STUDY SHOWS: Ditching DRM could reduce piracy, prices

[TheSFReader]

I don't know if the Supreme Courts may have changed it's stance on the subject since, but to me the following text is quite clear : it doesn't consider theft and copyright infringement as equal.


U.S. Supreme Court
DOWLING v. UNITED STATES, 473 U.S. 207 (1985)

Since the statutorily defined property rights of a copyright holder have a character distinct from the possessory interest of the owner of simple "goods, wares, [or] merchandise," interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The infringer of a copyright does not assume physical control over the copyright nor wholly deprive its owner of its use. Infringement implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud. Pp. 214-218.

[ekster]

Here's a recent experience I had with DRM and games...

I bought the game Mass Effect when it was freshly released, I paid the full price for it. They also had an additional free module online that comes with the update. I played the game a couple of years ago, had fun (using minimum specs as that's all my old PC could handle), and then shelved it.

I just built a new (and much better) computer and wanted to replay it at full specs and then buy Mass Effect 2 and 3 after that. But as I'm about to install the extra module (that also comes with a much needed patch), EA is forcing me to enter a second CD Key for that free module that I can only get get by registering the game on their site. I already did that before, but EA moved servers and wiped all the previous user data, it seems. So fine, I go to re-register it...
"I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."
EA took out the registration for this game, but they kept the requirement to register it in order to update it and install the extra content....
Yup, good old DRM. As a result, I had to pirate Mass Effect 1 even though I already paid for it legally. Now, despite already having the 2nd game sitting in my shopping cart and looking for the 3rd's release date, I will no longer be buying the 2nd or the 3rd one. Plus, I will no longer buy anything at all from EA out of spite.
Same goes with anything else, books, music, etc.
If anyone forces any horrible DRM on the things I buy and pay for legally, and especially if in a few years they stop supporting it and render the whole damn thing useless, I will go out of my way not to buy anything at all from that company afterwards.

In the mean time, the pirates continue to pirate, unaffected by any amazing new DRM that makes things even more expensive for the people who actually want to pay for it...

Yup, really good business model there. And then they wonder why pirating is becoming more and more mainstream.

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by teh603

You're missing one of the key points to this whole issue- that the only people actually stopped by DRM are honest users trying to do such legal things as make a backup copy in case their reader gets stolen or destroyed.

I think ekster just proved your point... though in fairness, EA's DRM system is one of the more draconic and ridiculous ones out there. With ME1, they honestly believed that forcing a constant connection to their servers while playing the game (so they can verify legitimacy of your copy at any time) would prevent piracy.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by teh603

You're missing one of the key points to this whole issue- that the only people actually stopped by DRM are honest users trying to do such legal things as make a backup copy in case their reader gets stolen or destroyed. Theft will still happen regardless of how tight a security you put on an ebook, but making a backup copy for your own personal use is definitely not theft.

Sounds more to me like them and their "Rights Holders" are just sore that they've lost the ability to serve as a gatekeeper to publishing. Would some of those "Rights Holders" also be the ones who legally steal copyrights from new authors using abusive Work For Hire contracts that only pay a pittance?

Edit: Now that I think about it, if you're that willing to let big business and these anonymous "Rights Holders" dictate what the people will buy, you're also ignorant of one of the cornerstones of Capitalism- demand. It doesn't matter how much supply of DRM ebooks you have, if people demand non-DRM ones then that's what they'll buy and leave your DRM ebooks rotting on the digital shelf.

I am not going to look it up, but I have already covered this.
If the public doesn't like DRM, they have the right to boycott the author, or the publisher, or the seller, or all of them until they change their ways. That is perfectly legal.

As for what people do in their own homes to their digital books, who is going to know. If someone tries to commercialize a method for removing DRM or to sell eBooks that they don't have the rights to, then when they get caught they will be prosecuted.

And if some person uses a silly argument that I or another rights holder have indentured authors in work camps producing the works that are being sold, well that person should get into writing themselves. Perhaps fanciful fairy tales would be up their alley.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

---

Good god, how did publishers survive when all they sold was paper books and they had no control over what we did with them?

And on that note, if the DRM on my books prevents me from moving them from my broken 950 to my replacement before sending the broken one back to Sony, I'm going to be pissed.

Scaly,
when they sold paper books you would get 1 copy and unless you had a typewriter and a lot of paper to duplicate them they had control. Even with a copy machine, they still had pretty good control. -That was a lot of paper.

About your Sony. Are you saying that Sony doesn't keep all your books in a cloud somewhere so it can shoot them over to you if you need them?

I wouldn't use Sony, if that was the case.

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by frahse

About your Sony. Are you saying that Sony doesn't keep all your books in a cloud somewhere so it can shoot them over to you if you need them?

They do. I am not the least bit worried about the 10-15% of my books that are from Sony.

As for my comment on paper books, that was sarcasm. I'm sure I'm not the only one who remembers that when VHS players came out the big movie studios were actually trying to stop them, because the ability to record a movie from TV would kill movie sales and studios would be forced out of business. Casette tapes that allowed us to record songs playing on the radio were supposed to be the death of the music industry. So was Napster.

Anyone who sells a good product will survive whatever piracy throws at them, DRM or not. Unless of course the DRM they implement is so restrictive that it prevents the buyer from using the product they way they want to use it. I have music CDs whose DRM stops them from playing in a computer's optical drive, to prevent copying them and uploading them to illegitimate websites. It also stops me from ripping the tracks and download them to my mp3-player... but all that music is on my mp3-player. I'm sure you can guess how that happened.

[teh603]

Originally Posted by frahse

And if some person uses a silly argument that I or another rights holder have indentured authors in work camps producing the works that are being sold, well that person should get into writing themselves. Perhaps fanciful fairy tales would be up their alley.

I am a writer, and I have actually bothered to look up what "all unsolicited works will be considered a work for hire if accepted" means. By the same token, your referring to yourself a a "Rights Holder" suggests something entirely different about you.

By the way, did you actually read what I posted? I never once mentioned anything about writers being indentured or anything like that, only that the contracts they were being offered amounted to legalized theft.

[kjk]

Originally Posted by ekster

Here's a recent experience I had with DRM and games...

I bought the game Mass Effect when it was freshly released, I paid the full price for it.

As a side note:

If you owned a PS3 or a Wii, you couldn't play Mass Effect 1 at all.

That is an issue of exclusivity-Microsoft exercising their right to keep the game to themselves to differentiate in the marketplace.

If you buy a copy of the Xbox360 version of Mass Effect 2, getting the same game for the PS3 will cost you all over again.

That is an issue of compatibility-the two consoles use different OSes, and needed separate teams to develop the games, with added costs. But, the overall content (story development, images, text, and other resources) are re-used.

Neither of these are specifically about DRM, like your PC situation-but it just adds to the confusion/frustration of many users.

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by kjk

As a side note: If you owned a PS3 or a Wii, you couldn't play Mass Effect 1 at all.

Or if you owned a PC, at first. ME1 was a 360-exclusive on release, the PC version came out nearly a year later (with extra stuff added). If you owned the 360 version you had to rebuy for PC, no discount, no freebies, nada. Rebuy or pirate, or go without.

So of course I waited until Steam dropped it to $2.99.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

They do. I am not the least bit worried about the 10-15% of my books that are from Sony.

As for my comment on paper books, that was sarcasm. I'm sure I'm not the only one who remembers that when VHS players came out the big movie studios were actually trying to stop them, because the ability to record a movie from TV would kill movie sales and studios would be forced out of business. Casette tapes that allowed us to record songs playing on the radio were supposed to be the death of the music industry. So was Napster.

Anyone who sells a good product will survive whatever piracy throws at them, DRM or not. Unless of course the DRM they implement is so restrictive that it prevents the buyer from using the product they way they want to use it. I have music CDs whose DRM stops them from playing in a computer's optical drive, to prevent copying them and uploading them to illegitimate websites. It also stops me from ripping the tracks and download them to my mp3-player... but all that music is on my mp3-player. I'm sure you can guess how that happened.

I am happy for you and your Sony content.

As for surviving piracy, and your music industry example, well yes the music industry did survive but you might have noticed a post in the last 2 days that said that the current music sales was about 50% of what it was 10 years ago, and that despite Beyonce and lady Gaga! Hard to believe.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by frahse

Scaly,
when they sold paper books you would get 1 copy and unless you had a typewriter and a lot of paper to duplicate them they had control. Even with a copy machine, they still had pretty good control. -That was a lot of paper.

I can loan a paper book to dozens of friends. When I'm done with it, I can donate it or resell it. I am not restricted in what I do with my own property.

It's not just about copying--though I could certainly do that with a paper book--it's about using the material as I see fit.

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by frahse

As for surviving piracy, and your music industry example, well yes the music industry did survive but you might have noticed a post in the last 2 days that said that the current music sales was about 50% of what it was 10 years ago, and that despite Beyonce and lady Gaga! Hard to believe.

Not the least. Have you tried listening to what those two produce these days? I certainly wouldn't pay for that garbage.

Piracy hurts sales only if you assume that every music pirate would have purchased the music in question if piracy was not an option, and that's just not true. The vast majority of pirates of music, movies, and/or ebooks, never buy anything that they can just as easily get for free. And DRM never stops them from getting what they want.

Originally Posted by Catlady

I can loan a paper book to dozens of friends. When I'm done with it, I can donate it or resell it. I am not restricted in what I do with my own property.

It's not just about copying--though I could certainly do that with a paper book--it's about using the material as I see fit.

Exactly!

[allinhi/]

I think what apple has shown is that for end product consumer goods if the price is right protection isn't cost effective. For a copy of windows?, or other high cost items I am not so sure. Look at clothes, small electronics and such routinely knocked off. I think for books and mid price items shifting the focus to some form of tracking id so that when an id shows up repeatedly it can be established when something is not fair use.

[ekster]

Originally Posted by kjk

That is an issue of exclusivity

That's also something I don't understand... do they really think that because they have a game exclusively for xbox, that I'll buy an xbox? If they have a movie that will only play on a Sony bluray player that I will buy that Sony bluray player? And if they only have an ebook for Kindle, that I will get a kindle?
There were/are some games I'm very interested in and willing to buy, but I don't own an Xbox or a PS3... so the end result? Less sales for them.
And they're crippling their own sales for what? To brag? To just get the up-front cash deal? That's very short-sighted of them. It's not like I'm asking them to make the new Duke Nukem compatible with a paperbook.

I'll never understand how some of these people ever get hired/elected to lead these companies...

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by ekster

That's also something I don't understand... do they really think that because they have a game exclusively for xbox, that I'll buy an xbox? If they have a movie that will only play on a Sony bluray player that I will buy that Sony bluray player? And if they only have an ebook for Kindle, that I will get a kindle?

Yes, they do. Exclusivity used to be what sold consoles. If you don't own one, and you are looking to get one, you buy the platform that has the types of games that you want, regardless of which one that is. When the 360 and the PS3 came out, a large number of the release titles were exclusives, that's how they competed for buyers.

Or you can do what I did and get both, and then end up doing 90% of your gaming on PC anyway.