View Single Post
Old 11-18-2012, 04:58 AM   #391
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
Catlady, I don't see why you are so strongly against a scheme (my proposal of post #356) that doesn't change anything for people that think like you but gives new freedom to media users AND reduces piracy.
Presently, if you buy media from mainstream services (Kindle, iTunes) you can do two things:
1) live happily in the "walled garden" that these services close you in;
2) strip the DRM and be free to share/backup your files, at the price of doing something that breaks a license agreement and/or the law (but with extremely low risk of prosecution).
With my "social DRM", you can still do 1) and 2) but you also can do 3)
3) leave the metadata in place and be free to share/backup your files without having to break any license agreement and/or law, accepting that if you behave irresponsibly you can get a fine in the end.

I don't want and don't like to break the law or a contract, and would choose 3). You can continue with 2) if you prefer. Why does having other people have more freedom (and accept risks that they are willing to accept) upsets you?
BoldlyDubious is offline   Reply With Quote