search results matching tag: DRM

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (20)     Sift Talk (7)     Blogs (3)     Comments (187)   

The Adpocalypse: What it Means

MilkmanDan says...

There are a lot of parallels between advertising and copyright. Buy wholeheartedly in to either, and you end up sort of failing to accept the reality of their flaws.

Advertisers think they have a big problem whenever someone circumvents their ads. They panicked when VCRs came around and allowed people to record shows and fast-forward through ads. They panicked when DVRs came out and let people digitally skip through ads. And they are panicking now, with more and more people getting fed up and putting ad-blocking software on their computers or devices.

Copyright holders think they have a big problem when someone tries to circumvent their system, too. They worried about libraries giving people free access to books; but at least a physical book is pretty much limited to one person at a time. They freaked out about cassette tapes being easily copied with a dual cassette deck. They freaked out about people sharing MP3 music over the internet. They freaked out when DVDs came out with CSS protection which was circumvented almost immediately. They continue to freak out by pushing for ever more and more drastic DRM schemes, that are generally circumvented quite rapidly.

The general theme in both advertising and copyright is escalation; a sort of arms race. The problem is that that solution doesn't actually improve things for anyone, in either case. Ads get more and more offensive and annoying, more and more people block/skip them. Copyright gets more and more locked-down, more and more people circumvent it. In both cases, as the "legitimate" side squeezes harder, it ends up making the user experience better for those who circumvent it "illegitimately". See, for example, this good old comic from The Oatmeal:
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/game_of_thrones

The web with adblock software is a massively better experience than the web without it. A pirated 1080p movie or TV show lets you skip the previews/commercials that are often unskippable on a DVD. And on and on.

This arms race doesn't have a good future. Creators and distributors must start wracking their brains to come up with whole new ideas, or at least variants of the old ones, that break that cycle and ensure that "illegitimate" users/viewers don't have a better experience than legitimate ones. I'm sure not holding my breath though.

We Broke: The Division

entr0py says...

Yeah, I rented it, it was a buggy mess with always online DRM cancer. Seeing that it has largely positive reviews really convinced me you can't even go by aggregated scores any more.

South Park S19E9 Clip: Ridding the World of Ads.

artician says...

To be fair, SouthPark has never hesitated to bite any hand it sees necessary, even the ones feeding them. It's a good habit I think, but it's hard to tell when it's satirical or smokescreen.

Semi-related, I'm playing Just Cause 3 right now, a game that requires Steam, and is getting a lot of heat because it uses some "Denuvo" tech, which is being labeled DRM. At the same time, in the game, the primary enemy that the player is fighting against, all throughout, is the DRM army. No joke. It's such a juxtiposition that isn't clear if you're experiencing someones idea of satire or complete, corporate dickishness.

Mordhaus said:

Ironic, considering they moved their content to Hulu.

Anno 2205 - Announcement CGI trailer - E3 2015 [Europe]

GenjiKilpatrick says...

Fuck EA and Uplay online DRM.

I don't know if this game even has it but..

2070 did and it makes end-game impossible to play offline.

Why would I buy a game that intentionally breaks itself without an internet connection?

Last Week Tonight: Tobacco's Legal Bullies

SquidCap says...

Not just TPP.. TTIP is the same but for Atlantic countries, EU - USA. They both also have clauses that prohibits boycotting or giving out negative reviews, anything that may cause loss of profit. They also have parts dedicated to copyright, denying free-for-use and to demanding the highest prison times for anyone sharing anything, denying the rights for stripping DRM from material you own...

I would be here the whole day if i would type each and every ridiculous thing those two "trade agreements" have but essentially they both deny independent nations to make ANY laws that may cause loss of PROJECTED profits.. Not just loss of profits but profits they might lose in the future..

And the court that solves these problems.. wait for it.. is independent jury with three private sector lawyers, no rights to defend nor to be even present, decisions are all secret. In practice three guys selected by corporations make a decision based on the evidence presented by corporations... It is sick and twisted "trade agreement" that is designed to maximize profits, to strip away environmental laws, regulations, worker rights, demands that nation HAS to privatize all of it's services if any corporation so wishes or face the "court"..

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Native Advertising

ChaosEngine says...

@Stormsinger, then why can't I buy the music or tv shows I want from Amazon?

How come hulu or netflix aren't available in my country? I've said it before, I am happy to spend money on the content I want, just make it available to me for a reasonable price (i.e. not nearly double what people in the US are paying for it http://www.steamprices.com/au/topripoffs)

At what point is it my fault that there is literally no legal way for me to purchase the content I want due to an arbitrary geographical restriction?

So if the entire internet is an experiment in alternative monetization, it's a dismal fucking failure.

You want some examples that work?

Steam Sales
Louis CK selling his entire show for $5
Kickstarter (hell Star Citizen alone)

Some people will always choose free. Fine, maybe they just can't afford it, and telling them to just not watch it is never going to work. Forget those people. Focus on the ones who believe that good content deserves rewarding. Make it easy for them to access your content (reasonable price, no drm or arbitrary restrictions) and they will pay.

Trying to stop piracy is pointless. It's out there and as I said, someone people genuinely have a moral issue with paying for content (the OSS zealots for example). Just assume it's going to be pirated (it already is!) and make it easy for those of us who want to pay for it to get it.

Kevin Spacey Talks About the Future of Television

MilkmanDan says...

Living in Thailand, most TV shows aren't available here until WAY after the Western airdate, if ever.

I live in a pretty small town. Western movies don't play here, and if I travel an hour or so to a town where they do, they do they are dubbed in Thai with no English subtitles. DVDs are readily available, but they are usually pirated cam copies burned to disc, and again dubbed in Thai.

Games? Not available in stores in my town. Bangkok, sure -- but again they are almost always pirated copies burned to disk. Console games are the same way and any shops selling the game will also chip the console to play pirated disks. I could, and admittedly probably SHOULD use steam for PC games.

Other software? Basically same story as games. If you go to a computer store here, advertising usually says that they are sold with Linux OS or bare drives. But, the shop will automatically put on a pirated Windows plus loads of software (office, Photoshop if you ask for it, etc.) upon purchasing the hardware. They are usually fairly inept at it, frequently have viruses or fail to actually activate the OS, etc. so I tell them to leave the drives bare and do all that stuff myself. But for 99% of people who buy a PC here, they will automatically get a pirated OS and software along with it.

Basically, my default mode of getting ANY media is piracy. Price (free versus not) is a part of that. Incomes are low here, but cost of living is comparatively even lower. Still, if media was fully available here but equal to the price in, say, the US the vast majority of people here don't have enough disposable income to afford much if any of it. A bigger issue for me personally is convenience. Piracy (torrents, etc.) as a distribution system is infinitely more convenient, easy, and "customer"-friendly than any more legitimate service. I get what I want very quickly, usually in multiple options for filesize vs quality on up to as-good-as-broadcast/blu-ray 1080p, with most everything available from a single source (isoHunt, kickass, PirateBay, take your pick). In terms of user experience, legitimate distribution can't even begin to compete with that -- and that is BEFORE considering price.

Instead, they exacerbate the difference by treating paying customers with open contempt. Pay for TV service? Enjoy 10 minutes of ads for every 12 minutes of show. Buy a DVD? Sit through un-skippable ads, dire piracy warnings, etc. before the show actually starts. Move or simply take the disk on vacation to another country and you will likely be screwed by region locking. Buy software? Get some DRM that slows things down or restricts fully NORMAL use of the software, nags you to register, etc. On the other hand, if you pirate stuff all of that goes away. No ads. Watch/use the media wherever you want, whenever you want, on whatever device you want. Software DRM circumvented easily, usually hours after the first release if not *before*.

I honestly see it as a problem that I am not supporting the creators of the media that I enjoy. But, Pandora's box has been opened on this one. Generation X and Y learned to scoff at the idea of paying for music due to Napster. iTunes has been extremely lucky to turn that around even slightly, making lots of mistakes along the way (DRM and device-locking, etc.). Gen Y and beyond are going to have the same attitude towards piracy with regards to ALL MEDIA that we learned to have towards music. I don't think there is any getting around that.

For content creators, I think that funding via Label / Publisher / Network is going to die out. And soon. The good news is that something akin to an evolution of patronage of arts and creators can work even better than it did in the past. The Motzarts and Beethovens of the future don't need 1 rich duke or king to commision a work, they need 10,000 average Joes on kickstarter or the like. I see things trending more and more in that direction, and all the time. I think it is an exciting time -- unless you're an exec in one of the old dinosaur publishers/networks.

Who Would Want to Buy Anything From These Pricks??

mxxcon says...

Angry Joe needs some practice at his interviewing skills, however it's a commendable effort.
However, what majornelsol said is not that much different from what PS4 is doing.
Both companies are punting drm efforts to publishers.

Microsoft's response to the PS4 not having DRM

ant says...

This is why I try to avoid subscriptions, DRMs, etc. I want to keep them forever if I want to like my CRT TV, VCR, tapes, etc.

oohlalasassoon said:

I agree. Those that write the software should be paid (even paid well) for their hard work, just like anyone else that works hard. If everyone understood that, DRM wouldn't exist. Unfortunately, software developers are in the unfortunate business where the fruits of their labor are so easily acquired without them seeing a dime in return.

But IF they are paid, there's little(zero) practical difference in the mind of the end-user between saying one owns a piece of software and one owns a license to use that software. That is, until it occurs to them that they'd like to sell that license of use to someone else (oh noes, they can't).

If I buy a car, do I own the car, or do I own the title that allows me to use the car that I don't actually own? Some lawyers might reply "the latter", but the guy driving around in the car probably wouldn't. Because I can sell my car, and transfer the title to someone else. Now it's their car, and I got something of value in return for giving up something of value. The atypical (or non-traditional at least) thing with DRM-controlled software --Steam games for example-- is that I can't sell that license of use, as I can the title of a car. So not only do I not own the game, I don't even own the license.

Microsoft's response to the PS4 not having DRM

oohlalasassoon says...

I agree. Those that write the software should be paid (even paid well) for their hard work, just like anyone else that works hard. If everyone understood that, DRM wouldn't exist. Unfortunately, software developers are in the unfortunate business where the fruits of their labor are so easily acquired without them seeing a dime in return.

But IF they are paid, there's little(zero) practical difference in the mind of the end-user between saying one owns a piece of software and one owns a license to use that software. That is, until it occurs to them that they'd like to sell that license of use to someone else (oh noes, they can't).

If I buy a car, do I own the car, or do I own the title that allows me to use the car that I don't actually own? Some lawyers might reply "the latter", but the guy driving around in the car probably wouldn't. Because I can sell my car, and transfer the title to someone else. Now it's their car, and I got something of value in return for giving up something of value. The atypical (or non-traditional at least) thing with DRM-controlled software --Steam games for example-- is that I can't sell that license of use, as I can the title of a car. So not only do I not own the game, I don't even own the license.

ChaosEngine said:

Unpopular opinion incoming!

First, full disclaimer: I am not a game developer, but I do write software for a living I'd prefer to be paid (and paid well) for my skills.

Ok, here's the thing. Sorry, but not your stuff. You didn't make it and you don't own it. You own a licence to use it.

Microsoft's response to the PS4 not having DRM

ChaosEngine says...

Unpopular opinion incoming!

First, full disclaimer: I am not a game developer, but I do write software for a living I'd prefer to be paid (and paid well) for my skills.

Ok, here's the thing. Sorry, but not your stuff. You didn't make it and you don't own it. You own a licence to use it. End of.

I know I'm in the minority here, but I believe not only is a certain amount of DRM acceptable, it's actually unfortunately necessary. I am possibly crazy, but I believe in paying the fucking writer.

Now DRM as it stands is fucking bullshit. *I* paid to watch this motherfucking movie. *i* paid to play this fucking game. Every time you cunts force me sit through a fucking anti -piracy message, it makes me more inclined to pirate your fucking content.

And I don't want to. If I'm buying your game/movie/book, I've already decided your artistic output is worth my time and energy that I put into working. Fuck it, I could have stayed at home and learned to play drums. I've wanted to do that for years, but I don't have the fucking TIME! So you get my time/work/energy.

How fucking dare you waste my precious free time on your sanctimonious fucking ads targeting the very people who don't give a shit about your message, and who, by some perverse twist of natural justice, don't have to put up with your bullshit.

That said.....

"wah, I don't like your DRM" is not a valid excuse to pirate content. If you don't like the way company X distributes your favourite book/game/movie/tv show.... don't consume that content.

No, seriously, (and I'm well aware I'm going to engender a lot of hate for this) if you feel you are entitled to the fruits of someone else's hard work because you don't agree with how it's distributed, then seriously, fuck you. Yeah, I'm not kidding. I don't care if it's WB or HBO or EA or whatever undeniably fucking idiotic big media conglomerate. At some point, a bunch of hard working, talented people created something you want to consume.

PAY THOSE FUCKING PEOPLE.

Or find another way to let those creators know you want their content but not as it's currently available.

If it's awesome, find a way to let them know. If it's shit, don't consume it.

So back to games and drm and copying.

It boils down to this. Buy the games you want. Support the people who are working their arses off because they love what their doing. If you think the new COD is shit (and you're in good company), then don't buy it, don't pirate it and for the love of FSM, don't play it. Your time is valuable. Buy a cheap PC and play FTL or Monaco or Fez or Walking Dead or Mark of the Ninja.... all great games, none of which need a "next gen" (aka 3 or 4 gens ago on the pc) console. Hell, go kickstart Star Citizen.

Fuck it, this is now so long I don't know where or why or how I started.*

Pay the people who make the things you love. They deserve it. They'll make more cool shit. Don't borrow it, don't pirate it. Just, pay them. They get fuck all enough as it is.

* kids! don't write posts drunk after midnight on Saturday after watching the All Blacks crush the French! You will write unpopular opinions and most likely excommunicate yourself from online communities you enjoy!

ant said:

Hence, I try to avoid these DRMs. MY stuff. I keep! I sell if I want to.

Microsoft's response to the PS4 not having DRM

ant says...

Hence, I try to avoid these DRMs. MY stuff. I keep! I sell if I want to.

oohlalasassoon said:

They'll also lock you out of access to every single game in your library if there's a billing issue with just one of your games. Rather than lock just the disputed game, they take your entire library hostage. My brother had it happen to him and he couldn't play any of his games for something like 6 weeks. Steam's side of the story was that my brother's credit card disputed a charge, but when he contacted his CC company they said they did no such thing, which is true, because he owned and had played the game for 3 weeks prior to the account lock, so the charge went through fine at time of purchase, obviously. In the end it was a fuck-up by Steam, and they never offered so much as a "oops, sorry."

Fletch (Member Profile)

Microsoft's response to the PS4 not having DRM

TheFreak says...

It seems like a lot of people are just jumping on a big bandwagon as far as the XB hate. This is more of a series of PR mistakes than any real issue concerning the XBOne.

Since DRM is up to the publishers on both systems, the only difference is going to be the unified DRM system on XBOne versus a hodgepodge of DRM on the PS4. I can guaranty you there will be NO examples of a publisher releasing a game with DRM on XBOne and then releasing the same game on PS4 without DRM. It's not going to happen. Same thing for restricting the sale of your used game. If a publisher activates this feature on XBOne, you KNOW they're going to implement the same type of restriction on the same game released on PS4.

The only real issue seems to be the daily online system checks by XBOne and the hourly checks for online gameplay. This either affects you or it doesn't. In my case, it doesn't affect me, so it's a non-issue. If it genuinely affects you then you should absolutely buy the PS4, assuming MS doesn't reverse course on that decision based on community feedback, which they've already indicated is a possibility.

I suspect there are a lot more people displaying outrage over some of these issues who actually aren't affected in the least. I also promise you there's a large group of people who know this whole affair is overblown bullshit but they're not going to weigh in with their opinion in this toxic environment.

Microsoft's response to the PS4 not having DRM



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon