DVD DRM row sparks user rebellion
-
Michael Dunn wrote:
That's what RIAA and MPAA want you to think. Removing DRM != stealing
So I guess you won't mind at all if I remove any and all limitations from PimpFish, and freely distribute it to whomever I please for no charge and with no compensation to you. Plus, I'll have your complete blessing to reverse engineer it, and include its functionality in MY application, also with no compensation to you.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
I see you've learned you're debating skillz on Slashdot. Clever stuff :)
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
Michael Dunn wrote:
That's what RIAA and MPAA want you to think. Removing DRM != stealing
So I guess you won't mind at all if I remove any and all limitations from PimpFish, and freely distribute it to whomever I please for no charge and with no compensation to you. Plus, I'll have your complete blessing to reverse engineer it, and include its functionality in MY application, also with no compensation to you.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
So now stealing == "anything you don't want to happen"? Fantastic! :rolleyes:
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
-
So now stealing == "anything you don't want to happen"? Fantastic! :rolleyes:
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
No, I've just exposed the double standard of some people who make their livings via intellectual property, yet who disrespect the IP rights of others.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
-
I see you've learned you're debating skillz on Slashdot. Clever stuff :)
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
No, I've just exposed the double standard of some people who make their livings via intellectual property, yet who disrespect the IP rights of others.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
-
Michael Dunn wrote:
That's what RIAA and MPAA want you to think. Removing DRM != stealing
So I guess you won't mind at all if I remove any and all limitations from PimpFish, and freely distribute it to whomever I please for no charge and with no compensation to you. Plus, I'll have your complete blessing to reverse engineer it, and include its functionality in MY application, also with no compensation to you.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
It seems that there are two arguments here. 1. I want to exercise my fair use rights to enjoy the media that I have purchased in the privacy of my own home in the manner of my choosing. 2. I want to distribute and download copyrighted materials on the 'Net without compensation to the copyright holders. The problem is that most people believe that (1) should be legal, but the DMCA makes it illegal. (2) has already been illegal for a very long time - even before the DMCA. The RIAA / MPAA are trying to link (1) and (2) together - they want the people who want (1) to be treated like the criminals who want (2). They do this by saying that (1) invariably leads to (2). Of course, there is ample evidence that the conclusion the RIAA / MPAA try to draw is false. One such source follows. We developed a data set of 312 popular movies and located one or more samples of 183 of these movies on file sharing networks, for a total of 285 movie samples. 77% of these samples appear to have been leaked by industry insiders. Most of our samples appeared on file sharing networks prior to their official consumer DVD release date. Indeed, of the movies that had been released on DVD as of the time of our study, only 5% first appeared after their DVD release date on a web site that indexes file sharing networks, indicating that consumer DVD copying currently represents a relatively minor factor compared with insider leaks. Source: http://lorrie.cranor.org/pubs/drm03.html[^] So, using this logic in the argument that you gave, you'd be free to use PimpFish however you want provided you pay for it. However, that still does not give you a license to freely distribute it - that would still be considered copyright infringement.
-
No, I've just exposed the double standard of some people who make their livings via intellectual property, yet who disrespect the IP rights of others.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
Congratulations! You've learned the classic techniques of "Cut and Paste". Welcome to the Windows Power User's club!
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
No, I've just exposed the double standard of some people who make their livings via intellectual property, yet who disrespect the IP rights of others.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
Richie308 wrote:
No, I've just exposed the double standard of some people who make their livings via intellectual property, yet who disrespect the IP rights of others.
Must've missed that post. I saw one where you equated the removal of onerous usage restrictions with stealing, and another where you launched into a sarcastic tirade after Mike pointed out the obvious flaw in your initial post... Perhaps you'd care to post a link to the conspicuously missing response you allude to?
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
-
Richie308 wrote:
No, I've just exposed the double standard of some people who make their livings via intellectual property, yet who disrespect the IP rights of others.
Must've missed that post. I saw one where you equated the removal of onerous usage restrictions with stealing, and another where you launched into a sarcastic tirade after Mike pointed out the obvious flaw in your initial post... Perhaps you'd care to post a link to the conspicuously missing response you allude to?
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
I never once used the word stealing. That was YOUR word. My point is that anything you do that breaks the license agreement ( including stripping DRM ) is illegal and unethical. And it's disappointing that someone who makes his living from intellectual property should be so flip when dealing with other people's IP rights.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
-
It seems that there are two arguments here. 1. I want to exercise my fair use rights to enjoy the media that I have purchased in the privacy of my own home in the manner of my choosing. 2. I want to distribute and download copyrighted materials on the 'Net without compensation to the copyright holders. The problem is that most people believe that (1) should be legal, but the DMCA makes it illegal. (2) has already been illegal for a very long time - even before the DMCA. The RIAA / MPAA are trying to link (1) and (2) together - they want the people who want (1) to be treated like the criminals who want (2). They do this by saying that (1) invariably leads to (2). Of course, there is ample evidence that the conclusion the RIAA / MPAA try to draw is false. One such source follows. We developed a data set of 312 popular movies and located one or more samples of 183 of these movies on file sharing networks, for a total of 285 movie samples. 77% of these samples appear to have been leaked by industry insiders. Most of our samples appeared on file sharing networks prior to their official consumer DVD release date. Indeed, of the movies that had been released on DVD as of the time of our study, only 5% first appeared after their DVD release date on a web site that indexes file sharing networks, indicating that consumer DVD copying currently represents a relatively minor factor compared with insider leaks. Source: http://lorrie.cranor.org/pubs/drm03.html[^] So, using this logic in the argument that you gave, you'd be free to use PimpFish however you want provided you pay for it. However, that still does not give you a license to freely distribute it - that would still be considered copyright infringement.
Vega02 wrote:
So, using this logic in the argument that you gave, you'd be free to use PimpFish however you want provided you pay for it.
This is where you are wrong. Because once I do pay for PimpFish, I am still bound by the license agreement. And if the license agreement states that I am not to remove any technical limitations, then I would be wrong to do so. I think some people grasp at straws to find any rationale they can in order to make it OK to dishonor the IP rights of others.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
-
I never once used the word stealing. That was YOUR word. My point is that anything you do that breaks the license agreement ( including stripping DRM ) is illegal and unethical. And it's disappointing that someone who makes his living from intellectual property should be so flip when dealing with other people's IP rights.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
Richie308 wrote:
I never once used the word stealing. That was YOUR word.
Kewl! My own word! ;P Ok, fair 'nuff - you said, "The nerve of people who think that they are entitled to have HD movies for free [...some irrelevant rant about immigration]" Last i checked, removing DRM doesn't give you free HD movies either.
Richie308 wrote:
My point is that anything you do that breaks the license agreement ( including stripping DRM ) is illegal and unethical.
I have yet to sign any agreements when buying movies. Over the years, i've spent a lot of time and money trying to actually play those movies, when the hardware or software wasn't up to the task. Heck, i once spent an entire weekend swapping out hardware, patching software, updating drivers, and finally resorting to low-level firmware hacking... just to watch a movie that i'd paid for. Why? Because someone, somewhere, was so afraid that i was going to record the thing onto VHS tapes that major portions of my display hardware needed to be locked down while playing movies, including the portions that actually display the damn movie. Needless to say, this fact was not noted anywhere on box or documentation for the video hardware, software, or movie itself. So yeah, wanna talk unethical? Go find the jerk who thought it'd be funny to sell me an unplayable disc and claim it was a movie.
Richie308 wrote:
And it's disappointing that someone who makes his living from intellectual property should be so flip when dealing with other people's IP rights.
Are you talking about Mike, or me? 'Cause Mike wasn't flippant. And if i'm disappointing you, then prepare yourself for an awful lot of disappointment - you're matching me flip-for-flip easily...
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
-
Richie308 wrote:
I never once used the word stealing. That was YOUR word.
Kewl! My own word! ;P Ok, fair 'nuff - you said, "The nerve of people who think that they are entitled to have HD movies for free [...some irrelevant rant about immigration]" Last i checked, removing DRM doesn't give you free HD movies either.
Richie308 wrote:
My point is that anything you do that breaks the license agreement ( including stripping DRM ) is illegal and unethical.
I have yet to sign any agreements when buying movies. Over the years, i've spent a lot of time and money trying to actually play those movies, when the hardware or software wasn't up to the task. Heck, i once spent an entire weekend swapping out hardware, patching software, updating drivers, and finally resorting to low-level firmware hacking... just to watch a movie that i'd paid for. Why? Because someone, somewhere, was so afraid that i was going to record the thing onto VHS tapes that major portions of my display hardware needed to be locked down while playing movies, including the portions that actually display the damn movie. Needless to say, this fact was not noted anywhere on box or documentation for the video hardware, software, or movie itself. So yeah, wanna talk unethical? Go find the jerk who thought it'd be funny to sell me an unplayable disc and claim it was a movie.
Richie308 wrote:
And it's disappointing that someone who makes his living from intellectual property should be so flip when dealing with other people's IP rights.
Are you talking about Mike, or me? 'Cause Mike wasn't flippant. And if i'm disappointing you, then prepare yourself for an awful lot of disappointment - you're matching me flip-for-flip easily...
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
Just one last thing. You characterize my posts as "rant" and "tirade" when it is obvious that you are the one who is getting too hot under the collar.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
-
Just one last thing. You characterize my posts as "rant" and "tirade" when it is obvious that you are the one who is getting too hot under the collar.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
Richie308 wrote:
You characterize my posts as "rant" and "tirade"
Just the one (the sarcastic tirade). The ranting about illegals frankly made no sense to me, so i'm gonna just continue to ignore it.
Richie308 wrote:
it is obvious that you are the one who is getting too hot under the collar.
Ah... no. Little do you realize, i'm not wearing a collar... ;P
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
-
No, I've just exposed the double standard of some people who make their livings via intellectual property, yet who disrespect the IP rights of others.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
Richie308 wrote:
No, I've just exposed the double standard of some people who make their livings via intellectual property, yet who disrespect the IP rights of others.
What double standard? I purchased $20 worth of music last night on iTunes. The first thing I did was remove the DRM (using iTunes itself) and then placed DRM free copies on my MP3 server so that my networked player in my living room can play the music that I bought. Now I can also listen to them on any MP3 player that I choose, not just my iPod. I have no intention of distributing the songs to anyone other than me. The whole process would have taken 10 seconds instead of a half hour if they had just sold me DRM free music in the first place, and the result would be the same. I hate piracy of IP. I get into arguments with people over it all the time, and I have no pirated movies, music or software (and I have a lot of all that stuff). But DRM is counterproductive and actually harmful to everyone, even the people who think they want it.
Faith is a fine invention For gentlemen who see; But microscopes are prudent In an emergency! -Emily Dickinson
-
Vega02 wrote:
So, using this logic in the argument that you gave, you'd be free to use PimpFish however you want provided you pay for it.
This is where you are wrong. Because once I do pay for PimpFish, I am still bound by the license agreement. And if the license agreement states that I am not to remove any technical limitations, then I would be wrong to do so. I think some people grasp at straws to find any rationale they can in order to make it OK to dishonor the IP rights of others.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
Richie308 wrote:
This is where you are wrong. Because once I do pay for PimpFish, I am still bound by the license agreement. And if the license agreement states that I am not to remove any technical limitations, then I would be wrong to do so.
There is no license agreement when buying music. I buy MY copy of the music to do with what I wish, within the limitations of the law, meaning I don't get to give it away to others. It is and always has been your fair use right to format-shift and time-shift media. Think recording stuff on your VCR, which the Supreme Court ruled legal. What the DMCA did is remove that right by making it illegal to use the technical means to do so - that is, removing DRM so that you can play, for example, a DVD on your computer instead of the DVD player. Oh, you still have your fair use rights, they say - it's just illegal for you to exercise them.
Richie308 wrote:
I think some people grasp at straws to find any rationale they can in order to make it OK to dishonor the IP rights of others.
I think it's sad when someone has bought the corporate line hook, line and sinker without regard to their own rights.
Cheers, Patrick
-
Richie308 wrote:
You characterize my posts as "rant" and "tirade"
Just the one (the sarcastic tirade). The ranting about illegals frankly made no sense to me, so i'm gonna just continue to ignore it.
Richie308 wrote:
it is obvious that you are the one who is getting too hot under the collar.
Ah... no. Little do you realize, i'm not wearing a collar... ;P
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
Shog9 wrote:
i'm not wearing a collar
And let's just stop there. God only knows where this could go from here, illegal immigrants, HD video, IP infringement, Mike's PimpFish software...it's enough to make my entire moral world view quake on it's foundation! Oh the sordid web we weave...
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
Shog9 wrote:
i'm not wearing a collar
And let's just stop there. God only knows where this could go from here, illegal immigrants, HD video, IP infringement, Mike's PimpFish software...it's enough to make my entire moral world view quake on it's foundation! Oh the sordid web we weave...
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
So now stealing == "anything you don't want to happen"? Fantastic! :rolleyes:
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
If that's the case, I'm sitting here naked. They took everything including my clothes! :shiver:
-- Raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
-
Maybe both sides are wrong here?
-
Once I got to "Attempts to gag the blogosphere", and finished pumping the remains of my stomach, I promptly moved on. The blogosphere. A dumber name I can't think of.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
Jim Crafton wrote:
The blogosphere. A dumber name I can't think of.
Never heard it before? Lucky you - under which rock did you hide, and is there still room for me? ;)
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
Michael Dunn wrote:
That's what RIAA and MPAA want you to think. Removing DRM != stealing
So I guess you won't mind at all if I remove any and all limitations from PimpFish, and freely distribute it to whomever I please for no charge and with no compensation to you. Plus, I'll have your complete blessing to reverse engineer it, and include its functionality in MY application, also with no compensation to you.
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
Thats a different situation. DRM for the sake of protecting an artist or creator of the content isn't bad itself. DRM forcing you to But HARDWARE you dont want is disgusting. If I have an HD-DVD setup with a sweet monitor that I love, I don't wantt o pay however much it is for a movie only to find that I cant play it because I'm not using the Monitorthat this particular manufacturer wants me to. Many VCR Tapes have protection on them, but that protection doesn't stop you from watching the movie in ANY VCR player.DVD's can be played on ANY Dvd player, yet most hve protection on them, so what the industries problem with creating a DRM that isn't hardware specific?
