undefined | Better HN

0 pointsdredmorbius6y ago0 comments

The problems with the DRM route are ... well known. See the EFF (https://www.eff.org/issues/drm) and FSF (https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/drm.html) especially.

Among other matters:

- Your devices are no longer fully under your control, and don't answer to you.

- Even where DRM isn't itself directly. malware (Sony: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootk...), it inevitably creates backdoors for APTs.

- The legal proscriptions on analysing and assessing ADRM mechanisms create both minefields for researchers and multiply the existing security threat risk.

But most critically, and pretty much fully torpedoing your voluntarism argument, device vendors may be contractually or legally prohibited from producing non-DRM-afflicted devices in their own relationships with DRM gatekeepers, meaning that there are no (or very crippled or expensive) DRM-free alternatives.

Witness ongoing efforts to plug the "anologue hole" (https://www.eff.org/issues/analog-hole) in various devices and software.

FWIW, my complete crap Chrome browser on my complete crap Samsung Android device refuses to allow me to screenshot this HN thread claiming it is a "DRM protected page".

I'd love to replace the device with something vaguely comparable. Between licensing restrictions, monopoly coercion, and market dynamics, there is literally nothing available.

Or more briefly: Your assertion is absolutely unsupported by empirical experience.

0 comments

10 comments · 4 top-level

pwg6y ago· 3 in thread

> FWIW, my complete crap Chrome browser on my complete crap Samsung Android device refuses to allow me to screenshot this HN thread claiming it is a "DRM protected page".

Just tested with Firefox on Android (Moto E4 phone). Firefox did not block taking a screenshot of this thread. Perhaps you may wish to test Firefox yourself to see if it better obey's you than Chrome does.

dredmorbiusOP6y ago

The problem simply should not exist.

pwg6y ago

Agreed.

But sadly it does, and while it does the options available are try something else or do without. In this case you can try Firefox for Android on your phone to see if it behaves better than Chrome.

1 more reply

gentleman116y ago

Firefox on iOS also works

javajosh6y ago· 3 in thread

I wasn't aware I was making any kind of assertion, honestly. But I think a world in which proprietary content must be totally vertically integrated with a non-owned proprietary device is at least an honest way to enforce artificial scarcity. I think the "shape" of this system represents a kind of platonic ideal that combines artificial scarcity in a free market system that values property rights. I find the idea abhorrent myself, and would not intentionally lease such a device, but I think it helps clarify the discussion.

AnthonyMouse6y ago

> But I think a world in which proprietary content must be totally vertically integrated with a non-owned proprietary device is at least an honest way to enforce artificial scarcity.

In addition to all of the other objections, the biggest failure here is of the technical measures to actually prevent copying. Even when it's prohibited by law and the pirates are a bunch of hobbyists, DRM gets broken time and again. You can imagine what would happen if copyright didn't exist and then breaking the DRM allowed for-profit businesses to legally distribute any of the content they extracted.

Though it should definitely be one or the other and not both. If copyright exists then DRM is not only useless, its existence is pure harm because all it adds to copyright is restricting things the copyright doesn't give the copyright holder a right to restrict, like free speech and fair use.

javajosh6y ago

I speculate that it's theoretically possible to build virtually unbreakable DRM into a physical device, especially if the device is designed to resist (or at least detect) disassembly. (Analog re-recording notwithstanding).

I like your point about DRM vs copyright. I guess I've always seen DRM as the "ounce of prevention" that replaces the "pound of cure" that copyright enforcement entails - although distribution platforms like YouTube increasingly reduce that pound to closer to an ounce (at the cost of more abuse). I think your point would be valid if enforcement of copyright was simpler and cheaper; perhaps you've read stories about photographers whose work has been used by large companies, without compensation, usually because the asset was included in projects done by 3rd party contractors. Its very expensive for an individual to enforce their rights. But yes, if the justice system itself were fixed to be fast, cheap, and fair, then I would agree that copyright alone would be the preferable solution.

smichel176y ago

I do this somewhat by choice. I have a mildly damaged old phone that I use as my "proprietary app device" with Spotify, Discord, etc. It allows me to sandbox their access to my life, to some extent.

Thorrez6y ago

> - The legal proscriptions on analysing and assessing ADRM mechanisms create both minefields for researchers and multiply the existing security threat risk.

Well I assume if we repeal all copyright then the laws against breaking DRM will be repealed too.

raverbashing6y ago

Screenshot worked just fine here, I don't know what might have been causing your problem (Android Chrome)

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse