Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="3catcircus" data-source="post: 1588908" data-attributes="member: 16077">Huh?&nbsp; Digital game materials are marketed to anyone who wants them.&nbsp; I would think that a publisher would want as many sales as possible and wouldn't think &quot;Gee, ya know - we really don't need to sell to people who don't use the latest software.&quot;And that's the situation - that people who would normally use the legal source will now have a huge incentive to use an illegal source.The general prohibition on copying for a print book doesn't trump my fair use rights - I can copy the thing wholesale if I want to, I just can't then turn around and sell the copies to people - which is what the prohibition is there for in the first place.&nbsp; It isn't there to prevent me from copying the book - it is there to prevent me from selling the copies.&nbsp; Additionally, Joe Publisher can't look over my shoulder after I've made the purchase and taken the book home.&nbsp; With DRM, they can and *do* do this.&nbsp; The fundamental flaw in the logic of DRM is that publishers seem to think that an electronic document is somehow different than a print one - and this has unfortunately been backed by the DMCA and NET act.&nbsp; Unlike in a dead tree book, where the verbiage warning gloom and doom for copying *doesn't* prevent me from using the book any way I want, DRM on an electronic book *does* prevent me from using the book any way I want.&nbsp; Just like some words saying &quot;don't copy this&quot; won't deter a dedicated professional from making copies of dead tree books for sale, DRM doesn't deter a dedicated professional from providing copies of electronic books for sale.&nbsp; Walk down any street in a host of cities in other countries and see the huge amount of pirated works openly for sale.&nbsp; We just don't have that big a problem of this in the US, which is where the DMCA applies.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="3catcircus, post: 1588908, member: 16077"] Huh? Digital game materials are marketed to anyone who wants them. I would think that a publisher would want as many sales as possible and wouldn't think "Gee, ya know - we really don't need to sell to people who don't use the latest software." And that's the situation - that people who would normally use the legal source will now have a huge incentive to use an illegal source. The general prohibition on copying for a print book doesn't trump my fair use rights - I can copy the thing wholesale if I want to, I just can't then turn around and sell the copies to people - which is what the prohibition is there for in the first place. It isn't there to prevent me from copying the book - it is there to prevent me from selling the copies. Additionally, Joe Publisher can't look over my shoulder after I've made the purchase and taken the book home. With DRM, they can and *do* do this. The fundamental flaw in the logic of DRM is that publishers seem to think that an electronic document is somehow different than a print one - and this has unfortunately been backed by the DMCA and NET act. Unlike in a dead tree book, where the verbiage warning gloom and doom for copying *doesn't* prevent me from using the book any way I want, DRM on an electronic book *does* prevent me from using the book any way I want. Just like some words saying "don't copy this" won't deter a dedicated professional from making copies of dead tree books for sale, DRM doesn't deter a dedicated professional from providing copies of electronic books for sale. Walk down any street in a host of cities in other countries and see the huge amount of pirated works openly for sale. We just don't have that big a problem of this in the US, which is where the DMCA applies. [/QUOTE]

Verification