Quote:
Originally Posted by stonetools
If that were the standard, then we hould just give up on enforcing any laws against theft. After all, there have been laws against theft since time immemorial, and people still steal.THe purpse of antitheft measures is to reduce it to a socially tolerable minimum, not eliminate it altogether. So too the purpose of anti-piracy laws. Anti-theft laws and practices, by the way, also inconvenience honest people , but we put up with the inconveniences precisely because they allow for functioning of modern society.
|
The problem with this argument is that you're conflating the imposition of DRM with the enforcement of anti-piracy laws.
Just because someone chooses not to use DRM doesn't mean they're abdicating their IP rights.
Baen does not use DRM, but this does not mean they don't take action to enforce their intellectual property rights. They send DMCA takedowns and take appropriate legal action against anyone hosting or reselling Baen eBooks without authorization; and they do all this without DRM.
The problem with your argument is that DRM neither deters piracy nor enables the enforcement of existing anti-piracy laws.
Let's take another example - bicycle theft. Honest people won't steal bicycles whether they're locked or not. That leaves dishonest people, the ones anti-theft devices are designed to deter. The problem here is that DRM is like putting a very complex lock around the front fork of your bicycle. The owner has to unlock the bike whenever they want to use it - but all a thief has to do is flip the lever on the front wheel, and they can slide the bike off the lock in a matter of seconds and be on their way.
That's DRM, it slows down honest people, and does nothing against pirates.