tdiguy 96 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 Firstly i will admit my knowledge of DRM is limited. Now that it is pretty common for cable companies to encrypt all transmission and require some sort of cable box or cable card actually be registered on their network does DRM serve any real purpose now other than being a very annoying roadblock? Should we as consumers try to lean on the providers that use drm to stop using it ( ie showtime, hbo and others ) so that we can view the content we pay for via cable companies on all the devices that we wish to use. What are your thoughts on this, given that as far as i know all providers now encrypt is there a need for drm or does it simply create an inconvenience? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebr 14958 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 It attempts to protect the content owners because this: so that we can view the content we pay for via cable companies on all the devices that we wish to use. Is impossible to differentiate from you allowing the whole world to view it on any device they choose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mastrmind11 717 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 Also the main reason why every provider has a streaming app... to control their ecosystem. As soon as they remove DRM, it's Pirate's Paradise.... just look at the state of the world w/ DRM intact. Anyone anywhere w/ a smidge of technical curiosity and/or know-how can get whatever they want for a fraction of the cost of the DRM'd providers. I pay for cable, but get all my shows from Sonarr because I can't be bothered w/ commercials... and it's perfectly legal. Simple enough to remove the cable sub part and just scoop them up DRM free a few minutes after they air. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdiguy 96 Posted January 7, 2018 Author Share Posted January 7, 2018 Right but here is my point, cable providers now encrypt their transmissions. In order to watch tv of any type you need a cable box or cable card which is registered to your account. So you can only get what you subscribe to. hbo, showtime and such are not transmitted over the air to be picked up by a regular antena. So with these new practices in place i dont see how DRM is still relevant because the cable companies now offer the same protections except it is more accessible to the end user that is paying for the content. Its not like the old days where you could splice into your neighbors cable and pipe it into your home and actually get a picture. Doing that now will not yeild any picture because even though most tv's have digital tuners the signal now is also encrypted ( with 3des if i read it from my cable card properly ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdiguy 96 Posted January 7, 2018 Author Share Posted January 7, 2018 Also the main reason why every provider has a streaming app... to control their ecosystem. As soon as they remove DRM, it's Pirate's Paradise.... just look at the state of the world w/ DRM intact. Anyone anywhere w/ a smidge of technical curiosity and/or know-how can get whatever they want for a fraction of the cost of the DRM'd providers. I pay for cable, but get all my shows from Sonarr because I can't be bothered w/ commercials... and it's perfectly legal. Simple enough to remove the cable sub part and just scoop them up DRM free a few minutes after they air. Are you sure about that or does that apply only to over the air transmissions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebr 14958 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 Right but here is my point, cable providers now encrypt their transmissions. In order to watch tv of any type you need a cable box or cable card which is registered to your account. So you can only get what you subscribe to. hbo, showtime and such are not transmitted over the air to be picked up by a regular antena. So with these new practices in place i dont see how DRM is still relevant because the cable companies now offer the same protections except it is more accessible to the end user that is paying for the content. Its not like the old days where you could splice into your neighbors cable and pipe it into your home and actually get a picture. Doing that now will not yeild any picture because even though most tv's have digital tuners the signal now is also encrypted ( with 3des if i read it from my cable card properly ) But, if they allow you to record that and play it back anywhere you want, then it is open season. Now, you can make the argument that the system isn't really doing what they want based on the plethora of IPTV and other sources for all this "protected" content in an unprotected form but the people using those sources are a niche compared to what would happen if the DRM strategies were simply removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mastrmind11 717 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 Are you sure about that or does that apply only to over the air transmissions? As long as I don't distribute the content anywhere, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdiguy 96 Posted January 7, 2018 Author Share Posted January 7, 2018 (edited) But, if they allow you to record that and play it back anywhere you want, then it is open season. Now, you can make the argument that the system isn't really doing what they want based on the plethora of IPTV and other sources for all this "protected" content in an unprotected form but the people using those sources are a niche compared to what would happen if the DRM strategies were simply removed. Here is the thing though, even with DRM in place its completely possible and legal to make my own recording of anything i have a subscription to and play it back for my own personal viewing. This is actually the cornerstone of why 3rd party dvr's are even around. DRM as far as i see it only hinders legal consumption of channels people subscribe to. Anyone getting DRM locked content from less than legal sources are not being hindered by the DRM locks and because cable providers now encrypt their transmissions its not like i can simply tap into my neighbors feed and get hbo or anything else which is what DRM used to protect against. One might also say that with game of thrones breaking records on "illegal downloads" that DRM might in fact actually be turning legal customers into illegal consumers because people are turning to less than legal sources to watch episodes on whatever device they wish. Mind you though this is pure speculation on my part, i dont know if any stats even exist about how many people illegally downloaded GOT that actually subscribe to hbo. Edited January 7, 2018 by tdiguy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdiguy 96 Posted January 7, 2018 Author Share Posted January 7, 2018 As long as I don't distribute the content anywhere, yes. i am curious on that i checked out sonarr and i wish there were more details on their site about what is offered. Can you get programs from say hbo without proving you have a subscription to hbo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mastrmind11 717 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 i am curious on that i checked out sonarr and i wish there were more details on their site about what is offered. Can you get programs from say hbo without proving you have a subscription to hbo?Sonarr doesn't offer anything. It's a binary newsgroup search engine/downloader. You need a subscription to a decent newsgroup aggregator or sonarr is worthless. And to answer your question, you can get pretty much anything you can think of that's remotely popular. I download GoT even though I pay for an HBO sub just because it's easier for me to set it and forget it, and get notified/reminded I have a new episode waiting. If you want to take this to PM I'd be happy to throw you a bone. Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdiguy 96 Posted January 7, 2018 Author Share Posted January 7, 2018 Sonarr doesn't offer anything. It's a binary newsgroup search engine/downloader. You need a subscription to a decent newsgroup aggregator or sonarr is worthless. And to answer your question, you can get pretty much anything you can think of that's remotely popular. I download GoT even though I pay for an HBO sub just because it's easier for me to set it and forget it, and get notified/reminded I have a new episode waiting. If you want to take this to PM I'd be happy to throw you a bone. Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk Ahh so its a modern day napster that did not work out well for napster back when Metallica sued their pants off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mastrmind11 717 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 Ahh so its a modern day napster that did not work out well for napster back when Metallica sued their pants off.Newsgroups were around long before Napster. They were basically the original internet. Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdiguy 96 Posted January 7, 2018 Author Share Posted January 7, 2018 (edited) Newsgroups were around long before Napster. They were basically the original internet. Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk Yes i know that, newsgroups / irc channels and such have been around for forever and like many other things not all content posted on them or aggregated through them is done in a legal manner, i would even question weather distributing any tv shows in such a manner would be considered legal but i am also no lawyer. FWIW napster was around for many years before Metallica sued the pants off them and some people considered it to be completely legal. Edited January 7, 2018 by tdiguy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebr 14958 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 Here is the thing though, even with DRM in place its completely possible and legal to make my own recording of anything i have a subscription to and play it back for my own personal viewing. This is actually the cornerstone of why 3rd party dvr's are even around. Yes, but all of those DVR solutions are designed such that the items they record can only be played back by that same piece of hardware (or a satellite of it). This is the only way the industry would allow them to record it. IOW - you cannot get that recording off of that machine and put it on your PC and play it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdiguy 96 Posted January 7, 2018 Author Share Posted January 7, 2018 (edited) Yes, but all of those DVR solutions are designed such that the items they record can only be played back by that same piece of hardware (or a satellite of it). This is the only way the industry would allow them to record it. IOW - you cannot get that recording off of that machine and put it on your PC and play it. I see, this is another case though where DRM is simply blocking legal consumption though. If i have a subscription lets say to hbo and i record GOT it has been decided by legal precedence that such use is legal for personal use. Aslo this is not limited to any specific device just to me as a subscriber. This sort of thing makes it really easy to form an argument that DRM actually fuels illegal consumption because DRM makes it difficult for legal subscribers to consume content in a convenient manner to them. I do see your point though, without DRM it would make distribution slightly easier, but there already has been record breaking illegal distribution of GOT so does DRM really slow down illegal consumption? Or does it turn legal customers into illegal consumers? Edited January 7, 2018 by tdiguy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebr 14958 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 I see, this is another case though where DRM is simply blocking legal consumption though. If i have a subscription lets say to hbo and i record GOT it has been decided by legal precedence that such use is legal for personal use. Aslo this is not limited to any specific device just to me as a subscriber. This sort of thing makes it really easy to form an argument that DRM actually fuels illegal consumption because DRM makes it difficult for legal subscribers to consume content in a convenient manner to them. Yes, but this brings me back to my original point. Without these protections, there is no way to keep you from sharing that content with whomever you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mastrmind11 717 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 Yes i know that, newsgroups / irc channels and such have been around for forever and like many other things not all content posted on them or aggregated through them is done in a legal manner, i would even question weather distributing any tv shows in such a manner would be considered legal but i am also no lawyer. FWIW napster was around for many years before Metallica sued the pants off them and some people considered it to be completely legal. Distributing the content will raise significantly more red flags than consuming it, simply because distributing it is flat out illegal, whereas consuming it is only illegal if you haven't already paid for the content. That's why you never hear of pure torrent downloaders getting fined, while there have been many notable cases of distributors getting smacked down. Iow, you can download whatever you want as long as you previously paid for it, whether via physical media purchases or subscription. Btw newsgroups are anon and all support SSL, so... Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdiguy 96 Posted January 7, 2018 Author Share Posted January 7, 2018 Distributing the content will raise significantly more red flags than consuming it, simply because distributing it is flat out illegal, whereas consuming it is only illegal if you haven't already paid for the content. That's why you never hear of pure torrent downloaders getting fined, while there have been many notable cases of distributors getting smacked down. Iow, you can download whatever you want as long as you previously paid for it, whether via physical media purchases or subscription. Btw newsgroups are anon and all support SSL, so... Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk True, but for example in the case of GOT hbo considers every illegal download / distribution to be just that, they however do not go after everyone that downloads it in such a manner for a few reasons. One of the obvious ones being that it simply is not worth it, chasing down millions of potentially illegal downloaders, hunting down the traffic proving who downloaded it, all things that can be time intensive and in the end if you have a subscription they will not net anything in court. Chasing down the distributors is highly profitable and worthwhile. Simply because prosecution is FAR easier all they need to do is nail down that 1 organization / person and then prove they were distributing the content. Then of course for financial purposes they like to find out a good estimate of how many times the content was distributed to get figures for how much they should sue for. There have been a few cases where consumers of illegally distributed content were prosecuted that does happen its just far more rare because its not nearly as worthwhile or as easy to prosecute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldonnis 148 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 While I despise almost all the DRM mechanisms that are in play today, I can kinda see the intended point of them. Content creators and the providers that have paid real money to license and broadcast content want to (try to) control as much of the distribution as possible for a whole host of reasons (not all of which may be obvious). If they can't, or take their hands entirely off of the wheel, then it's entirely possible that they'll lose a significant chunk of income from it or not be able to recover the costs associated with making it to begin with. That's not even including factors like measuring viewership and engagement, advertising revenue/opportunity, and so forth. DRM is just an enforcement mechanism to ensure a lot of those things can be done routinely and reasonably accurately. "Protecting the show from pirates" is also a factor, and really it's the biggest one, but it's not the only reason for it. As a consumer, I totally agree that DRM has gotten onerous to the point of frustration to the end user. The requirements for playback of a UHD or trying to watch 4k Netflix on a PC, for example, are just ridiculous to the point of absurdity, but everyone, from Microsoft to Hollywood to the people who pirate stuff, are to blame for that situation. I cannot agree, though, that making things difficult causes pirating (insert correlation vs. causation argument here). Movies and music aren't food or water - it's an id thing: people want it and if it's "too much/too hard/too encrypted/too whatever", they'll pirate it instead and blame others for their choices if pressed. Could the providers offer more choices for consumption? Absolutely, but it's impossible to satisfy everyone's little "too X" checklist. Hell, some folks I know would still download illegally even if you cut the price of a movie to a penny and offered it in every video/audio format imaginable. These same people wouldn't pay for HBO to begin with, but they'll watch GoT because it's free for them to torrent. What's sad is that I know more people like that than people who legitimately purchase content...and it's getting worse. Lastly, consider why DRM is around to begin with. Going back to the infamous Betamax case, content owners/providers have been trying to sack fair use and personal copies because they feel that control of their content should be in their hands. This desire only got worse when digital distribution/delivery came around since someone can now make infinite copies with no quality degradation and with a standard computer. Manipulation is infinitely easier as well - removing ads can be an automated procedure now, unlike trying to do the same with a VHS-taped show if you didn't have the editing equipment. DRM is actually intended to make it a pain in the rump to the consumer in order to prevent the casual consumer from doing those things. It will never stop those intent on doing those things, but most people are sufficiently dissuaded from doing it themselves by DRM so it serves its purpose (according to the content providers/owners). DRM will probably go away when media companies' stop clinging to their business models that go back to the early days of film. It's going to be a bumpy road, and we'll probably end up with something some of us won't like, but things will progress eventually. The music industry is still going through it, as is the print media sector....and there isn't really a good answer yet. Giving up control or trusting consumers to not copy/distribute is a hard sell, though, since there's ample evidence that we can't be trusted. Human behaviour is why we can't have nice things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdiguy 96 Posted January 8, 2018 Author Share Posted January 8, 2018 I see your points, but i still think considering the measures that cable companies have in place that DRM serves no real purpose other than being an annoyance primarily to people wishing to legally consume content they pay for. I mean GOT for example how long does it take for a new episode to hit the less than legal distribution channels? I am not into personally but i would bet that there are cases where its possible to see it before it is aired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mastrmind11 717 Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 I see your points, but i still think considering the measures that cable companies have in place that DRM serves no real purpose other than being an annoyance primarily to people wishing to legally consume content they pay for. I mean GOT for example how long does it take for a new episode to hit the less than legal distribution channels? I am not into personally but i would bet that there are cases where its possible to see it before it is aired.Entirely possible. Just like buying a bootleg DVD off the steet. But, for me at least, I wait for high quality... Looking at the bootleg rips online, there are MANY that'd take a cam rip over a studio rip. That said, when apple removed DRM from their iTunes stuff, they crushed it. So I get what you're saying, and everyone will come around eventually... They don't have a choice. As of now they're clinging to antiquated tech, and it had to change...and they know it. Stay tuned. Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldonnis 148 Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 (edited) I see your points, but i still think considering the measures that cable companies have in place that DRM serves no real purpose other than being an annoyance primarily to people wishing to legally consume content they pay for. I mean GOT for example how long does it take for a new episode to hit the less than legal distribution channels? I am not into personally but i would bet that there are cases where its possible to see it before it is aired. Except that DRM does nothing to prevent such things, nor is it intended to. Someone from a partner or cable company taking a digital copy of an episode and posting it prior to the air date is a whole different animal entirely. You can't say that we should wipe AACS 2.0 off the planet because some clownshoe records a film in a theatre with his phone or steals it from the theatre chain's digital storage. DRM isn't meant to address those cases and the fact that they happen doesn't invalidate DRM's use case (apples and oranges). Bear in mind, DRM is something that cable companies do for two reasons: they're required to by contract with the content providers to be able to broadcast their stuff and also because things like cable boxes are a revenue stream (not pure profit, as those suckers aren't cheap and customers destroy them regularly and with alarming frequency). When it comes to contracts, streaming services aren't immune either. Netflix notably uses DRM and has to or else it couldn't keep entire studios' worth of content in their catalog. If you want to blame anyone, it's not the cable companies, it's the studios. They're the ones requiring this stuff, just like they're the ones who wanted schemes like AACS 2.0 on UHD. Anyone who wants to carry their product really has no choice but to comply. Network-produced content is a mixed bag, since some have contracts of their own with production companies or they just might want to protect their (often not small) investment a little. Cable boxes/STBs are a bone of contention for me, as they're not technically needed by a vast majority of the population these days for basic service yet they tell everyone they do need them. They do make it easier for provisioning, though, and provide consistency for customer service people (and saves sending techs out for every single problem since you can reset or reprovision from a central location)....and of course the revenue. There are still a ton of people who are FAR from the cutting edge of technology, though. In my area, the number of HD->SD conversion boxes sold is astounding as there are a lot of retired or fixed-income folks that can't afford to replace their old SD 4x3 televisions or don't care to. Cable boxes aren't always using DRM anyway (frequently not used on local programming), but some channels will require it and there isn't another mechanism out there to handle it currently (not counting CableCard, as there's no real difference). Just having to use a STB doesn't mean it's all DRM'ed. In those cases, the STB is nothing more than a glorified tuner with some extra features. Hell, most STBs still in use have coax outputs, which doesn't do end-to-end DRM anyway and yet you can still watch many (but liekly not all) channels when using it. Really, you could make the same type of DRM argument against every mobile provider as well - why do we need SIM cards? Why does Verizon cling to CMDA/whitelists? Why do carrier-specific phones exist that don't include competitors' radio frequencies? The questions go on. It's all about controlling their own network and revenue streams...or in cable's case, their network and ensuring that only those allowed to view something or pay for it can. Ultimately, the argument is what value the content has to the studios vs. how the consumers value it. DRM only exists because the studios/providers/creators feel their products have a value of X. The (disgruntled) public see the value more as some value below X depending on the person and content in question, and the folks that pirate content see the value as...well, zero, or at least so little that it wouldn't be worth producing in the first place (at least that's how the studio would read that valuation). Their perspective is: we just spent tens of millions of dollars making this film and paying the small army of people it took to make it, so why wouldn't we at least try to protect it? The "scary" part is that if they don't protect it, they see it as they would just be handing it out for free to absolutely everyone. Let's be honest here, they're not entirely wrong in that regard. DRM is just a tool that's not always employed. It's gotten pretty heavy-handed in some areas, but does have some more transparent implementations that most people don't find objectionable. As noted before, Netflix uses DRM, but nobody seems to care, so I'd say that it's not awful to anyone except the anti-DRM zealots. On the ridiculous side, though: disc DRM is at the point where even legal backups aren't possible with the vast majority of UHDs and that's turning people off from buying discs. The funny thing as a consumer is that it's just pushed a lot of the disc consumers towards outlets where studios have even more control while also saving them a bunch of money: streaming services (their own or big players like Netflix or Amazon). Edited January 8, 2018 by Waldonnis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdiguy 96 Posted January 8, 2018 Author Share Posted January 8, 2018 So in a area where cable companies encrypt everything and a STB is required for even the most basic of programming, like where i live. What does DRM do other than hinder my legal consumption and use of content? In cases where encryption is the norm i would say DRM does not offer protection that is already offered by the encryption DRM in these areas only prevents legal use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebr 14958 Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 So in a area where cable companies encrypt everything and a STB is required for even the most basic of programming, like where i live. What does DRM do other than hinder my legal consumption and use of content? It keeps you from being able to record and distribute that content to someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sammy 739 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Also the main reason why every provider has a streaming app... to control their ecosystem. As soon as they remove DRM, it's Pirate's Paradise.... just look at the state of the world w/ DRM intact. Anyone anywhere w/ a smidge of technical curiosity and/or know-how can get whatever they want for a fraction of the cost of the DRM'd providers. I pay for cable, but get all my shows from Sonarr because I can't be bothered w/ commercials... and it's perfectly legal. Simple enough to remove the cable sub part and just scoop them up DRM free a few minutes after they air...and then there's Radarr.. Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now