The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

Re:The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations... by bostik on Thursday May 15, 2014 @05:53PM (#7752476)

> tldr: At the end of the day, if you want to consume mainstream media, you've got to put up with the mainstream consumption hardware/software.

I don't put up with it, and hence have chosen to avoid devices which would impose DRM on me.

I'm a voracious reader. Several of my friends have asked why I don't have a kindle, and the answer is simple. Kindle may be the best reader right now, but unless I can freely move any books bought for it to another device down the road, I will REFUSE to pay the prices of e-books.

If I can not move it the same way I can move a physical book, I haven't bought it. Therefore, I will not pay even close to the amount of a paperback copy. Something like 30-40% of the physical copy price, at most, would be the correct range. And since I don't own it, I should expect to pay for it about the same amount I would get for it when taking it to a used book shop.

So, in reality the correct DRM'd e-book price for me would be something like 10-15% of the physical book's price. Anything more and I simply won't bother unless the book is supposedly really good. All in all, I'll rather leave the book unread for now and eventually get it for ~25% of the price second-hand.

That's a market the publishers don't make a penny on. Their loss.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations... by shmerl on Thursday May 15, 2014 @06:00PM (#7752508)

I have the same approach. I don't buy media with DRM ever and only use devices and systems free of DRM (Windows for example has inherent DRM so those who avoid it shouldn't use it either). The only exception are DVDs, because DRM there is so obsolete that it's not relevant. On any Linux distro one needs to use libdvdcss to play them anyway.

[ Parent | on HN ]