Federal Trade Commission To Scrutinize DRM 211
Ars Technica reports that the FTC is getting ready to take a hard look at gaming DRM, setting up a town hall meeting to be held on March 25th. They're currently recruiting panelists, and they say the meeting will, in part, "address the need to improve disclosures to consumers about DRM limitations." The controversy over DRM came to a head in 2008 with the release of Spore and the multiple subsequent class-action lawsuits focusing on the SecuROM software that came with the game. Ars Technica says the town hall meeting will also look at "legal issues surrounding DRM" and "the potential need for government involvement to protect consumers."
Video Games a Bad Candidate,this doesn't bode well (Score:5, Interesting)
Video games are by far the worst candidate for this discussion imho.
There is very little case law protecting consumer fair use with video games, as compared with audio and video.
This is a heavy bet on weak prospects.
Assuming the FTC does determine a need is required for video games, this will provide definitive and hefty leverage to expand it to music and video media.
If it does not, and it's a high likelihood the FTC determines it does not, it will be MUCH harder to press the issue on, for instance, the fact that blu-ray media will black peoples' screens at random due to undocumented HDCP issues.
Are Pigs Flying? (Score:5, Interesting)
Truly a case of Uncle Sam's left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing, considering the recent creation of a Copyright Czar.
At least Apple is moving in the right direction, announcing yesterday that it will drop DRM from it's tracks.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4811674a28.html [stuff.co.nz] (and elsewhere)
"Legal Issues Surrounding DRM?" (Score:2, Interesting)
At the bare minimum... (Score:5, Interesting)
At the very least, the FTC should make it illegal to advertise any product infected with DRM as a "sale" as opposed to a "rental" or "lease". As it's impossible to own them, that's false advertising.
Yes, that means that everyone from Wal-Mart to the local mom-and-pop would have to change their advertising, in-store displays, and receipt printouts. That's a problem for them to work out with their suppliers, though.
When I hear - Govt Wants To Protect the Consumer (Score:4, Interesting)
Consumers are in the driver's seat now. (Score:5, Interesting)
I think you could make the argument that a recession makes for extreme competition, and its quite likely that it could turn out that DRM simply has to be dropped because a) it requires more money to actually DRM enable a product, particularly in testing, and b) there might be enough of a critical mass of consumers shopping for content based on the absence of DRM.
We won't really have a complete victory, though, until we see Microsoft drop entering those silly license key numbers for its products.
Re:Governments are smart (Score:4, Interesting)
I would actually like that solution very much.
It still has quite a lot of bad sides of DRM but at least we would have some non-corporate organization keeping the server up and eliminating the risk that corporation loses interest and DRM products won't work.
For any who think that government is no more trustworthy in this than corporations... Not only do I disagree but it doesn't matter. If there is gov run DRM server that goes down, corporations can (if they have the interest) set up their own servers again. If corporation's DRM server goes down, government isn't there to pick the pieces.
So I for one have little (read: not "none". I still doubt those products would work well on the platfrom I'm writing this from.) problems with the idea of government ran DRM server.
Actually (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd be fine if they'd just make retailers take returns. That's the problem right now is that you can't return games. So you buy a game, turns out the DRM doesn't work on your system, or maybe you simply don't approve of it. Well too bad, it's opened, so you can't take it back. That is bullshit. I'd be happy if the government just said "You are required to accept a return on any title that has DRM on it just as you would for any other merchandise." That way if the DRM screws you over, you can just take the game back.
Now of course they'd whine and bitch that people would use this to "rent" games. As in buy them, try them, then take them back. Possible, people are known to do that with things they want for just a little while. However that's why I'd require it only for DRM'd games. You want to release a game with no DRM, then it's fine to not take returns.
Re:Video Games a Bad Candidate,this doesn't bode w (Score:3, Interesting)
True on the farr use but there is a ton of case history involving computer intrusion. That's not what this is about.
Installing software(securerom) on my computer without my permission is clearly a criminal act.
"They're currently recruiting panelist" (Score:4, Interesting)
Lately that's meant that industry heavies are busy trying to stuff the panel with their own 'experts', doesn't it?
And then three months after this is all done with, we'll start seeing stories about how a quarter of the panelists have been discovered as previously employed by one of the RIAA's shadow groups, in addition to several other panelists receipt of airline tickets to hong kong (as well as an all-expenses paid week there for a meeting) as well as other weakly disguised "gifts" being scrutinized.
What amazes me is they continue to get away with this same old game, time and time again. This wouldn't be a problem if the followup had some teeth to it. What do you do when this all comes to light after the event? Remove them from the panel? Fat lot of good that does after they've "made their recommendations" etc.
Re:Here's a thought... (Score:4, Interesting)
But if I complain, and if they listen, and they release without DRM, we'll both be richer! Win, win!
Re:At the bare minimum... (Score:4, Interesting)
As it happens, I was browsing the laws for my state of residence (Indiana) last night, looking for something else entirely, and I came across this [in.gov]:
(The bit about "transmit computer software to the computer" is defined to include providing a DVD or other physical media.)
I'm not sure what legal recourse it provides, but it seems like a start anyway.
DRM Is just a last gasp (Score:3, Interesting)
When copyright is revoked and universal distribution of everything for free is the rule, there will be no more DRM.
Only free software will exist, because nobody will be able to charge anything for it anymore.
Of course, the quality might suffer a little and there might be a few less items out there, but it will all be free. Oh, and you might have to spend a week or so figuring out how to compile a game before you can play it.
Until some really smart people figure out how this can actually work it is going to be tough. People really want stuff for free and plenty of people are willing to buy things and post them for all to download. Of course, a lot of that is stuff bought with stolen credit cards... but the spirit is there. I don't see any turning back from the "it all should be for free" movement. At least until the last vestiges of decadent Western civiilization is wiped off the map.
Re:Video Games a Bad Candidate,this doesn't bode w (Score:3, Interesting)
So by loading a web page that has a silent trojan installer you consent to have your machine rooted and joined to a bot net?
You opened the browser. You went to the web page.
Re:And once again pirates have it easier... (Score:3, Interesting)
What if I'm both?
I've bought XP twice already with new computers but got sick of the activation bullshit after upgrading motherboards and pirated the corporate edition to avoid it.
So I paid for XP twice and got XP Corp. Illegal? Yep.
Unethical? Not to me it isn't.