View Single Post
Old 11-19-2012, 07:53 AM   #409
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 murraypaul View Post
But you've offered no reason whatsoever to think that that form of piracy would be reduced.
Currently people can remove the DRM from a file and upload it.
In your scheme people would be able to remove the watermarking from a file and upload it.
It's not really like that. Currently people have no personal reason to avoid removing the DRM from a file and uploading it. (Respecting laws and contracts is not a personal reason, in this context: a personal reason is something that tells you that you will be damaged if you do something.)
In my scheme, people will have the very personal reason of not wanting to let down the person who gave them the file (as I explained, for instance, in post #366; please note that it's not necessary that the potential uploader cares about the original file buyer).
This is a key difference. It means that my social DRM system features what I called a "distributed damping system" based on social links between people.

Last edited by BoldlyDubious; 11-19-2012 at 07:55 AM.
BoldlyDubious is offline   Reply With Quote