Everything costs effort and can be expressed in money equivalent!
Originally Posted by elanthis
The point is how to monetize it properly. Making everyone pay just for copies of DRMed crap is wrong.
Now, cough out $3,000,000,000 for your DRMed copy of Linux kernel or you are douchebag.
LMAO "hard work" - every work is hard. The difference is, if you ain't popular and unique, your "hard work" does not interest ANYONE, especially if you restrict it yourself how to distribute it.
No, it won't... this will make Netflix available on Android, possibly only on unrooted devices. By balkanizing Linux even more, this will make the chances of getting supported web video on Linux even more remote.
Originally Posted by GreatEmerald
What's worse, this standard will let content providers restrict the usage of *any* portion of a web page, not only video. This will allow the EME proposers to pay web site owners to make their content only accessible through their proprietary browser, making profits by spying the user's habits through the browser itself and selling the data to advertisers. Once web sites start making money from this scheme, thousands of them will embrace EMEs and therefore will no longer be viewable by open source browsers.
It can't get worse than this. It's like a zombie but omnipotent Flash encrusted deep into the HTML standard that we'll never get rid of.
I signed the partition though. ( free software foundation )
My 2 cents
I live in a country where every computer that doesnt come with Windows OS preloaded get 1 pirated copy installed by someone. Not to mention game movies and audio content.Private torrents are full with almost everything u need at a free cost . Like it or not they will never be able to restrict sharing on internet nor they will make money on every ripped movie found on torrents. Thank god we have Russia and hackers and crackers will still pirate everything that moves. So for me everything work on linux couse i dont use or buy disks off any kind when i can get it all free via torrents. Sharing is freedom power belongs to the people!
You talk about piracy, why don't you go after the big gaming, music, and movies caught stealing someone's else creation without paying them a dime with their own rules? That is a sheer of hypocrisy and double standard.
Originally Posted by elanthis
While this won't fix the DRM in HTML5 issue, there's a new bill in Congress that legalizes DRM cracking for instances in which copyrights are not being intentionally violated. This would legalize cell phone unlocking on both the consumer and producer side and end the legal issues with DVD and Blu-Ray DRM cracking by media players to play movies on Linux. I urge all American citizens here to read this and sign the petition and spread it around as much as possible:
I don't know how much support is has in the House right now, but so far the co-sponsorship seems somewhat bi-partisan. If this becomes law, it would be the biggest real copyright reform in a very long time.
Last edited by Prescience500; 05-11-2013 at 05:06 PM.
So instead of plugins that get updated we will trust media companies to test and update their emes?
And I never view drm protected media. So tell me how there will be no web?
How long until there won't be Linux games from Steam anymore because some morons think that the artists making the games won't need the money and pirate everything?
Originally Posted by asdx
I disagree with your views.
Originally Posted by elanthis
Piracy is not stealing. Why is it that I can go to a library, and lend a book, or a CD or a movie, read or listen or watch it as many times as I like, let my friends do the same, even make copies of the media for my own use, and no one thinks anything is wrong... but if I do the same over the internet, suddenly I'm a thief, a criminal?
That's bullshit. Sharing is good. "Piracy" isn't an issue. Humble Bundle has shown that it doesn't matter: even if there is some piracy, when you're fair and give people good terms, they will pay for content, because people want to support content creators. So DRM is pointless, it only alienates customers and does nothing to deter "piracy".
Piracy also doesn't hurt the music or movie industries. That's just an excuse. What they're really afraid is becoming obsolete and losing their position as gatekeepers to the market. Since the internet gives anyone the ability to self-publish and even get funding (kickstarter et al.), totally bypassing all established gatekeeper channels, the old and fat corporations are very afraid of becoming irrelevant. They fear the day when all artists realize they don't have to work as slaves to the publishers/record labels/etc. That's why they make excuses like "piracy" and try to present it as a moral issue, why they try to campaign for even more draconian legislation (SOPA, ACTA) to censor and cripple the web.
And that's also why this DRM for HTML5 is a bad thing. It's just another battle in the ongoing war between the old gatekeepers and the new market disruptors. Similar battles can be seen all across the board, in every industry. For example, Microsoft is trying its best to stay as the gatekeeper of the OS market. All of them are fighting a losing battle, because progress cannot be stopped.
Oh and before you trot out all the old strawmen, this doesn't mean that everything should be free for everybody. No one is saying that content creators shouldn't be compensated. They should, it's just that they need to develop business models that allow them to get paid without limiting the rights of consumers to share content freely. There are already tons of such business models available, many of them already proven to be feasible.
And those of you who say that this is a good thing because "it gets rid of flash and silverlight", who think that DRM is inevitable, that's just not true at all. Even if W3C corrupts the HTML5 standard with DRM, that's no guarantee that content providers won't still implement their own DRM schemes. That's no guarantee that you'll get netflix on Linux. However it would help legitimize DRM and make it easier for content providers to implement. Why should it be easy for them? Why should the slaves make it easier for their masters to whip them to submission? Are we really collectively suffering from Stockholm syndrome, where no matter how much the copyright mafia keeps flogging us, we just bend over and ask for more? I don't think so... we managed to repel ACTA and SOPA, we can fight this too.
To be honest yes.
Originally Posted by Sonadow
Surely the easiest way to reduce piracy is to make the legitimate version at least as good as the pirated version?
Selling a crippled version that people can't use without expensive hardware/software is just gonna result in more people pirating, just to get a version they can actually use.