This may sound like a stupid question, but what exactly is DRM and why is it so bad? I keep hearing about how people hate DRM, but I don't know why. Please help.
Samurye
Digital rights management (DRM) is a term that refers to access control technologies used by hardware manufacturers, publishers and copyright holders to limit usage of digital media or devices. Whereas copy protection only attempts to prohibit unauthorized copies of media or files, digital rights management allows the issuer of the media or file to control in detail what can and cannot be done with a single instance. For example, an issuer can limit the number of viewings, number of copies, which devices the media can be transferred to etc. Digital rights management often depends on cryptography and on-line activation. Blu-Ray and some recent game titles by Electronic Arts are an example of each. Digital rights management is used by content providers such as Sony, Apple Inc., Microsoft and the BBC.
The use of digital rights management is controversial. Advocates argue it is necessary for copyright holders to prevent unauthorized duplication of their work to ensure continued revenue streams.[1] Some opponents, such as the Free Software Foundation, maintain that the use of the word "rights" is misleading and suggest that people instead use the term Digital Restrictions Management. Their position is essentially that copyright holders are attempting to restrict use of copyrighted material in ways not covered by existing laws.[2] The Electronic Frontier Foundation, and other opponents, also consider DRM systems to be anti-competitive practices.[3]
In practice, all widely-used DRM systems have been defeated or circumvented when deployed to enough customers.[4] Restricting the copying of audio and visual material is especially difficult due to the existence of the analog hole, and there are even suggestions that effective DRM is logically impossible for this reason.
Hope that answers it for you
Or in short: -
Digital rights management technologies attempt to control use of digital media by preventing access, copying or conversion to other formats by us the end user.
The idea behind DRM is that content is only playable through trusted devices. Encryption is used to prevent untrusted devices playing the content. As a further measure, the entertainment industry wants laws like the DMCA and EUCD to prevent untrusted devices playing the content.
A content provider will only trust a device if it enforces the policies of the content provider. So, if the content provider says a movie cannot be watched on wednesday, trusted devices should implement that.
The reason DRM is bad is that it hurts your freedom to enjoy your property as you like. I.e. if you cannot watch a movie on wednesday, this has nothing to do with protecting intellectual property, but everything to do to with making you pay more, for example for "24x7" playback rights.
DRM often requires you to pay and pay. You pay for a license to watch your music on your stereo, then another license to listen it in your car and so on. By definition, as the content will only play on selected devices, new future devices may not be able to play your content.
The main reason people hate it is because of some of the nastier things it has been known to do... The older variations more so than newer ones have been known for doing everything from installing trojans to messing with files they aren't supposed to. One of the most notorius currently used DRM is Securom.
Securom installs itself without any warning, and the files for it cannot be easily gotten rid of. And software which was unwanted by the consumer and installs itself without warning or easy uninstallability is concerning to many. It has also been known to slow down some computer setups and rarely do other odd things. It is the base software of many DRM methods, such as those below.
A method used commonly now in DRM, especially by EA and other big evil gaming companies is limited installs. The game will only allow the buyer to install the software X amount of times, the details of which vary from software to software. The worst of this sort of system used recently, or rather threatened to be used, was the planned DRM for Spore and Mass Effect (PC). They were planning on putting a 3 install limit on the game, which includes reinstalls done when you do things such as buy yourself a new computer, installing a new OS, ect... the only reason that did not go through was the HUGE protests on the EA forums and just about every other forum and article comment on the web. Once your 3 installs were used up, if you wanted to get any more installs, you have to call EA tech support and argue with them for awhile.
And then there is online checks. Online checks are fairly common in multiplayer games, where on loggin the game checks with the maker's servers to ensure the CD key hasn't been distributed to others or cracked, since the same CD key showing up in 250 locations around the world usually means it is a cracked key. This method is not to bad as long as used only for multiplayer. The problem comes when this online checking is done for single player games. Three that come to mind are the Spore/Mass Effect (again) and my Company of Heroes:OF. As for the first two, along with the above mentioned DRM, EA was planning on making the games check via the internet every day to make sure the key wasn't cracked. If they were not able to connect to the internet, it would give (I think it was) 20 days before it automaticly made the games unplayable until it was able to connect. This would be fine for Spore, which uses online databases in the game, but Mass Effect is entirely single player, and thus requiring an internet connection to play is bad. Company of Heroes: OF I got for Christmas last year (2007). The game requires you to create an online account with them to even play the game. If your internet is not able to connect, you cannot log in to their servers and so cannot even play a single player game. Another BIG worry about this method of DRM is that if the company which made the game goes under, the server would likely go down making the game completely unplayable unless the bankrupt corporations decided out of the goodness of their hearts to patch it out before going down; which needless to say is a mediocre chance at best.
And now you see why DRM is evil! And now you have 'wall of text syndrome.'
http://xkcd.com/488/
^^^^^^^^^^^
Says it nicely
The thing with Stardock's DRM (Impulse) is that I think it effects the following groups of pirates these ways
-People who are going to pirate anyways continue to pirate anyways.
-People who pirate for the thrill of it generally don't, as there is no honor in pirating a game that
-People who pirate because it's the better version don't have to, as the Impulse version is as good or better then any pirated variant
-People who buy no matter what will buy no matter what
So Stardock's system does a good job of converting potential pirates into sales (though I believe this category is narrow), rewards people for buying their products, but doesn't do anything about hardcore pirates. However, hardcore pirates are not part of the market- anyone with basic economic training would just view them as free riders. (Not even worth the effort to prosecute- as prosecution wouldn't increase profits- all you'd do is get the pirates to do something else for free)
Other DRM systems, even Steam, don't do this as well as Stardock. If I could get rid of the DRM-check for TF2 every time I play, I'd pay $5 to do such. This is why Impulse is the best system on the market.
i dont think impulse is a DRM system, tough it undeniably acts like a DRM system, i think it's more another commercial thing.. just look around all you'll find all sorts of purchaseable goodies.... tough most of them completly uselss.... some get pursuaded to buy it
SoaSE is not unpiratable, "large" patches are still being relased, they just upload the entire soase folder... overwrite and voila - .-
on one end, i think its a good thing. some peopel have problem with impulse,, they dont want to wait for a fix, or post on the forums, they just wanan play.. just dling that folder goes faster
on the other end, people who didnt even purchase will use it, i personally think there should be some different method of receiving patches... like being able to send a mail to support, then get some browser-based patch...
The main problem with DRM is that it in no way affects sales positively. If someone who always pirates their games is unable to, they will simply pirate another game instead. Most of the time though, the DRM is cracked and pirated versions of a game show up even before it is released. However, those who do want to buy the game will often get all sorts of hoops to jump through, which can put off quite a few people who object to being treated like criminals. Pirates are pirates and will always be pirates, and therefore there is no use in DRM to try and keep them out. Aside from locking their code in a chest deep in a vault and throwing the key into a volcano, there isn't anything they can do to keep pirates from getting at the game. DRM makes sales go down rather than up (just look at the Spore debacle) which, unfortunately, most large gaming companies do not seem to realize.
One important thing to consider is that DRM is the name for a type of program, not a specific program in itself. Hence you get different levels of DRM. EAs DRM (Spore, Mass Effect etc) is the sworn enemy of many gaming aficionados, while Steam's DRM isn't so intrusive. Stardock games don't have any, although they do check serials if you want to update the game (so only legitimate copies can get patches).
Which is, in itself a form of DRM.
Calling it DRM is not the same as calling it bad. While DRM is NEVER good for consumers, Stardock's DRM isn't that bad for consumers at all, and I can only see one reason why someone would have a problem with it- and it's a situation that really doesn't exist anymore (the used PC game market is gone, and Stardock has a vested interest in keeping their games out of the used PC game market)
I don't mind not being able to sell PC games, since they retail cheaper then boxed copies. I just become much more careful in what I buy instead.
