DonnyEMU wrote:
I disagree. I do not want my computers OS deciding it has to crypt my personally created works. I want those to be as interchangeable as possible. I do not want layers of protection on it. I want transparency and interoperability on my work.
Look first of all if you were a content maker and you seen someone making an illegal copy of your work (even if it was to make a dirivitive work or something that was not for monetary gain) it's still illegal in the USA (my country). If you read the Digital Millenium Copyright Act you will see that it was badly written piece of legislation that trounces all over fair use rights. This is not Microsoft's fault it's just the reality of government not understanding consumers and being run by major companies like hollywood. They are asking for these things built-in as protections. The big companies. Microsoft is more or less just complying with current law.
I am a content maker, and the DMCA adds very little over previous copyright law, what it does, is offer massive smackdowns of anyone fool enough to try to circumvent copy protection.
Yes it's a bad law and needs addressing.
Treat folk honestly and most will be honest, treat them as thieves and they will ablige, in my experience anyway.
DonnyEMU wrote:
My point with the thief thing is not to call people thieves (if you are offended though you should be asking yourself why and if you did anything to make you feel that way), but what do you care if you are not making illegal copies of something if it's in there or not..
But you did call people thieves, and how dare you sir try to insinuate that it is everyone elses fault that they feel offended when they are liabled. And make no mistake - that is precisely what you did.
DonnyEMU wrote:
People are great at seeing the consumer side but did you ever try to make a living by music, videos, movies etc. Piracy just adds the cost of these items. I respect Microsoft for suporting the companies who loose money daily off of this and giving them an option not to loose revenue.
It doesn't though, DRM stops no one. Name one application written in the last decade, with a form of copy protection, that wasn't pirated.
Hell, most applications are available from warez servers within days of it being released to the general public.
To say that DRM protects content providers and makers is utter bull of the highest order. All it does is effectively accuse your customers of being thieves, as well as inconveniences them. Those in the know will get the non drm'd crack and have the benefit of not having payed and not having been jerked around with DRM.
All DRM does, and ever will do is create lock-in. Even Microsoft have admitted as much - going so far as to suggest cracking their own DRM so as to allow their own customers to transfer songs legitimately bought under their older music service to be used on their Zune player.
Please stop perpetrating the myth that DRM is anything other then a vender lock-in scam.
DonnyEMU wrote:
Also if you aren't making illegal copies or doing misuse of materials then you aren't a thief and have nothing to worry about and I am not accusing you..
That's not what you said though.
DonnyEMU wrote:
There isn't an opinion here or anything to debate, it's either legal or illegal through current laws (me I am speaking about within the USA). If you really want to make a difference contact your lawmakers of where you live, make sure your own rights to fair use are protected.
I have heard many rationals for illegally duplicating things and saying well I have a right to use this for "X" purpose. Your government dictates what is legal or illegal in laws set forth. Those aren't debatable unless you get them changed. Otherwise it's just a justification.
UK fortunately still allows you to back up your media, with the proviso that you don't use both copies at the same time. The BPI (The UK equivelent of the RIAA) has also stated that they have no issue with people ripping their CDs for personal use so long as they don't go out sharing them, which is fair enough imho.
