Re:The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations...
by shmerl on Thursday May 15, 2014 @03:09PM
(#7751511)
Yes, and they make two mistakes - that's it's necessary (as you pointed out, DRM doesn't prevent piracy), and that such evil is acceptable (accepting massive surveillance or other overeaching police state kind of methods is similar).
Re:The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations...
by jbk on Thursday May 15, 2014 @03:47PM
(#7751781)
I'm not making any judgment on DRMs, I'm just trying to explain how they work.
Re:The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations...
by shmerl on Thursday May 15, 2014 @03:51PM
(#7751796)
I understand. You are right about the main issue behind it - most people are not thinking this through, otherwise there would be more opposition to DRM.
Re:The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations...
by edanm on Thursday May 15, 2014 @04:19PM
(#7751977)
Somewhat off topic advice - if you're trying to convince people of your views, calling things "evil" rarely works.
I'm willing to believe that DRM doesn't further the interest of society, but evil? I don't think you can say that considering the real evil that exists in the world.
Re:The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations...
by shmerl on Thursday May 15, 2014 @04:39PM
(#7752095)
Would you call police state evil? I would. Same thing is about DRM in my view.
How would you call something like this for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_rootkit
If you speak about DRM-for-copy-prevention to people in the street, a lot of them consider it as a 'necessary evil' because 'the artists need to live of their work'.
When you know more about DRM, you usually have stronger arguments against, of course.