Yep, like the unskippable ads on legitimate DVDs, where you couldn't be certified if you made a DVD player that let you skip those video files like all the others on the disc, and you couldn't legally make an uncertified player because of the DRM.
Exactly. Like consuming content from another region, having a personal backup copy of content we legally bought, like re-selling content we legally own, like recording and replaying transmission from "terrestrial"/"over the air" TV, like making our own devices capable of playing that content...
These are all rights that (AFAIK, IANAL) we legally have but can't exercise because media producers took the control over distributors of content and devices manufacturers.
We have nothing equivalent to a VHS recorder where can simply press a button, recording whatever is on TV to a removable media and play it anywhere else! We can't even buy a non-smart (actually calling it smart is dumb) TV for a reasonable price anymore!
Video rental stores are all closed where I live. Media consuming has degraded to before 90's experience.
>We have nothing equivalent to a VHS recorder where can simply press a button, recording whatever is on TV to a removable media and play it anywhere else! We can't even buy a non-smart (actually calling it smart is dumb) TV for a reasonable price anymore!
to the first part, some of the "antenna to HDMI" boxes let you plug in an SSD, and will let you have a "recording loop" like a DVR, and also let you DVR scheduled shows. If you then take that drive and plug it in to a computer, it will have files that open with VLC/mpv/mplayer/whatever.
And to the second part, I used a large monitor as a TV for a long while, and my primary screen is a projector, both of which are just dumb "bits to nits" devices. The downside is having to have external speakers.
> to the first part, some of the "antenna to HDMI" boxes let you plug in an SSD, and will let you have a "recording loop" like a DVR, and also let you DVR scheduled shows. If you then take that drive and plug it in to a computer, it will have files that open with VLC/mpv/mplayer/whatever.
What you probably will not find is one of these devices with support for netflix. No big name brand offer this feature. Probably not supporting this feature is required to get permission to support netflix.
> And to the second part, I used a large monitor as a TV for a long while, and my primary screen is a projector, both of which are just dumb "bits to nits" devices. The downside is having to have external speakers.
Yes. No "integrated" set. TV's now are locked down computers which take as much control away from the owner as possible.
Where and how? Removing competition among distributors? media producers? manufacturers?
The only place where I could see it reduce competition is manufacturers sure, but why would media producers want to reduce competition there?
I think it's media producers refusing to accept they can't stop pirating and manufacturers making use of that to sell them stuff. In the end it's only the manufacturers who make money from DRM.
Remove competition among manufacturers because nobody can legally build and sell a compatible player without the key's owner permission.
Remove competition among distributors because media producers can refuse giving permission to distribute their media without agreeing to whatever terms they impose.
Remove competition among media distributors by creating silos of content where you can't find one or another title. Today, if you want to have reasonable access to media, you'll have to sign more than one stream service; compare this to how you could go to a rental store 15 years ago and choose media from many different producers.
>Remove competition among manufacturers because nobody can legally build and sell a compatible player without the key's owner permission.
And what are media producers gaining from less competition among manufacturers?
>Remove competition among distributors because media producers can refuse giving permission to distribute their media without agreeing to whatever terms they impose.
They don't need DRM for that, copyright is enough. Those who want to distribute legally do follow the terms with or without DRM. Those who don't do distribute illegally with or without DRM.
>Remove competition among media distributors by creating silos of content where you can't find one or another title. Today, if you want to have reasonable access to media, you'll have to sign more than one stream service; compare this to how you could go to a rental store 15 years ago and choose media from many different producers.
15 years ago DRM was already a thing (albeit badly implemented) and it's really not DRM that killed rental stores. The internet did. Exclusive contracts is what's killing competition among media distributors.
>>Remove competition among manufacturers because nobody can legally build and sell a compatible player without the key's owner permission.
>And what are media producers gaining from less competition among manufacturers?
It becomes much easier to impose restriction on costumers. These restrictions end up forcing the costumer to pay more or more than once for content.
>>Remove competition among distributors because media producers can refuse giving permission to distribute their media without agreeing to whatever terms they impose.
>They don't need DRM for that, copyright is enough.
Right, but copyright law doesn't prevents me from owning backup copies of content I bought, copyright law doesn't force me to pay periodically to have the right to listen to something, copyright law doesn't force me to watch a content using certified devices only, copyright law doesn't prevent me from legally creating and selling a player for a content... DRM does.
>>Remove competition among media distributors by creating silos of content where you can't find one or another title. Today, if you want to have reasonable access to media, you'll have to sign more than one stream service; compare this to how you could go to a rental store 15 years ago and choose media from many different producers.
>15 years ago DRM was already a thing (albeit badly implemented) and it's really not DRM that killed rental stores. The internet did. Exclusive contracts is what's killing competition among media distributors.
DRM makes it much easier for silos to thrive. For example, I can not re-sell, I can not rent, I can not watch on a non-certified device, I can not use it on a device which has all required anti-features to be allowed to play an specific content.
I'm assuming the commenter you replied to is talking about the fact legitimate distributors usually follow the law. They're going to pay the large sums of money instead of breaking the DRM.
