that they lavished on their singers and bands and interviewed some of the best singers and songwriters in the business that pin poinoted RIAA’s mistakes in that regard and how today they turn 1 song and force the singer to get 10 other crappy ones ready so they can release an entire cd just to sell the 1 song on.
No my friend, that part is not FUD, that is the history of how they do things.
The one monkey wrench in their gears is the ‘net and satellite radio that has the ability to get unknown/local artists out there and a direct distribution model is obtained. Will it work though? Time will tell.
I’m not disagreeing with how they do things. They, however, are not music. The people writing and performing are. Non-RIAA labels have been growing for several years. As the RIAA continues to screw itself, they will grow more.
My point on FUD was the DRM-only hardware being the only way to go, rather than having the kind of choice that we’ve had for decades (the line input).
A group like The Beatles would not be allowed to to go from pop crap to truly skilled artists, today. They’d get dropped in a second at the thought of it, and what they made would never be released. Or, it would be released, and given no chance of success (not stocking stores well, no hype at all, no help getting a tour together, etc.).
The ‘net isn’t the only monkey wrench: the human mind is. We’ve made and listened to music for at least as long as we have history. It’s a part of our being. Some distribution model will work, because there is demand. That demand can be diverted, but not removed. The RIAA hasn’t been good for several decades–but until recently, their methods worked the best. Now, they don’t.
“I’m content with buying the physical CD and then ripping it to FLAC.”
…you mean you don’t do that for all of them?
It’s been at least a year now since I have directly listened to a factory CD. That is one issue I have with DRM: I now use FLAC. Anything else is made from them. I like it.
If I can’t do that, or can’t get similarly DRM-free lossless files, I have no reason to pay for it. The files on the computer are now the primary sources, and the CDs are the backups. I will not support a system more restrictive, and will support one as free (my last album was $23) or more free.
You are wrong about the car.
DRM will lead to the situation where you have to buy an album to play at home, buy the same album again to play it on your mp3-player, buy it once more so you can play it on your computer, or pay for the option to use the mp3-player as a PC-playback-device, and of course you’ll also have to pay for the option to use the mp3-player as a playback-device in the car.
DRM means you’ll have to buy the same album several times. DRM is not about piracy, but about limiting fair use. That’s why companies are so fond of DRM.
Don’t call me a troll, this is an honest question: wouldn’t that *increase* the appeal of piracy? The pirate copy doesn’t need, the encumberances of DRM, DVD regions, whatever… The more annoying the legal media are, the more likely I’ll want to buy pirate.
Of course. But that’s why the companies want DMCA spread all over the world. And then you have no rights at all.
In Denmark we don’t have DMCA, so we can crack the DRM as we want to, legally. We cannot distribute copyrighted material without permission from copyrights holder, but we can legally crack any ‘protection’ scheme. DeCSS is an example of this.
There is always choice. Like not buying music controlled with DRM. I know I’m not going to.
I don’t like being told what to do with things I pay for. If I pay for the right to listen a copyrighted music, I’ll listen it the way, any way, I want. If someone tries to restrict that right, I won’t pay and won’t have the right to ear it. Simple. I lose, the record companies lose, the artists lose.
And there are a lot of musicians who also agree with what I said.
What the big music companies are trying to do, is to shove what they want us to listen down our throats, saying ‘it’s the next big thing!’, and we have to pay, mandatory! Well, to hell with them.
They (the big companies) are afraid of the Internet, because enables musicians and small companies to thrive, directly selling their music and products. They (the big companies) no long are needed. That’s the big threat.
So, under the guise of copyright protection, they are set to control us, through our equipment and hardware. They invented DRM, that serves 2 purposes:
– Control what we should hear and how, from them;
– Control what we can hear, or rather what we cannot, from other rival big companies.
So, I’ll fight DRM. And I’ll keep fighting. If necessary, I’ll stop buying music, movies, even software. I lose, the big companies lose, the artists lose.
Stop playing their stupid game people! If nobody watches drm’ed crap it’ll be dumped faster than betamax.
Just a small note; BetaMax was the superior system VHS, but due to shear marketing power, and Sony’s unwillingness to allow anyone to produce BetaMax-compatible VCR’s, it died a slow death.
No, I’d say DRM is a bit like 8tracks, a technology looking for a market that doesn’t exist, with consumers who are quite happy with the existing set of technologies.
This is the most stupid claim I’ve ever heart. The fact that theres no DRM at all in Linux is one of the reasons I use it! I’ll never use any of this DRM stuff, that’s for sure.
Tom
Edited 2006-04-07 14:34
I agree. I’d dump linux like a flaming bag of doo doo.
If a DRM system were to be developed for Linux, you could keep on using Linux without using DRM. I use Mac OS X (which has DRM in iTunes) and I don’t use DRM.
You can choose not to use DRM even when DRM is installed on your computer.
I was about to say the same thing. Linux is entirely open, even if DRM was built into the kernel to keep people from removing it, people would still be able to remove it.
that is true how stupid. if linux does not adjust to a corporate run nation it will be left in the shadows of windows and macs. and by the way windows is on 90% of the desktops, so linux better get with the program
Edited 2006-04-07 18:55
Where have you been the last 16 years, Linux has been progressively growing in several “corporate run” nations at a very healthy rate. Linux is more than an operating system, it’s a slow but steady revolution.
Never ending war with piracy… I wonder which company would be so dumb to loose millions of customers. They can’t stop Open Source. All copy-protection stuff eventually will get cracked and many people WILL use cracked versions. They can’t go into your house and check if you messed with your TV -> it’s yours, you bought it so you can even throw it out the window. The solution is to provide cheap access to the content, so people will eventually start buying things instead of making pirate copies. For example mp3z – when I want only 1 song, why should I buy whole CD, in which the rest of the songs is usually crap.
hey can’t go into your house and check if you messed with your TV -> it’s yours
You might want to read up on how HDCP is supposed to work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDCP
Somebody wants to sell me a movie for 20$. But this Movie will be viewable only as long as the selling company stays in business plus the amount of time the hardware does not brake after the company goes out of business.
Now I compare that to what the illegal internet download programs provide: Cheap access to movies which I will be able to possess as long as I wish.
The DRM-using content providers are loosing customers because they are more expensive, and they are loosing even more customers because their content is too restricted.
The only way a DRM system would be acceptable for me would be a blockbusters-like arrangement. Where I know, that I have 2 days to watch the movie, and after that it’s gone. Of course the prices would have to be comparable too.
Now that I think of it, you cannot BUY DRMed content, you ALWAYS RENT it, sometimes you just don’t know for how long.
Instead of worrying about using DRM to prevent people from illegally copying media, DRM which will always be broken and unwanted by the consumer, they need a complete paradigm shift… not being funny but that’s what it is.
Change the way you do business. Fund media though sponsorship. Product placement, have actors walk down the street past a Coke billboard. Keep it low key, subliminal, not Waynes World Style (unless it’s a comedy). Merchandising, i.e. Nemo toys, Buzz Lightyear figures, etc. etc.
Don’t even bother charging for copies, except to cover shipping and handling. If consumers want to copy and redistribute the media let them, all the better since more eyes will see the sponsors’ products and more wallets will be buying the associated merchandise later.
This is a solution where everyone wins; consumer and producer.
DRM is a waste of time and money.
I’d vote for an even more dramatic paradigm shift: Let’s drop monetary economics at all, let there be no money at all!!
Tom
I’d vote for an even more dramatic paradigm shift: Let’s drop monetary economics at all, let there be no money at all!!
Compared to the the US administration right now, who still hasn’t received the memo that Keynesian economic theorum is broken, your theory doesn’t actually sound half-nutty.
+1,000,000 Money is the main source of many problems our world is facing today, here are a few :
huge gap between what the rich & the poor can enjoy, pollution due to the transport of goods according to unlogical economic patterns, waste due to overavailability of perishable products in supermarkets & due to short-lifeterm products & due to publicity getting one to buy new products when the old one still works fine, unequal access to healt systems, increased crime in order to get money, technological evolution slowed down by patents, polution rather than increased expense in order to reduce it, crippled products to justify selling the real thing at higher price, wars for economical predominance, starvation of millions of people, letting other millions die of disease because they can’t afford the prices asked by pharmaceutical compagnies, unequal distribution of land, millions working like slaves,… the list would probably take days to complete
We’re at a moment in history where all the nations next goal should be to unite for the good of all and try to think how we can manage what the earth has to offer in a just & respectfull manner and how we can all be happier instead of how some can get richer.
Technology allows more & more to be done with less humans needed in the process, and for the moment the result is exponentially increase of money flowing to ever less people while the advances in technology should benefit all. We should use this opportunity to lower the time people need to work & allow them to enjoy their life as they want to. Think about all the unnecessary jobs due to all those compagnies competing to do similar work without sharing their knowledge, think about the millions of people working in the financial sector doing work that doesn’t benefit anyone except the rich without contributing anything usefull to make life on earth better and often making things worse.
Let’s enter the new age of sharing, doing great projects together that benefit all instead of a happy few, concentrating on living happy lives & doing whatever interests us, let’s all share the chores that noone want’s to do but needs to be done (probably less than one hour a day donated to the community’s needs should be enough).
Some day these changes will be inevitable eventhough the corporate system & most rich will do all they can to prevent it. As evolution will continue to accelerate there will be less work to do, less jobs to provide & the pressure against the economical system will grow.
In fact money has already become virtual as for decades no bank has had in store enough to pay back what the people have deposited, and even the gold stocks have been sold in many countries. Money has no other value that what the people are willing to give to it. The whole economical system only works because people continue to beleive in it, but i’m confident it will change. I only hope i’ll be there to see it 😉
Edited 2006-04-08 09:00
All I can say to that is Bravo, I agree 100 % with that and gave you the score you deserved.
Corporate greedy pigs won’t let it happen for a long time, I say we just all rise up and slay them. I’d hate to say it, but it’ll probably require a lot of violence. Even if the concept that is money is still used, if the 2% of the world’s population that is rich were to just give up all their wealth and let it be divided amongst everyone equally, the world would be very different indeed. To make everyone equally wealthy, would indeed make it so that people could do the things they want, instead of the things they NEED to do in order to survive. Doing away with money world wide would make it so one person wouldn’t have more power than another, and would also help millions (maybe billions) of starving people everywhere in 3rd world countries.
Personally I think a world disaster is going to hit sometime in the not so distant future and will again (Yeah, it’s happened before) reduce mankind to a lower form of civilization. Perhaps one of these times around, we’ll actually get it right and equalize everything for everyone. In the end, if Money was no longer something everyone vied for, then maybe we could finally make it to other planets and colonize them.
Oh, and to be more on topic, DRM sucks. I have already decided as soon as I heard Vista was going to have it, that I would not get Vista at all. Not to mention that Linux does everything I want/need except play games, and Vista will screw that up anyhow, on the OpenGL games (which usually work rather well in Wine anyhow).
Leech
Edited 2006-04-08 14:16
Fund media though sponsorship. [snip]
This is a solution where everyone wins; consumer and producer.
The public didn’t win watching Asimov’s I Robot raped on screen.
For a politically incorrect summary of why sponsored movies aren’t the way to go:
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=i_robot
Exactly, I Robot was not “low key” or “subliminal” advertising. It was in-your-face commercials. Not to mention the fact that it tricked you in the first place with a misleading title.
If the advertising/sponsorship was all low key you wouldn’t even realise that there was sponsorship at all and, consequently, it wouldn’t detract from the media.
I could imagine a comedy going completely the other way, and making it super exaggerated, in-your-face commercials, and that could be funny under certain circumstances.
The point is that charging the consumer and imposing DRM to keep that market artificially restricted isn’t going to work. But a well done sponsorship deal could be a win-win for both sides.
Gee, product placement? What an amazing new idea. I bet the movie companies have never thought of that.
I dind’t say that it was a new idea, I just happen to think that it’s a workable one, much more workable than DRM 😉
The main shift that needs to take place is in the heads of movie producers. The shift should be along the lines that spending hundreds of millions of dollars on special effects for a movie that doesn’t have a half-decent plot is absurd. Just as absurd as paying 25 mils to actors.
If they get it into their heads maybe they wont feel so pressured to squeeze every last penny out of consumers who work 9-5 all year long for 50K
I have several friends that are actors in community theater. They don’t get paid for it, yet they are pretty good — some of them far better than what we’re getting on TV and in movies these days.
When I seen producers shelling out multi-millions of dollars for a “star”, I think to myself, “Gee, to think they could have gotten so-and-so 40 hours a week for 60K per year and they’d be ecstatic.”
Julia Roberts getting $15 million for 6 months work? C’mon, you can’t tell me that you couldn’t find a more convincing hooker for that kind of scratch.
Last time I checked, DRM has zero benefit to the consumer and every benefit to the content provider, up to the point that it pisses off the consumer, which of course they’ve crossed that line long ago.
I’m pretty sick of Hollywood trying to blame its utter inability to produce good movies on piracy and copy protection issues.
I’d be more willing to go see more movies if they didn’t consistently attack my system of values, beliefs and political views, and call me stupid, illiterate, racist, etc.
I’m pretty sick of Hollywood trying to blame its utter inability to produce good movies on piracy and copy protection issues.
So true, very true.
Want to know the most recent movie I watched? Russian Arch; and as for a future movie; possibly the George Cloney movie “Good night and good luck’; everything else so far either seems to be a combination of remakes, or a rampent display of nationalistic jingoisms for the flag waving naive public to woff down with their McDonalds Big Mac and their super size chips.
I’d be more willing to go see more movies if they didn’t consistently attack my system of values, beliefs and political views, and call me stupid, illiterate, racist, etc.
Or worse still, are hyped up to the ceiling and beyond – case in point would be ‘Brokeback Mountain’ – as a gay male, I was so board shitless through the movie, I was actually happy when I left.
But this is typical of hollywood; feather weight in the thinking department, and marketing department in overdrive all the way.
windows vistas inclusion of more DRM ‘features’ is actually going to be another reason for any user with even half a brain to switch to linux. i wouldnt touch DRM material with sumone elses computer.
If a world without DRM is behind then please, leave me there.
RealNetworks were early pioneers on the spyware trail. Just my 2 cents, but I wouldn’t trust a word they say.
My guess is that DRM will introduce a sizeable mess for a few years. There will be competing schemes, diferent laws around the world, bugs, serious corporate abuses and attempts to create new monopolies, new regulations that backfire, lots of court cases, etc.
These are good arguments for steering well clear of the whole thing until it has completely settled down, if ever it does.
DRM will never go away. All the P2P networks blew that opportunity. People wanted digital media online and the labels/studios learned. I can understand the need for DRM, it’s not as bad as people think. Most services, although they don’t advertise it, give a fairly decent set of rights, usually the same as iTunes. Unlimited secure device exports and 7 playlist burns. How many times you all gonna make 7 playlist burns of the same CD, legally? When you buy a CD you buy a license, not the ownership of the songs there in. Nobody owns anything the studios sell. The $9.99 to $30 spent is a license, not your ownership. Now if you can make a copy of the CD/DVD, fine you should be able to for personal use I fully agree with that concept.
Linux, used it numerous times. Wish it were Play-For-Sure or Helix DRM compatible. The modules/drivers/sound server are not secure enough to qualify for a DRM. Besides if DRM did make to a Linux you would be very limited as to what you could do in terms of the kernel (upgrading/recompiling/etc) as you would break the DRM subsystem/licensing system. It would most likely be a specialized Linux distro like Linspire primarly allowing commercially recomplied apps to be installed.
I want either Sony’s OpenMagic Gate, Real’s Helix DRM and/or Windows Media DRM on Linux and on OS X. There needs to be a tried and true cross platform DRM scheme available.
And No, I’m not getting compensation for this… I wish, but alas, No.
I agree. I have a Rhapsody subscription which I use to fill up my New samsung mp3 player. I have no problem paying $16 a month for this and I would end up spending more than $16 a month on songs from ITMS. At the end of it all, if Rhapsody fails, I can move to another services that has the same music.
I have no issue with this at all.
I can understand the need for DRM, it’s not as bad as people think. Most services, although they don’t advertise it, give a fairly decent set of rights, usually the same as iTunes.
I don’t think so. If the studio granted any “rights” to the consumer (like the right to actually listen to the audio), they would have been advertised.
DRM is really a way for the music industry to keep their dying revenue model. Online distribution and P2P actually provide a way for artists to be their own distrubutors. Online radio channels will allow artists to promote their music and gain some more revenue through inserted advertisement. However, for major artists, the exposure is probably more important here, as they gain most of their revenues through concert tours
As for films, I think they need to produce better films. People still treasure the cinema experience, unless they are watching crappy films.
Edited 2006-04-07 16:40
“DRM is really a way for the music industry to keep their dying revenue model. Online distribution and P2P actually provide a way for artists to be their own distrubutors. Online radio channels will allow artists to promote their music and gain some more revenue through inserted advertisement. However, for major artists, the exposure is probably more important here, as they gain most of their revenues through concert tours ”
EXACTLY! That’s why they crushed Napster. The sick part of this is that both political parties are in on this monopoly of RIAA/MPAA, I have letters from both republican’s and democrats saying the same thing: “I standby protecting the copyrights…” even though in my letter’s to them I didn’t say they shouldn’t; I said they should protect a new revenue and distribution model. Of course they chose to ignore that and quoted the line RIAA/MPAA told them to say when they cut checks to them.
“When you buy a CD you buy a license, not the ownership of the songs there in. Nobody owns anything the studios sell. The $9.99 to $30 spent is a license, not your ownership.”
I really have to disagree here. In software, you have to agree to the EULA to install it. Where did I ever agree to licensing terms with any music CD’s I have ever bought? Answer – I Haven’t. I BOUGHT the CD, and I OWN it.
If I truly only licensed it, why couldn’t I turn in my vinyl albums and pay the manufacturing costs of a CD? (what, like 10 cents?) I have done this with software in the old days – buy a game, have a bad floppy in it, pay a couple bucks to have a new one mailed to you. BECAUSE I ALREADY PAID THE LICENSE. Why pray tell then did I have to repurchase all my albums and tapes as CD’s?
Because I didn’t buy a license, I bought a copyrighted product the same as a book. Period
“Because I didn’t buy a license, I bought a copyrighted product the same as a book. Period”
Excellent Point! That’s also why you can re-sell your cd’s/LP/tapes at “Ted’s Music Trades” store or at your garage sale.
But be warned, that is a market they want to kill too. I’ve even heard Stephen King say he doesn’t like the fact that you can re-sell the book when you’re done.
That’s right. You bought the physical media. Laws limit what you can do with it.
And those laws are being circumvented by DRM, limiting the rights the laws grant you.
Maybe in denmark. Here in the US, I think the DMCA puts some pretty crappy limits on fair rights. It’s a sad state of affairs that I don’t see getting fixed for at least 5-10 years.
At least we don’t have anything similar to DMCA in Denmark. But we do suffer from DRM, despite the laws limiting the right for vendors to apply DRM to their products.
I consider DMCA to be unconstitutional, but it’s something only the american people can solve.
When the voices heard are corporations and the money they have, it’s really looking like it’s going to get much worse before it gets better. It will reach a breaking point before anything happens.
You’re probably right
Sounds like the only quick ‘solution’ is civil disobedience.
The problem with DRM is, just like you say, that it will never go away. A sufficiently old recording is not protected by law, but if it is recorded using DRM technology it will be hard to make legal copies, especially since the technology used, or the company that once made it may not exist anymore. This will no doubt lead to cultural losses over time.
As long as people are aware of what they are buying I see no problem with DRM. If people want to buy a limited product for less money why not let them. I will never do it though.
Building a large expensive record collections is not something you are likely to do if there is a slightest chance that you won’t be able to listen to it in 20 years.
The problem today, is that most people doesn’t make an informed decision when they buy limited versions. It should be mandatory for music stores to put stickers on CDs and DVDs telling the customers the limitations. This would of course be a big turn of for using the technolgy in the first place.
As far as I understand there is no need to include it in Linux. It should be possible to provide for solutions that handle DRM at the application level.
“Linux, used it numerous times. Wish it were Play-For-Sure or Helix DRM compatible. The modules/drivers/sound server are not secure enough to qualify for a DRM. Besides if DRM did make to a Linux you would be very limited as to what you could do in terms of the kernel (upgrading/recompiling/etc) as you would break the DRM subsystem/licensing system. ”
So is that the issue the VP of Real is getting at in the article when he said DRM needs built into *nix?
“When you buy a CD you buy a license, not the ownership of the songs there in. Nobody owns anything the studios sell. The $9.99 to $30 spent is a license, not your ownership.”
You are right and wrong. When I buy it, I buy it. I’m buying a product. Anything I do not making money on it or undercutting those who own the copyright to it is basically OK. It’s mine.
You right in that no one owns anything studios sell. What you are wrong about is that I’m buying a license. No one owns the content, not even those who made it or bought the rights to it. They own rights to it.
When you pay for a DRM song, you are renting, or buying a license. Have fun with that.
When I buy it, I am not buying a license. I am not renting. When or if I buy a CD and sign a contract that reduces my rights to use it, or get a rental receipt back, I’ll stop buying. If the laws reach the point of stating that (we’re close, mind you), I’ll stop, as I have slowed down in recent years.
The RIAA and MPAA saying that shit isn’t going to stop me one bit, except maybe get me interested in their competition.
if they provide compilable drm sourcecode i can integrate it with my desktoplinux.
so i dont see the problem…
One way to get a DRM-free world, could be to support the providers fo DRM-free content. If you are in to buying music online, you should check these sites before purchasing DRM’d music:
http://www.karmadownload.com/
http://www.epitonic.com/
http://www.magnatune.com/
http://www.emusic.com/browse/all.html
http://www.trackitdown.net/
http://www.klicktrack.com/
http://www.djdownload.com/
http://www.mindawn.com/
http://www.mp3tunes.com/store.php
/Jonas
The only problem with that, is the general populus doesnt give a damn about supporting DRM free media. They see an MP3 player, and you show and prove to them that it has the same features, and more that an ipod has, and guess what their response is? “But its not an ipod”. This is why everyone is taken advantage of so easily by big corperations. When it comes to common sense, and seing the dog BEFORE it bites you in the @$$, people are STUPID.
Dont forget http://www.allofmp3.com/, the best service I know of.
Ah, allofmp3, the dodgy Russian site that is illegal everywhere except in Russia, on the basis of some loop whole in the law that doesn’t explicitly rule out electronic transmission of music – the law only covers the actual physical transfer of a cd/cassette.
How can it be illegal everywhere if it is legal in Russia?
This “loop hole” is a perfectly fine law. It just states that this kind of service should be handled as radio.
How can it be illegal everywhere if it is legal in Russia?
The same way that it can be legal to smoke marajuana in the Netherlands, but illegal elsewhere; the same way that alcohol can be purchased and consumed in Western countries, but banned in Muslim ones.
Russian laws, like any other laws, do not transcend boarders; they regulate the activities of people within those boarders, those customers on the other side of the world have to conform to laws that are made in their respective countries – just because Russia allows it, doesn’t make it legal in another other country.
This “loop hole” is a perfectly fine law. It just states that this kind of service should be handled as radio.
Excuse me, that is a load of poppycock – New Zealand has a comprehensive copyright policy, but if you want to transmit music over the air waves in the form of a radio and the likes, its simply a matter of obtaining a licence for it, which allows you to transmit the material, which the money then goes to the music industry.
But the site IS in russia, and thus regulated by russian law.
Your New Zealand example sound similar to how I understand this russian law. They pay a fee to some organisation that distributes it to the copyrightholders.
But the site IS in russia, and thus regulated by russian law.
But under US law, this could be classed as illegal, and as thus, customs could have a right to prosecute for importing (via transferring data accross country boarder lines) copyright infringed material.
Like I said, those who live in the Russia won’t have any problems, the people who will have problems are those who are outside Russia, not covered by Russia law, and could possibly put themselves in a spot of bother.
Keyword being: possibly.
I don’t think it would be illegal to buy from them as a swede f.ex.
As ‘bigcraig03’ says so well…..”There needs to be a tried and true cross platform DRM scheme available”
Yep…the key word is ‘scheme’…..as in a scheme to fleece the customer/user/owner of technology.
;-(
The problem with DRM, is that they are going after the wrong people. The end user. They need to go after the people who are actually making the stuff available to the user who is downloading it. The end user, whether or not they download or not, is an innocent bystander. From my own observations, and experience (I have been known to download software I shouldnt), the people who download are a) teens in highschool, who in any normal family situation couldnt afford alot of the software that is pirated (any decent version of visual studio, etc) and would never see or use this software if they DIDNT download an illegal copy, or newer games where parents wont shell out $60 for a game on a whim, or b) college students, (<side rant>normal students, not the pricks who are going to college on daddies trust fund or paycheck, and assume everyone else is too, you know the ones who actually have to work 30hrs a week besides go to school full time, for minimum wage to make a car payment, insurance payment, and pay at least $600 of a tuition bill AFTER loans, and books, then the over inflated gas prices to pad the pockets of the already filthy rich greedy oil companies, who use every stupid small breeze as an exuse to raise prices even more</side rant>), who barely have the money to get a hamburger, let alone shell out $100-$200 for a copy of windows. DRM is nothing more than exuse to squeeze end users for even more money by limiting their use of the product until they get more money. Imagine getting in your car and seeing a display that says “Sorry, youve already driven this car 3 times, your going to have to go to the dealership and buy a new one”.
“The problem with DRM, is that they are going after the wrong people. The end user. They need to go after the people who are actually making the stuff available to the user who is downloading it. The end user, whether or not they download or not, is an innocent bystander.”
You mean, they didn’t go after napster and all those p2p software and torrent sites?
Hm.. strange.
The torrent sites and napster, and all other p2p are not the ones who prepare the downloads. If none of those existed, I have news for you, there would just be another popular method of piracy. They are a means for the source to get software, etc. to the end user, they are NOT the SOURCE.
Read what you said:
who are actually making the stuff available to the user who is downloading it.
The p2p software and torrent sites were and still do make the content available, usually with very little or not attempt to filter out illegal content.
The p2p software and torrent sites were and still do make the content available, usually with very little or not attempt to filter out illegal content.
Pardon? it isn’t their responsibility to police the ‘high way’, they provide means to allow people to legally share files between users; if it people weren’t using Kazaa or GNUTella, they would using MSN chat sessions and sending files between friends, using those temporary upload and transfer facilities etc.
Blaming Kazaa and GnuTella for allowing people to transfer files is akin to blaming the road authority for allowing an individual to drive to a drug dealers house to pick up a couple of joints.
What it sounds like is another pathetic attempt to impose his or her ‘nanny corporation’ upon people; apparently they’re meant to police the activities of users using their network – sorry, that isn’t THEIR responsibility, its the law enforcements responsibility along with the licence holders – the issue isn’t and shouldn’t be a criminal matter, but a civil matter of a licence breach and the record companies to prove that the one action of the individual has detrimentally affected their industry.
Thats how the law is written in New Zealand – piracy is a civil issue; hence the reason why so few piracy cases come to court, because the evidence required is so great that unless you’re actually got a 10TB RAID storage array, and serving gigs of traffic each day, the end user isn’t going to be held up as the sacrificial lamb if he or she downloads a few songs.
I never said it is their responsibility or that I think they should police.
Excuse me snappy, but didn’t you say this: The p2p software and torrent sites were and still do make the content available, usually with very little or not attempt to filter out illegal content.
Filtering my definition is censorship, and censorship is by definition, the policing of information – therefore, you advocate the policing of these P2P servies.
Where did I advocate anything? I don’t think these sites should be filtered because it really doesn’t do much of anything but inconvenience people slightly.
I nowhere said I agree with their lawsuits and attempts to take these sites down. In fact, I don’t agree. Don’t make poor assumptions, kaiwahh.
Edited 2006-04-09 01:17
<deleted>
Edited 2006-04-08 05:38
I’d love to be able to listen to my legally purchased iTunes songs on my Linux PC at work, but I can’t (it may be technically possible using Wine or Sharpmusique or similar, but it’s not something that can be done easily/robustly/legally). I’m sure I’m not the only one.
It would be wonderful if DRM was outlawed tomorrow. But it’s not going to happen. So, as long as Linux distributions do not support *any* form of DRM, Linux users like me will suffer the consequences.
Bottom line: I’m with Linus (the man) on this one. Let’s fight DRM somewhere else; in the meantime, let’s be realistic and allow companies who are willing to invest money in Linux-based DRM to provide a workable solution for us Linux users (I wish that included Apple…)
If one needs it in THEIR linux, how bout making it an easily installable seperate download that doesnt come pre-installed in any distribution. One could even make that part of the license agreement to enforce it, ie) “This product shale only be distributed as a stand alone product (ie. it may not be bundled with any other application or operating system)”. That way no-one is forced into anything.
That sounds a lot like binary drivers, and java, and flash. Great idea, except it makes it an option, not de facto lock-in (which is their real issue, because Real can definitely get DRM working with RealPlayer, if they want).
The biggest problem with DRM and Linux is that all DRM solutions are based on the fact that the users don’t know how the systems work. If any DRM method or software is open source you could very easily find the encyrption algorithms and keys used and remove the DRM from the files. Of course any one is free to compile a closed source DRM program for Linux.
That may be how many things are implemented, but not necessarily how it has to be. Media can be watermarked in real-time during delivery based on a public key you provide and the distributor’s private key.
Sure, you could distribute your key along with the copy you pass around, but the copy will be traceable to the person that paid for the original, or the IP to which it was delivered.
Properly designed, a system could be implemented that would be effective even with the complete source code. The only reason it hasn’t been done is either lack of interest, or the type of programmer that could implement it wouldn’t whore themselves out to the MPAA/RIAA.
Actually this is not true.
Cryptograplical methods prevents the usage of digital material from those who don’t have rights to use that material. They don’t and they can’t limit how those who have access to the material can use it.
It is a binary situation: either you can use the material or you can’t. If you can decrypt to a bit stream that can be played with a sound card, you can compress that bit stream as mp3 without any DRM.
The biggest problem with DRM and Linux is that all DRM solutions are based on the fact that the users don’t know how the systems work. If any DRM method or software is open source you could very easily find the encyrption algorithms and keys used and remove the DRM from the files.
I guess you don’t know a lot about encryption and digital signing. It is possible to make an open source DRM solution, just as you have a lot of open source encryption algorithms that are impossible to crack.
I guess you don’t know a lot about encryption and digital signing. It is possible to make an open source DRM solution, just as you have a lot of open source encryption algorithms that are impossible to crack.
Actually virtually all cryptographic methods are public and well studied. But the problem doesn’t lie in the cryptographic method. If the user has the key required to listen to the music he can use the same key and method to remove the protection from use file, if he knows how.
Watermark technology is not an answer either because watermark is not actually about DRM but embedding meta data in side a music or image file. Is you know method how that metadata is inserted you can obscure it so that it can’t be red any more.
The thing I find odd is that Real is a DRM content provider and at the same time the biggest multimedia supporter of Linux. All they have to do is make a DRM front end solution for Linux, problem solved.
So I don’t understand what the VP of Real is **itching about. Or is he talking about the hardware DRM evil idea?
In the article, Ayars states that reliable DRM would require ‘trustworthy’ drivers, and the current model is inadequate. I’m not sure what his proposed solution to verifying drivers is, because it’s not quoted in the article (if it exists).
<i.The thing I find odd is that Real is a DRM content provider and at the same time the biggest multimedia supporter of Linux. All they have to do is make a DRM front end solution for Linux, problem solved. [/i]
Please, keep Real off Linux; its the last platform which they haven’t raped, pillaged and wrecked havoc over by Real.
Sorry, I don’t want to be anal raped to the tune of $16 so that I have the privilage of being able to access music that I’ve downloaded, and making the service worth while, constantly listening to every new damn cd that is released by some populist third rate artist who lacks the basic singing constructs to be able to sing acapella.
When I download music, I want to know that thats it, no more money will be getting extracted out of my wallet each month.
eh you’re confusing their Internet streaming music service with their DRM purchase d/load one. You can buy the songs individually just like in iTunes without any monthly fee. Rhapsody – the internet streaming music service works on Linux now because you’re just buying a subscription to interactive streaming music is all.
Also, let’s not forgot that until Linspire came along and now Fluendo (see http://www.fluendo.com) Real was the only way to legally listen to .mp3 format in the DMCA US. Sadly I don’t think it provides encoding so its only a half baked solution. If more of our players supported .ogg the point would be moot, except for the fact that you can bet its only a matter of time before CD’s as we know it are simply install programs to put the songs in your computer DRM’d and not audio cd’s at all anymore.
[quote]But the Free Software Foundation Europe countered this claim on Thursday, saying that consumers have made it clear that they do not want DRM restricting their use of digital media.[/quote]
Considering that music and movies are selling like hotcakes on iTunes, I’d say consumers have demonstrated that they are more than willing to put up with DRM.
Considering that music and movies are selling like hotcakes on iTunes, I’d say consumers have demonstrated that they are more than willing to put up with DRM.
Thats funny I dont remember passing my vote off to some wanker with an iPod.
Thats funny I dont remember passing my vote off to some wanker with an iPod.
Unfotunately, you don’t have to when there’s well over 20 million of them
When I consider that my 21″ display is not going to show protected content since it’s lacking HDCP, I predict it will be some time before I really take part in the new HD media stuff.
For Linux and open source in general, I do not see a huge chance for implementation of DRM since the current nature of the system allows anybody to modify graphic and sound card drivers to gather digital copies of anything being output on such a system.
Basically, DRM aware content readers/decoders could only deliver output on systems with potentially closed source driver binaries stamped by some certification authority. Same thing holds for any filters/plugins in the media chain.
This also means, that a company like RealNetworks alone cannot make Linux DRM capable.
Yer. Let’s have DRM, which is the very same DRM that’s locking you out of using Apple’s iTunes format, and is locking you out of using Windows Media as well. Great.
to pull a star wars:
the harder they sqeeze, the more customer slipp thru their fingers…
i use linux because there is NO drm. i like it that way.
i would rather chuck my computer out the window than put up with drm. it is too annoying to deal with.
i would rather not watch certain videos than have any drm on my system. if there are movie trailers that require DRM. then i guess i wont watch the preview, or go to the movie for that matter.
Many Israeli consumers refuse to buy the new German
gas ovens because they only seat 45.
The masses don’t understand Digital Rights Management but I think they’d get Digitally Rented Media
I have no idea why Real cannot support Helix DRM on Linux right now. Technically I believe they can, but they cannot justify/guarantee its security to the Recording Industry. Closed platforms with limited end user accessibility is, I’m sure, preferred. With Windows Media Audio, there might be a requirement of a secured audio path in the sound server to prevent low-level audio outputs from being hijacked. I’m sure there are several hook requirements Micrsoft needs to lock MS-DRM to OS X itself. I believe needing access to certain parts of OS X that MS couldn’t or was un-willing to obtain from Apple was the reason DRM 9/10 never made it to the Mac. Flip4Mac may look into it in the future. Real’s DRM may not require such locks, but I could see where Linux support would still be an issue at the kernel level. I’m sure Real can secure OS X fairly well with Helix, though. I mean, I’d be shocked if they couldn’t. I think MS-DRM’s requirements within the OS lower levels are far greater than with other DRM schemes.
DRM systems are not and will not be going away. They are here to stay and as such consumers will utilize them. Nobody wants to be stuck to 1 DRM with one device like iTunes/iPod. I wish Open MagicGate, FairPlay, MS-DRM, Helix DRM all worked together in terms conversion.
QUOTE:”A PLATFORM FOR REVENUE
In addition, Real’s Helix Media Delivery System allows Internet media infrastructure providers to build a platform for multiple revenue streams via pay-per-view content, content syndication, rich media advertising and more. Our team of business specialists can help you understand the economics of the digital media business and make the decisions required to be successful.”
http://www.realnetworks.com/industries/serviceproviders/index.html
Personaly I dont like flash but I have to use it to navigate some sites I need. I do not need digital media and DRM is not wanted I know people still use legacy media players that dont Understand DRM. Real networks do not understand that windows users are Jumping the VISTA boat now for this very reason.
DRM anger is not going to go away. DRM oh yea so we are going to have to support legacy DRM for 200 years as well? VB6 is now legacy. Do your windows 3.1 programs still work?? Looks like everyone is going to have to loopback their speakers just to get a Archive of the music they own.
I havnt heard what the porn industry have to say because they are the ones that are denyed more money than the whole music industry.
Could the idiot who marked down my post; declare as to the reason they did so – remember kids, points aren’t an indication of whether you agree with something.
F**k that! No DRM! Booo!