Digital Rights Management (DRM)
Policy related to Digital Rights Management.
Poll Created Wed 24 Apr 2013 1:18AM
We should outright ban DRM Closed Mon 29 Apr 2013 8:43PM
Successful, motion passed.
As a fairly major sub-plank under our fundamental policy on copyright and patent reform, should we put in additional laws to outright ban DRM, source code obfuscation, media encryption for the sole purpose of cheating customers and subscribers, and any attempts to thwart or obstruct the reverse engineering of any digital media, including but not limited to applications, video games, ebooks, movies, music or other forms of software and artwork? Should we ban all forms of digital restrictions or obstructions to reverse engineering?
|Results||Option||% of points||Voters|
||Agree||71.4%||5||N AJ GJ|
|Undecided||0%||7||JO JY SS LN|
7 of 14 people have voted (50%)
kbenjamin sauerhaft coplon
Wed 24 Apr 2013 1:24AM
i think once we have power the public will be angry enough that DRM will become less popular without extra legislation
Wed 24 Apr 2013 1:31AM
DRM doesn't really do much for the consumer.. I think its safe to encourage the PNC to advocate for a DRM ban.
Alex M (Coyo)
Wed 24 Apr 2013 2:36AM
DRM will be used to thwart attempts to maintain a free and open internet and society assuming copyright reform or abolition succeeds.
Wed 24 Apr 2013 2:51AM
Outright banning it makes sense to me. When piracy is no longer illegal there will be no point. I think only through a ban will we see companies actually drop it.
Fri 26 Apr 2013 2:15AM
DRM is a battle between publishers and customers not pirates. DRM does not stop pirating and it never will. It only drives consumers away.
Fri 26 Apr 2013 5:50PM
DRM is a battle between publishers and customers not pirates. DRM does not stop pirating and it never will. It only constrains consumers by creating barriers where previously there were none.
Non-stealthy edit later
Fri 26 Apr 2013 6:00PM
I realized while writing my last comment that DRM is a toothless dog. The Act that was passed in 1998 give it it's teeth. I think it would be more effective to pull its teeth than put it down.
Sorry I am not very good with analogies.
Sat 27 Apr 2013 3:51AM
because its an ouright abuse which is nothing more than giving "IP" holders the "right" to abuse anyone who comes in contact their their "property"
Lindsay-Anne Gorski Wed 24 Apr 2013 2:11AM
DRM harms the consumer (see online-only DRM games such as Diablo III and the new SimCity) and is easily circumvented. It does not do its intentioned function and prevents other pieces of data (music, games, other software) that the user has from being used without the incurred expense of additional licensing fees or inane restrictions.
kbenjamin sauerhaft coplon Wed 24 Apr 2013 2:22AM
why can't we just make the policy
"we oppose the use of DRM"(or something similar) i don't see the need for a ban
kbenjamin sauerhaft coplon Wed 24 Apr 2013 2:39AM
and require all of our media be released without DRM
Amanda Johnson Thu 25 Apr 2013 10:22AM
Ksc: people already hate DRM and that doesn't stop companies from using it, without a ban I find it highly unlikely that they will stop.
kbenjamin sauerhaft coplon Thu 25 Apr 2013 5:02PM
AJ The people who hate DRM have not proven themselves to be a large group of unified consumers, let alone a large group of voters of voters. After that happens i see things changing dramatically, no anti-DRM legislation necessary.
Alex M (Coyo) Thu 25 Apr 2013 5:16PM
Without a federal criminalization of the use of DRM, companies will use that to maintain unnatural monopolies when their business models have been rendered obsolete decades ago, and they should have been bankrupted decades ago.
kbenjamin sauerhaft coplon Fri 26 Apr 2013 2:16AM
if it only drive customers away then why do we need to ban it?
Benjamin Lyon Fri 26 Apr 2013 2:43AM
I only have so much text there for statements and that is the first thing that came to mind for DRM. If I was thinking more clearly I should have put, because it puts unnecessary constraints on the consumer....I want to type more, but I lost my train of thought, because of I kept getting distracted by the IRC.
Amanda Johnson Fri 26 Apr 2013 2:55PM
KSC: The issue is that it will not drive away customers. A minor problem will not stop me from getting an IPod if I believe it is the best on the market. We shouldn't allow companies to bully people and still get paid because their product is just good enough to allow them to be assholes.
Benjamin Lyon Fri 26 Apr 2013 5:58PM
What if instead of a ban, we repealed the DRM act? The companies can still try their useless DRM methods, but we remove the penalties for bypassing them. We all know how annoying it is, but maybe the more important matter is the egregious fines that are levied against people.
I think I just changed my own mind on this matter.
Amanda Johnson Sat 27 Apr 2013 1:23AM
There is just no reason to not ban it? It isn't like this will be an unpopular opinion so I don't see the need to stop halfway?
GI Jack Sat 27 Apr 2013 3:52AM
Our platform should include nothing that undermines this
This needs to be law
The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
Nick Sat 27 Apr 2013 5:17AM
@gijack , I generally agree with that. But I would like to note that we shouldn't blindly follow the words of other organisations. Just because they are good guys, doesn't mean its all good stuff./
Though of course I think nearly everyone would agree with that.
GI Jack Sun 28 Apr 2013 1:37AM
DRM is not a "toothless dog". While without legislation, you cannot legally prosecuted, hard to reverse engineer machines, or anything that you cannot easily ascertain the workings of, are inherently dangerous, the same as patent medicine of last century.
Not knowing how it works, allows them to hide dangerous components, that might not be fully understood even if reversed to enough of a degree for the people to solve their immediate problem.
A full review of how a system works should be a legal right. Whitepapers need to exist for all products on the market.
Alex M (Coyo) Mon 29 Apr 2013 6:17AM
I agree with GI Jack. Strict criminalization of DRM use should be part of digital rights. DRM can be very dangerous, not just infringing on users' rights and liberties.
Alex M (Coyo) Mon 29 Apr 2013 6:20AM
It is not enough to depend and rely on the public's anger to keep multinational corporate monopolies on the straight and narrow. Keep in mind, these are corporate welfarists who feel they are entitled to our money and their government-enforced monopolies.
They will not repent unless forced to.
Alex M (Coyo) Mon 29 Apr 2013 6:20AM
DRM is not a toothless dog. It is dangerous to users, the Internet, society and culture, and to national and international security and safety as a whole.
Amanda Johnson Tue 30 Apr 2013 2:37PM
I put it on a pad of approved policy measures:
after we have a list of decision then we can get to how we want to write it
Nick · Wed 24 Apr 2013 12:22AM
I am thinking we should recommend that the PNC generally opposes DRM.