Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck
If piracy *mattered*, they would've paid attention to the people who said, "DRM is not going to stop piracy."
|
Why? It was largely the pirates who were saying that. "Experts" were telling them that DRM would be effective, and they didn't know enough about software to not believe them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck
If piracy were costing them the m(b)illions they claim, they'd have hard numbers--and be pressing lawsuits with those numbers. Instead, they're pressing lawsuits claiming "we can't be bothered to prove ANY copying actually took place, much less that we lost a measurable amount from it; we want a ruling based on the concept that copying *could have* taken place and therefore, we're owed a statutory amount of damages."
|
Lack of hard data doesn't mean loss wasn't happening; and the specific reason for the lack of hard data was the inherent insecurity of the web itself, something the publishers had no control over, so they can be forgiven for not having hard data.
That doesn't stop them from wanting to prevent loss. Bottom line is, they went with the most reliable recommendations they had, from the most reputable sources: "DRM would solve the problem." Considering how ignorant the publishers were about the web and software, you can't completely blame them for their choices.