• Web DRM standard moves to next phase of development, FSF's Defective by Design campaign to continue
    106 replies, posted
[QUOTE=bitches;50734284]jesus christ, i guess anticheat is "evil" too! not letting people just break the DRM easily isn't an argument that it somehow harms anyone [editline]18th July 2016[/editline] those gosh darned evil terms of service telling you that they want money in exchange for their service that relies on money [editline]18th July 2016[/editline] just cut to the chase where you reveal how utterly entitled you think you are to free shit[/QUOTE] I never said movies or software have to free as in price, I just said they should not have anti-consumer components like DRM, you can still make money by respecting your users and giving them a good service, look at GoG.
[QUOTE=bitches;50734111]if you find out that some DRM software is doing something it shouldn't be, then you have cause for concern but i asked you why DRM is INHERENTLY bad, something you keep avoiding to answer[/QUOTE] The problem for the end user is that it's a system made to stop a bunch of people who tends to get their way in those regards. It's essentially a feelgood measure that serves as an inconvenience for the end user. Lord of the Fallen [URL="http://wccftech.com/lords-of-the-fallen-pc-drm-uncracked/"]allegedly[/URL] bugs caused by its DRM. Then we have shit like always-online DRM and whatever the music industry spends their time making (only to fail.)
[QUOTE=eirexe;50734664]I never said movies or software have to free as in price, I just said they should not have anti-consumer components like DRM, you can still make money by respecting your users and giving them a good service, look at GoG.[/QUOTE] DRM in web-browsers is reasonable for services such as netflix: you're not buying every movie on netflix, you're only buying the ability to view them for the duration of your membership. it's a valid concern for content distributors to not want their content redistributed for free, so how do we prevent that from happening in netflix?
[QUOTE=Foda;50735433]DRM in web-browsers is reasonable for services such as netflix: you're not buying every movie on netflix, you're only buying the ability to view them for the duration of your membership. it's a valid concern for content distributors to not want their content redistributed for free, so how do we prevent that from happening in netflix?[/QUOTE] That is the point, this won't prevent it, it's just getting rid of your user's freedoms for no reason.
[QUOTE=Foda;50735433]DRM in web-browsers is reasonable for services such as netflix: you're not buying every movie on netflix, you're only buying the ability to view them for the duration of your membership. it's a valid concern for content distributors to not want their content redistributed for free, so how do we prevent that from happening in netflix?[/QUOTE] Yes and this DRM has caused me issues viewing netflix from it's inception. I even canceled my sub for quite a while because I couldn't watch it.
[QUOTE=Matthew0505;50732267]FSF is biased in the same way the Cure Brain Cancer foundation is biased.[/QUOTE] While I agree with FSF on this issue, the FSF is not an indisputable force for good. A lot of their ideology and the way they implement it is really questionable; I'd hardly compare them to the Cure Brain Cancer Foundation.
[QUOTE=Foda;50735433]DRM in web-browsers is reasonable for services such as netflix: you're not buying every movie on netflix, you're only buying the ability to view them for the duration of your membership. it's a valid concern for content distributors to not want their content redistributed for free, so how do we prevent that from happening in netflix?[/QUOTE] Why should they? They aren't suffering any losses, and seeing as Netflix made 6.77 billion dollars last year, I don't think they are going anywhere. And even then, aparrently having sites like [URL="https://torrentfreak.com/online-piracy-drops-in-australia-netflix-151014/"]Netflix decreases piracy[/URL] as it's more convenient. And with Netflix, much like region blocking, it's pretty much just a feelgood measure as you won't really achieve much.
[QUOTE=eirexe;50734223]Then the terms of service themselves are evil, i'm going to quote the FSF itself, since you seem to be unable to get why: [quote]DRM is incompatible with free software. DRM is only possible by keeping some parts of a computer secret from users and unmodifiable, which is a direct attack on users's freedom. DRM cannot function while being free software as this would allow the antifeatures enforced by DRM to be undone. [/quote][/QUOTE] Encryption and implementation details of various [B]media [/B]DRMs are publicly available and often have open-source implementation, they can bank on just private keys to function. This is both modifiable, public and open-source. I can see how this quote applies to software DRM which generally is a big cat and mouse game of obfuscation, but nothing in this quote applies to media DRMs.
[QUOTE=eirexe;50734036]It's not scaremongering, it's a legitimate concern over knowing exactly what my computer is doing, sometimes reverse-engineering software is illegal. It working on most devices is not an argument, this is not about convenience, this is about freedom.[/QUOTE] have you audited every line of code in every single one of the programs running on your machine? the "freedoms" argument is stupid because i can guarantee that you haven't audited every single line of code on your machine
[QUOTE=eirexe;50735507]That is the point, this won't prevent it, it's just getting rid of your user's freedoms for no reason.[/QUOTE] Tell me how this new DRM technology removes a Netflix user's freedoms, he would still be able to watch movies on his browser/tablet/phone? Whenever I see someone get outraged at how DRM will ruin <insert thing>, I can't help but feel that that person is just a pirate being salty that he will have to pay to access <insert thing>.
[QUOTE=_FR_Starfox64;50735926]Tell me how this new DRM technology removes a Netflix user's freedoms, he would still be able to watch movies on his browser/tablet/phone? Whenever I see someone get outraged at how DRM will ruin <insert thing>, I can't help but feel that that person is just a pirate being salty that he will have to pay to access <insert thing>.[/QUOTE] I personally don't mind basic DRM here, as I fully understand why Netflix wouldn't people to easily download a movie off their site. However, as a counter-point, this will not at all stop piracy. At worst someone would just have to resort to screen capturing the movie or ripping the DVD (which is a more common method anyway) to redistribute it illegally. All this is going to stop is people who download the movie off of Netflix so they can watch it later without Netflix for whatever reason (perhaps streaming it to their media center or watching later without an internet connection), which may push them to cancel their netflix and just download it illegally anyway.
[QUOTE=LordCrypto;50735776]have you audited every line of code in every single one of the programs running on your machine? the "freedoms" argument is stupid because i can guarantee that you haven't audited every single line of code on your machine[/QUOTE] It's impossible to audit every single line of code in your machine, what point are you trying to make? I chose to trust that the community has analyzed most of the programs I run.
Yeah like OpenSSL
[QUOTE=Cold;50736142]Yeah like OpenSSL[/QUOTE] or bash
[QUOTE=Cold;50736142]Yeah like OpenSSL[/QUOTE] Free Software is usually more secure, and stuff like the OpenSSL bug was so big because it being a free software program all vulnerabilities are public, and that is not a bad thing, everyone knowing that there's a vulnerability means that it will quickly get patched, and people will update their versions of the program to ensure security. [IMG]http://zdnet1.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2014/10/02/20a269e4-49eb-11e4-b6a0-d4ae52e95e57/resize/770xauto/4767b455ea1356e9749fed336705fd30/coverityerrorrate2014.png[/IMG] Then LibreSSL was created, but that's another story. Security through obscurity just means that critical vulnerabilities will go hidden for longer, look at all the Flash 0 days. Why are you making this a free software issue though? this is about DRM, not free software, this thread is not about free software, it's about getting rid of DRM.
I'm a Netflix subscriber, and bitches talking about a DRM that doesn't affect a user's experience is living in fantasy land. Yes, if a form of DRM did exist that worked without a compromise on the paying user's experience did exist, then it would be fine. It doesn't exist. If you want to talk about Netflix specifically, it really annoys me that I am unable to watch 4K content on PC. Why? DRM. Despite the fact that HDCP 2.2 has already been cracked, and pirates are able to download Breaking Bad in 4K, I, as a paying user, am not permitted this content because I am on a PC. I'm not certain how this web standard DRM will affect the user experience as it has yet to come to fruition. But I can guarantee that it will.
[QUOTE=Winded;50733559]DRM is only efficient at giving incentive for pirates to buy the real product when they can't get it to work for the first couple of weeks..[/QUOTE] The irony too is that a lot of the time DRM makes it better to pirate a thing than to buy it some DRM is so aggressive in some games for example, that it makes the game practically unusable, and yet hilariously gets cracked a week before the games even out, meaning not only did it not do it's job but it actually punishes you for paying for the game. You end up getting a better experience downloading a cracked copy. not to justify piracy, but DRM can be fucked [editline]19th July 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Tracker;50736609]I'm a Netflix subscriber, and bitches talking about a DRM that doesn't affect a user's experience is living in fantasy land. Yes, if a form of DRM did exist that worked without a compromise on the paying user's experience did exist, then it would be fine. It doesn't exist. If you want to talk about Netflix specifically, it really annoys me that I am unable to watch 4K content on PC. Why? DRM. Despite the fact that HDCP 2.2 has already been cracked, and pirates are able to download Breaking Bad in 4K, I, as a paying user, am not permitted this content because I am on a PC. I'm not certain how this web standard DRM will affect the user experience as it has yet to come to fruition. But I can guarantee that it will.[/QUOTE] What is HDCP even SUPPOSED to do, anyways how do they think it'll prevent anything from happening?
[QUOTE=Levelog;50735522]Yes and this DRM has caused me issues viewing netflix from it's inception. I even canceled my sub for quite a while because I couldn't watch it.[/QUOTE] how so, HDCP incompatible hardware?
[QUOTE=J!NX;50736754]What is HDCP even SUPPOSED to do, anyways how do they think it'll prevent anything from happening?[/QUOTE] It's supposed to be a feelgood measure for some companies
[QUOTE=eirexe;50732188][URL]http://www.fsf.org/news/web-drm-standard-moves-to-next-phase-of-development-fsfs-defective-by-design-campaign-to-continue-opposition[/URL][/QUOTE] Has been tried since the 90s... it never works. You can literally just export what the GPU throws out and rip the content from it.
DRM is not meant to be uncrackable and most businesses certainly understand that. What DRM tries to provide is a way to boost sales in the beginning of a release, that's why Denuvo is having so much success. Denuvo is pretty ingenious and they know it's not uncrackable, but the system they developed makes cracking each game a very time consuming task that pushes the pirates a few months back, which means a lot more sales for players that want to play near release. I'm not sure how they will apply that type DRM to movies though. it might be a bit more challenging than games.
[QUOTE=bunguer;50737891]DRM is not meant to be uncrackable and most businesses certainly understand that. What DRM tries to provide is a way to boost sales in the beginning of a release, that's why Denuvo is having so much success. Denuvo is pretty ingenious and they know it's not uncrackable, but the system they developed makes cracking each game a very time consuming task that pushes the pirates a few months back, which means a lot more sales for players that want to play near release. I'm not sure how they will apply that type DRM to movies though. it might be a bit more challenging than games.[/QUOTE] it's impossible to apply DRM to films. as long as it's being pushed on a screen it can be captured. at worst rip quality might decrease a bit but considering how people already mostly download YIFY garbage I don't think the general pirate public minds
[QUOTE=Zezibesh;50737932]it's impossible to apply DRM to films. as long as it's being pushed on a screen it can be captured. at worst rip quality might decrease a bit but considering how people already mostly download YIFY garbage I don't think the general pirate public minds[/QUOTE] HDCP Did a pretty good job at preventing capture at the display end of things, until the splitters came along that would just rip out the encryption and the people who monitor that where ignorant about it.
[QUOTE=LordCrypto;50735776]have you audited every line of code in every single one of the programs running on your machine? the "freedoms" argument is stupid because i can guarantee that you haven't audited every single line of code on your machine[/QUOTE] You're assuming he's alone in his concern, but there's more than a single enthusiast or professional interest in auditing major platforms. [QUOTE=bitches;50734284]jesus christ, i guess anticheat is "evil" too![/QUOTE] Anti-Cheats are services meant to add value to the customers product by blocking malicious code from voiding game rules or giving unfair advantages on multiplayer scenarios, much like anti-viruses are to a certain extent. The same way steam is more of a service that connects me to my friends and makes it easier for me to enjoy my content across multiple systems. Steam games that enforce DRM or use third-party solutions are still bullshit however. [url=http://i.imgur.com/fS99qRs.png]There are examples of steam games with optional or no DRM.[/url] [QUOTE=bitches;50734111]just cut to the chase where you reveal how utterly entitled you think you are to free shit[/QUOTE] You're doing a great job assuming bullshit about people. [QUOTE=bitches;50734111]if you find out that some DRM software is doing something it shouldn't be, then you have cause for concern[/QUOTE] Had you taken your sweet time to read the article, or knew enough about the matter at hands you would've known AT LEAST about Sony's incident. [QUOTE=bitches;50734111]but i asked you why DRM is INHERENTLY bad, something you keep avoiding to answer "freedom" has nothing to do with it; you understand exactly what TOS you're agreeing to and what devices your content is available for when you step into an agreement with Netflix[/QUOTE] Freedom has everything to do with it, there's no point in trying to discuss if all you do is close your ears while screaming "YOU'RE ALL PIRATES!!!". Furthermore, the agreement is bullshit and it effectively hurts the customer, rather than bringing value to the purchase/rent. What if I want to rip the media out of the website to produce derivative, non-competing works such as a critique? What gives you the right to stop me from practicing inside the guarantees of fair-use at my own leisure? [QUOTE=bitches;50734111]it is an AGREEMENT; it is Netflix's right to demand whatever they want (which is incidentally very little) your argument would hold more weight if we were talking about one-time payment to watch a movie forever, like many services offer where you buy a particular film but then have DRM preventing your usage of it but i'm not asking about those, i'm asking about Netflix[/QUOTE] And it is reasonable for customers to protest whenever they feel like the agreement is overcrossing its boundaries when it comes to its social function. As it stands Netflix' DRM only serves as means to stop me from enjoying legitimate content however I feel like, since I'm bound by the availability of their software in the platform I want to play it back, while people can simply "acquire" said content via "alternative methods" and be completely unbound to any sort of restriction. They don't need client-sided DRM to limit media streams only to authenticated devices, only to make sure that only trusted software can decode it. [editline]19th July 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Cold;50736142]Yeah like OpenSSL[/QUOTE] Anyone that thinks that software can be perfect, regardless of their "freedom status" is deluded. But ignoring all of the windows/flash/java vuln is really disingenuous.
So what do you anti-drm people suggest? That Netflix just embeds their films via simple HTML5 video tags and allow users to download the films?
[QUOTE=.Lain;50736946]how so, HDCP incompatible hardware?[/QUOTE] The days before pipelight were rough ones.
[QUOTE=Van-man;50732288]When the core problem is region locked or region delayed content, or the DRM inevitably fucking up in one way or another, then it is. Buuut they'd rather rest on the laurels after petitioning for DRM, instead of stepping up and actually offering a good and worldwide identical service so it isn't worth the hassle to :yarr:[/QUOTE] The problem is that Rights and licenses are regional. Various countries have different laws and standards regarding them, different ways of enforcing them etc. Creating a global simultaneous license is nice and all, but unfeasible. Remember that while the internet does facilitate global and international communication and transference it is not Supranational.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;50738021]So what do you anti-drm people suggest? That Netflix just embeds their films via simple HTML5 video tags and allow users to download the films?[/QUOTE] That they continue to do what they do to make their service [URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10187400/Spotify-and-Netflix-curb-music-and-film-piracy.html"]more convenient and better than pirating[/URL]. Something they already do pretty well.
[QUOTE=gokiyono;50738247]That they continue to do what they do to make their service [URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10187400/Spotify-and-Netflix-curb-music-and-film-piracy.html"]more convenient and better than pirating[/URL]. Something they already do pretty well.[/QUOTE] what's to stop someone from paying for a month subscription, writing a script which then go through each film and downloads it, and then re-uploading? They need DRM. Also, no content creator would sign the rights over to netflix without some kind of DRM protection
[QUOTE=wraithcat;50738245]The problem is that Rights and licenses are regional. Various countries have different laws and standards regarding them, different ways of enforcing them etc. Creating a global simultaneous license is nice and all, but unfeasible. Remember that while the internet does facilitate global and international communication and transference it is not Supranational.[/QUOTE] Much of the western world is surprisingly identical nowadays, both for better and for worse, and yet there's still a huge discrepancy in release dates even for content that are untranslated and unsubbed. [editline]19th July 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=proboardslol;50738256][B]what's to stop someone from paying for a month subscription, writing a script which then go through each film and downloads it, and then re-uploading[/B]? They need DRM. Also, no content creator would sign the rights over to netflix without some kind of DRM protection[/QUOTE] Who's gonna stop them from inevitably breaking or bypassing the DRM and doing the same? Remember the whole DRM debacle with Blu-ray and DVD's beign cracked? Face it, DRM just ends up doing more harm than good for paying customers, do I have to reminds you of all the shitty antipiracy measures that ruined playing games because they were buggy and overzealous? They don't need DRM, they need to step up and realize why people who isn't even interested in a technical challenge are willing to break said DRM. And that's because DRM is a hassle to those it shouldn't be...
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.