"If consumers even know there's a DRM, what it is, and how it works, we've already failed."

—Peter Lee, Disney Executive in an interview with The Economist in 2005.


@heavenly_general Now how come the "streaming" rebranding worked so well?...

@heavenly_general Actual source:

the context used to say that: “consumers don't want to be IT administrators for their own home”, claiming people shouldn't be fighting over DRM compatibility and, oddly enough, long term support, or else people would use CDs and DVDs

@heavenly_general it's funny because it's presented in the context of - get ready - the digital home, and DRM and its intents are presented in a pretty positive light

"protects such content against piracy and unauthorised copying. DRM allows the copyright holders of content—film studios and record companies, in essence—to define such parameters as when a film or song that is downloaded “expires”, or how many times it can be copied to another device, such as a portable player"

apparently they didn't stop to think about the idea of a home policing what people can do having anything wrong with it

@xerz Thanks for the link. I admit that I didn't read it. Because of that, I missed some contexts.

@heavenly_general in fairness the ideal DRM never causes the user any problems and only prevents them from making infinite copies on torrent sites.

@icedquinn I admit the fact that I am out of depth on the subject of DRM.

In a sense, if we purchase an ebook and we have no any capability to copy it, then yes, it is fair.

But now, since I have purchased an ebook, I want:
1. To read it on any devices I have,
2. To lend it to my friends,
3. To copy a part of it for a purpose or another,
4. To sell it when I do not need it anymore,
5. To be able to read it whether the publishers still operating or bankrupt,
6. And other reasons.

@heavenly_general there isn't really a way to make sure copies you made can't be used when you loan it to someone else.

or rather, an ideal form of DRM is impossible to obtain.

there is some blockshit that can help (ex. bitcrystals) where license tokens can be moved between wallets without the intervention of the original publisher. but then, you have to check against the chain and what stops you from just not updating them or feeding fake blockchains in to stuff :cirno_shrug:
@heavenly_general the other ideal world that will never happen, is that DRM is abolished and people bother to pay artists without being held at gunpoint and then we have an age of FOSS and open culture.

@icedquinn Since you mentioned FOSS. I can give you a reference.

WordPress is a libre software. All of its plugins are also libre software as well.

But as we can see, many people have created many plugins and sell them (usually annual subscription).

And their businesses are thriving, such as:
1. Elementor, BeaverBuilder, Divi,
2. WPML,
3. Gravity Forms,
4. WooCommerce and its ecosystems,
5. And so many others.

@heavenly_general that's just colonizing the commons though. automattic has to deal with side funding the project and then people come by to sell plugins that aren't open source.

FOSS and open culture don't real. they're just platforms for businessmen to colonize.

@icedquinn Would you please to tell me an example or two of plugins under non-GPL license?

Do you mean those "premium" plugins? These are under GNU GPL.

Automattic as far as I know is not in the business of selling plugins, but:
1. Hosting (,
2. Backup,
3. Security,
4. Search facility,
5. CDN (free facility),
6. Analytic,
7. And some others.

But, indeed there is possibly that plenty of its server software are not under GNU Affero GPL License (only GNU GPL).

@heavenly_general i never found beaverbuilders source code. when i go to the website, it just tells me all about how much i can pay them

@icedquinn Libre software or free (as in free of speech) software is not about price.

You can write a libre software and sell if for a price.

BeaverBuilder created a WordPress plugin under GPL license for a price.

If you want to use the plugin, you can purchase it from the company.

Then, you will receive the code. You are free to do anything with the code.

You can use it, modify it or even resell the code.

@icedquinn About "FOSS not real", frankly I do not know about this.

But one thing is clear. There is open source movement which I do not really understand.

But, there is also (much) smaller movement. It is free (as in freedom) software or libre software movement.

It is not a computer technical movement, rather, it is a social movement.

But yes, free software movement is very small and many people do not know it.

The evidence that "people don't bother to pay artists" just isn't there. All the way through the rise of file sharing, mean incomes for musicians were on the rise. Since streaming took over, they have been falling. DRM does not benefit artists. It does work as an anti-competitive measure, reducing the collective bargaining power of artists - and thus their incomes.

@icedquinn By copies, I meant this way:

Just say I have purchased a classic financial book; "The Intelligent Investor" by Benjamin Graham.

I made several copies of the first few pages and gave them to my friends and my families.

I want them to read these, so they know the differences between investment and speculation.

In this way, I can still read my books and my families (and my friends) can read the copies.

@icedquinn The other reasons are:
1. I do not want the publishers of the (e)books which I have purchased to come to my home and forcefully burn my (e)books,

2. I want to purchase (e)books and I do not want to rent them. Once I have purchased the (e)books, I do not want them to be burned (expired) by the publishers, so I have to purchase (rent) the (e)books again,

Sign in to participate in the conversation

A instance dedicated - but not limited - to people with an interest in the GNU+Linux ecosystem and/or general tech. Sysadmins to enthusiasts, creators to movielovers - Welcome!