Quote:
Originally Posted by ApK
It's really not that complicated. Making an unauthorized duplicate and giving it to an unauthorized person will almost certainly be a violation of copyright law.
|
You seem to have missed quote from pdurrant. In that particular DRM model, account sharing is allowed, and thus media sharing.
People find that bizarre, but they don't have the big picture. E-books would never survive if publishers suddenly hit the consumers with total loss of consumer freedoms. Such a plan would die as fast as it rolls out. Publishers are smarter than you give them credit for.
The plan is to roll out e-books with very liberal permissions, comparable to that of paper books. Consumers will obviously take the bait, because there are only advantages at that stage. 10-15 years down the line when consumers are e-book converts and non-DRM books are rare, only then does it make sense to chip away aggressively at consumer freedoms. This is very easy with DRM. The idea is to jail books in thick shrink-wrapped licenses just as software is today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApK
I doubt anyone with a moderately functioning moral compass and a modicum of respect for laws protecting the right of content creators will ever have a problem.
|
You're grouping two different schools of thought that don't make sense. Those with a "moderately functioning moral compass" do not financially sponsor DRM, and therefore do not buy DRM'd content. While this does not conflict with the law, it certainly does not respect laws that have lost sight of the origins of copyright (which was
not to protect content creators, but rather to stimulate more creative works being introduced to society
by way of incentivizing creation). You've got the means and ends mixed up.