Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ShadowAce
How could something created to protect the income and intellectual property of the creative artists be bad?

That's not what it was created for. It was created to protect dying business models and to force end users to continue to purchase 'rights' to the same as many times as possible.

While I'd like the option to have Netflix on my Linux HTPC, I don't think DRM on Linux is feasible. In order for DRM to be effective, it needs to effectively control the entire system. The problem is that so-called 'content owners' are not the boss of my Linux machines: I AM.

So, if there's a way to have some kind of self-contained DRM on the system that doesn't get in my way and only deals with Netflix, that's fine. However, if you think someone won't circumvent it in about 2 seconds flat, you've got another thing coming.

8 posted on 06/01/2011 6:12:19 AM PDT by perfect_rovian_storm (Fascism is nothing but moderate communism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: perfect_rovian_storm
In order for DRM to be effective, it needs to effectively control the entire system.

And, I think, that is where DRM on Linux is not feasible at all. While DRM can argue it's need is greater than yours (not well, but it has succeeded with the yo-yo OS), it cannot argue that with the other content creators on your system--namely the OS writers/contributors. The sheer number of people/organizations require to come into agreement for such a thing to be possible is staggering.

I don't think it is possible.

9 posted on 06/01/2011 6:16:44 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson