DescentBB

Why can't I watch Blurays on my computer via normal, legal ways? Why does the public put up with DRM?

Because they are sheep ?

In 15 years it's all going to be streaming anyway.

snoopy wrote:Why can't I watch Blurays on my computer via normal, legal ways? Why does the public put up with DRM?

because it's been pushed on people under the guise of trying to "stop piracy".

The number one promotion for Piracy is the restrictive DRM that the content providers slap on everything. Because the pirated stuff just works, while the stuff you legally acquire either doesn't work at all, or you have to jump through a hundred flaming and expensive hoops to get it to work. You should NOT buy this massively restrictive stuff, just stick with the good old DVDs for now if you want to buy anything. Reject the extra cost and extra effort required to play back a Blu-Ray.

I have no issues with Blue-ray on my PC...... HDMI is a wonderful thing!

For me it is simple.
My PC is at a desk, I have to sit there.
27\" screen...
My media room or BedRoom I can sit, laydown, do whatever and on 52\" and 50\" LCD and Plasma.
Other than watching a movie on one of my laptops for travel maybe... I would rather be comfortable.

DRM is a pain in the ass, and it will fade away.
Though for me it isn't an issiue.

My brother's got a program that strips the restrictions off.

Yea, DRM is a pain in the azz, thanks much internet culture that believes everything is supposed to be free.

And you know what, if playing Blu-Ray is a pain in the azz to the PC crowd, and is not a problem to those with legit entertainment systems…well so be it, no sympathy here, ya did it to yourself.

Spidey wrote:Yea, DRM is a pain in the azz, thanks much internet culture that believes everything is supposed to be free.

And you know what, if playing Blu-Ray is a pain in the azz to the PC crowd, and is not a problem to those with legit entertainment systems…well so be it, no sympathy here, ya did it to yourself.

These kinds of responses are pure stupid. Sorry, but you look like a complete idiot saying that. People that say stuff like this (the pirates are at fault, the hackers ruin it for the rest of us) are spouting pure BULL SH*T! Take your ignorance and shove it.

There is no reason to defend a company's evil actions because of the actions of others. There will always be pirates and crackers out there but they are always a minority. Heck, there have been pirates for hundreds of years. The only thing DRM (Digital Restrictions Management) does is hurt the customer. Pirates have never and probably will never be affected. Companies use piracy as an excuse to limit the customer and force them to rebuy the same thing over and over again. People who believe otherwise are ignorant, stupid, sheep. As an example with dvds. The main reason the DRM on dvds was cracked was to allow playing them on OS' other than Windows and Mac. Thanks to the efforts of the "hackers" I was able to watch dvds that I legally purchased on my computer back in 2000. Sure I had to download "illegal" code from some server in another country but it was only illegal because the companies said so. The point being, DRM is trying to create "criminals" out of honest consumers.

Blueray and HDMI is the latest attempt to block consumers from using their equipment how they want. People who bought the first gen hdtvs are now screwed by the hdcp that is now required to view hd movies. They can not view their legally purchased bluerays on their legally purchased (older) hdtv. Ridiculous. Again, anyone who supports this kind of behavior from the companies we support needs their head examined. When an HDMI copy protection stripper that is affordable is available you bet I will buy one (think there are a few but they are in the $500 range) so I can use my equipment how I want. I bought it, I own it, I do what I want with it.

Another example is the recent PS3 firmware update. Sony removed advertised features from ALL PS3s in the name of security. People paid money for these features and now the company just takes them away for no legitimate reason. So either you update and lose a huge feature, or don't update and lose access to PSN and all multiplayer features in games. Either way, you are losing a feature that you paid for. It's akin to bait and switch.

People need to wake up and refuse to support this crap. Resent PC games have been a joke. Assasins Creed (a single player only game) requires an active internet connection to even play it. With the constant issues the company has been having with their authentication servers sense launch people are still unable to play it legally. They have to download a cracked version just to play it.

So, stop regurgitating these DRM company's thow-up of reasons for limiting only the paying customer on how they can and can't use their legally purchased media, please.

Xamindar wrote: These kinds of responses are pure stupid. Sorry, but you look like a complete idiot saying that. People that say stuff like this (the pirates are at fault, the hackers ruin it for the rest of us) are spouting pure BULL SH*T! Take your ignorance and shove it.

These kinds of responses are pure stupid. Sorry, but you look like a complete idiot saying that.

DRM is like any other kind of control. It only screws over the legitimate users.

The DMCA also specifically outlaws the circumvention of copy protection mechanisms, so basically what that means is \"fair use\" which is guaranteed under The Constitution is illegal. It is like the MPAA and RIAA have more authority in the US than The Constitution.

Our Copyright system and our Patent system are supposed to protect and accelerate technological and cultural progress, but can you honestly say that the way they are being used right now is what they were originally intended for?

Is DRM the fault of pirates…are the locks on your car the result of car thieves?

Is DRM poorly implemented…hell yes, but if you think it’s being used by “evil corporations” to “make criminals” out of everyday users, then you are the stupid one. Where is the point in that? Your theory at least needs some plausibility.

I agree that DRM only hurts the honest person…I have pointed out that very fact in other threads, and I have also pointed out what Krom has said, in others.

And it is somewhat of a culture thing on the internet, and people have to deal with it. Thieves in “real life” are frowned upon by the general population, not so here…it’s kwell, or whatever that stupid word is.

Spidey wrote:Is DRM the fault of pirates…are the locks on your car the result of car thieves?

That analogy doesn't make sense. I control the locks on my car. I do not control the DRM on my Blueray/DVD.
A more accurate analogy if you want to stick with cars would be: I buy a car from Ford but am only allowed to drive that car on Ford approved roads and can not go off pavement or on any dirt roads. If I did try to go off road or off the Ford approved road my car would immediately shut down. Now would you stand for a car that worked that way? I know I wouldn't.

Is DRM poorly implemented…hell yes, but if you think it’s being used by “evil corporations” to “make criminals” out of everyday users, then you are the stupid one. Where is the point in that? Your theory at least needs some plausibility.

Well they may not be doing that intentionally but with the laws they are trying to pass and insane DRM techniques it will become that way for people who want to use what they purchase. Sorry to sound like I was attacking you, it's the mentality of those statements that get under my skin. But yes, I do feel the RIAA and MPAA are evil, pure evil. They sue thousands of people for thousands of $ per song in an attempt to bully the public and terrorize people. I don't think its too far fetched to call these organizations terrorists sense that word seems to be the popular one these days.

And it is somewhat of a culture thing on the internet, and people have to deal with it. Thieves in “real life” are frowned upon by the general population, not so here…it’s kwell, or whatever that stupid word is.

The reason it's not frowned upon "as much" here is because it is different than "stealing in real life". When a song or movie is downloaded the company isn't "losing" any money. It just isn't gaining any money for a sale. Have you ever recorded a song on the radio onto a cassette tape? Recorded a movie on TV onto a VHS tape? Did you think you were doing something illegal? Stealing? Internet downloading is the same thing, just a lot easier. I'm not justifying, just hope to explain the difference between stealing a real solid object and copying something.

That wasn’t meant to be an anology, that was more of a “do bears ★■◆● in the woods” question, and goes to cause and effect.

To the point about corporations being evil, well I’m not going to argue over that point, it’s purly a matter of opinion, and yours is as valid as any…I guess. I just can’t see any practical value in doing what you are saying, it’s a bad deal for everyone involved.

When a company broadcasts a song or TV show, you have the right to record that show for personal use, unless there is a warning given with the broadcast, such as the ones transmitted with football games and such. This is considered proper usage, if you offer an mp3 up to download, this is considered unauthorized usage. In the two cases…one is offered by the owner for anybody's usage, the other is not.

I think you have a right to ★■◆● about the BS that DRM causes, I don’t believe you have the right to ★■◆● about the right for someone to protect their property rights…maybe we can agree on that?

If not…oh well.

the new DRM Yeah Microsoft

quit bitching and buy your bluerays, do not think some chumps online downloading crappy rips are keeping the prices up, you friggen tools

Spidey wrote:I'm Crying, I can't play Descent, So I Lurk like a webcrawler, with Angst, Insatiable need to yell at the world by quoting quotes and spewing dribble

4FakeNames

Spidey wrote:I think you have a right to ***** about the BS that DRM causes, I don’t believe you have the right to ***** about the right for someone to protect their property rights…maybe we can agree on that?

I believe absolutely in the right of an artist or programmer to profit from their work. Copying commercial software (or music, or movies) without paying for it is theft.

HOWEVER, It's also clear that the software and entertainment industry have betrayed the consumer in several ways.

1 : Stupid DRM that limits my ability to use the software/music/movies I own. If I purchase a DVD, I should be able to play it in any dvd player, and yes, even on my linux computer. If I've purchased a game, I shouldn't have to live in fear that on any particular re-install, or even re-boot, my game will suddenly decide it was pirated and quit working. If I purchase music, I shouldn't have to wonder if the cd installed a root kit to monitor my usage of the music.
This stuff doesn't stop the pirates, it just annoys the honest people and encourages more of them to

2 : Current software/entertainment "licensing" agreements violate the basic and intuitive concept of what it means to purchase something. If I buy a book, and can then sell that book to someone else, or even give it away if I choose. I can't make copies and hand out a dozen though. Software/music/movies should be the same. If I purchase a program, I can later give or sell that program to someone else as long as I don't keep a copy myself. I should be able to resell my music or dvds without being in violation of some licensing agreement. I PAID for a PRODUCT, not some vague ethereal licensing agreement.

I think the entire industry would be better off dropping DRM. The dishonest people who are going to steal your work are going to do it anyway. The honest people will be more likely to pay (and happier to pay) if they feel like purchasing the product actually grants them the same kind of ownership they get with a book. People are generally happy to support developers/artists. They just don't want to pay money for crippleware.

Xamandir wrote:The reason it's not frowned upon "as much" here is because it is different than "stealing in real life". When a song or movie is downloaded the company isn't "losing" any money. It just isn't gaining any money for a sale.

But it IS like stealing in real life. If someone mows lawns for a living, and you get them to mow YOUR lawn, but not pay for it, you have stolen their work.

Perhaps a better analogy: If an inventor designs a new light bulb, and you take a picture of their design, and then start selling it, or even giving it away, you are STEALING from them. They have a right to profit from their own work and ideas. And taking that work or idea without permission or payment is theft.

Both sides have points, yet I think that DRM isn't the answer.

In favor of the entertainment industry: The level of piracy is just stupidly high. Artists deserve to be paid for their work, and somehow our society is okay with turning a blind eye on all of those seeders out there, illegally redistributing artists' work.

The problem with DRM: The manufacturers who are in the \"in\" group are using DRM as a form of vendor lock-in, preventing the user from having their fair use & free choice options. I'm acutely annoyed about it, because as a Linux user, I'm being locked out by the \"in crowd.\" Basically, I see DRM as a mis-directed attempt at a solution to a real piracy problem. The real problem are the people who choose to redistribute the content that they legally obtain. I'm all about them going after people who are sharing hundreds of titles. I have a serious problem with them going after people who have hundreds of titles that they've attained via fair use standards. I.E. I don't think they should be able to prosecute me for having recorded movies on my computer that I recorded off the TV, but they should be able to if I had obtained the exact same content via a download from someone that was illegally redistributing it.

Why I think vendor lock-in is a problem: it gives the vendors (and by extension, the government) too much power to arbitrarily change the rules, and retroactively enforce them. The classic example of this is the 1984/kindle incident. the bottom line is this: we're being moved toward a content lease model, rather than a content ownership model, where each use is subject to vendor approval, and inevitably vendor charge. On some level I'm okay with this, and on another I'm not. I played WoW for a couple years, knowing that I had zero ownership of the character developments that I was making, and that Blizzard could kick me to the curb anytime that they wanted to, without so much as a thanks. I accepted it because I saw it as entertainment that would age quickly. Five years from now, I don't anticipate having a sense of loss of culture over my inability to access the game. In general, I feel about the same for all games. (Plus, there's the loss of support issue to go along with software.)

I feel differently when it comes to Movies/Pictures/Books/Music. I see these as cultural items that don't age... cultural items that five years from now I may want to come back and revisit. I'm afraid of vendor lock-in because I want to guarantee myself the ability to revisit these things in the future. How can I keep the content that I legally own up-to-date if I can't copy it to newer formats?

That's my issue. I really don't want to break the law, and I'm not going to go around sharing things illegally with everyone... but when they lock out open-source software and define the only open-source solutions as illegal, what am I supposed to do?

I have \"pirated\" copies of practically everything I legally own because it is easier and more convenient to play the \"pirated\" copy than it is the legal one. Sure I put a blu-ray disk in my blu-ray player and it just works...after taking one to two minutes to load the disk, skip through all the previews I never watch, then another minute to load the menu and finally thirty seconds to sit through the copyright warnings. Or I can just double click the \"pirated\" media file on my PC and the opening credits of the movie start playing within 1 second...

Snoopy, I'm curious about the specific problem you're having.

I watch Blu-Rays on PC at home all the time (an old P4 box I turned into a Win7 Blu-Ray media center).

It sounds like the issue you're having is specifically with Blu-Ray software on Linux distros... or am I misunderstanding?

To be precise: we never owned content that we never made ourselves.

We've owned the media the content was transmitted on, but that was a moot point until it was possible to seperate the content without degradation of the content from the media. Technology has advanced to the point where content can be sold without a transmission medium, and also allows the possiblity of finer grained captitalization of content.


That has nothing to do with DRM. DRM exists to keep shareholders happy about their piracy concerns. Notice that all of the DRM that people has complained about is used by publicly traded corporations?

In short, as a consumer you can only positively re-enforce DRM; buying DRM'd products says you don't mind it, pirating only justifies the use of DRM, and not buying means you don't get listened to.

Angry shareholders get results very quick however.

So what’s the answer?

Foil:

I haven't tried yet, because I haven't purchased a bluray drive yet.

However, my understanding of Linux & Bluray is this: The only way to get bluray playback, at full 1080p, on Linux, is to rip the disk by means of the \"black market\" software out there, and then playback the ripped movie from your hard drive.

Your other option is (maybe, I'm not even sure) to virtualbox/dual boot to a Vista or 7 OS and run it from there. Problem with that is that I don't own a copy of either, and don't intend to spend my money on buying one.

Well, to be frank, linux is not included in the common definition of normal.

Its techincally illegal to play dvd's in linux, not to mention the plethora of codec's that are not GPL friendly.

However, they really don't care much what you do after you've bought the disk...

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Restr ... ayAndHDDVD

Oh by the way new Blu-Ray standards and program material will turn off analog component out on players.

http://www.cepro.com/article/say_goodby ... y_players/

As consumers North Americans are getting pounded in the *** like at a federal penitentiary.

fliptw wrote:Well, to be frank, linux is not included in the common definition of normal.

Its techincally illegal to play dvd's in linux, not to mention the plethora of codec's that are not GPL friendly.

However, they really don't care much what you do after you've bought the disk...

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Restr ... ayAndHDDVD

Exactly. I'm familiar with it all... and that's my complaint. M$ and Apple are using DRM as vendor lock-in. I'm not a fan of doing things that are technically illegal, and I'm following the spirit of the law (artists deserve to be paid for their work)... yet at the same time I refuse to be subject to the vendor lock-in, so I complain about the state of things. I'm not particularly asking for anything, I'm just whining.

Also, Canuck, I've known about those plans for a while now. The simplest solution to the blu-ray thing will be to buy a standalone player that supports HDMI. I'm afraid that the commented prediction that disks in general will be phase out will come true... I can only hope that Linux gains enough traction among home users by then that it will be seen as something that needs to be supported by suppliers. Or maybe not... Linux hackers don't exactly like being told "no." I'll be happy in the near future if netflix streaming starts to support linux.

Ferno wrote:DRM is like any other kind of control. It only screws over the legitimate users.

Plain and simply stated. Nice.

Spidey wrote:So what’s the answer?

short term answer? buy shares in a company that is pushing DRM. It sounds kind of nuts but it will work. why? you can have a voice that will be listened to, and you can profit off what they do. If you succeed in getting rid of DRM, you win. If they don't, you can make enough money to buy their product and do whatever you want with it.


Another answer is for companies to split the product into two pieces. One piece consists of just the movie. no extra/deleted scenes, no alternative endings. Just what you'd see in a movie theatre. Charge six bucks for that. The other piece is the regular/ special edition movie WITH the extra goodies.

That way, people who don't want to bother with the stuff they don't want don't have to buy it, and the people who want the whole enchilada can get it.

Then we can watch movie piracy plummet like a stone in the lake.