- From: cobaco <cobaco@freemen.be>
- Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 18:35:56 +0200
- To: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
On 2014-05-18 17:20 David Singer wrote: > Please tell me why I should take you at all seriously when you say > simultaneously that piracy is not a problem, and not the reason for DRM, there's a very simple fact: the entire multitide of DRM schemes that have been tried over the years have not managed to make a dent in piracy, let alone kill it of If stopping piracy was the reason for DRM, then the industry would've long since abandoned an approach that clearly doesn't work for that goal there's a second simple fact: the industrie has not in fact abandoned DRM hence: either the industry is terminally stupid, or the aim of DRM is something else then stopping piracy > Let’s get this clear. If you enjoy, without your paying for it, an > experience that someone creates, and is only making available to those who > pay for the experience, that is theft. theft and copyright infringement are entirely different areas of law, that statement is true all over the world that's the case because they are completely different concepts You obviously don't believe me when I state that as fact you work for a big corp, go confirm that with you corporate council, and then stop equating the two > Please tell me when you have created something worth watching, from your own > resources, and are making it available without restrictions. THAT is doing > it from your own resources. making a duplicate of something obviously requires a lot creativity then creating something entirely new, I'm not disputing that BUT making a duplicate is still an act of making that requires resources Digital goods just have the fortunate quality (from the standpoint of a duplicator) that the duplication requires little in the way of resources or skill > Please tell me when you have demolished the for-pay content industry in the > USA by importing Nigerian and Bollywood films and made them available > without DRM. you seem to take the destruction (as opposed to adaption) of Hollywood when faced with DRM-free competition as a given If so, then by every capitalist theory they deserve to die, and nothing of value lost NOTE: i said drm-free not I thought Apple was only doing DRM because the content-industries forced you into it? Why the kneejerk response to the idea of Apple main-streaming DRM- free content from other producers? > If you believe this, why haven’t you formed the company already? because I don't have the necessary cloud to mainstream alternative content Apple IMO does In the absence of a major player like Apple making a deadlock-breaking move, non-mainstream channels will just gradually have to gain in importance, exactly what's currently happening -- Cheers
Received on Sunday, 18 May 2014 16:36:26 UTC