View Single Post
Old 11-08-2012, 03:55 PM   #237
BoldlyDubious
what if...?
BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
BoldlyDubious's Avatar
 
Posts: 209
Karma: 750870
Join Date: Feb 2011
Device: paper & electrophoretic
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catlady View Post
BoldlyDubious, I think that the source of the file is irrelevant. The person who uploads the file to a torrent or a file-sharing site is the one responsible; who cares where that person got the file in the first place?
This is how things are now. The results are: (i) people who upload files to file-sharing sites are almost impossible to identify; (ii) using this as their justification (or excuse), media companies subject everyone to drastic licensing schemes which greatly limit what they can do with the files they purchase (or, more precisely, get a license to access).

Given that the current type of DRM can easily be removed, the system does not damage illegal uploaders; while it certainly creates absurd difficulties to users behaving correctly.

My proposal for "social DRM" (I don't think I have been especially original, certainly someone else already proposed something similar) aims at changing this.
This is done by giving to media purchasers both the freedom to do whatever they want with the files they bought, and the responsibility to choose wisely what they do with them.
One of the key points is that consumers would get to own media, not licenses. Therefore, many reasonable things that are now difficult and/or prohibited would become easy and possible. To name just a few: backing up, lending to friends and family, changing reading device, leaving your media library to your sons and daughters when you die, ...
BoldlyDubious is offline   Reply With Quote