The general public doesn't have an issue with DRM, they happily purchase the content as-is today. They may grumble when they have to purchase a movie for the second or third time but they continue to do so. Therefore the public, being people with money, have stated overwhelmingly that they want content without stipulating anything about DRM, free or otherwise. You are attempting to apply your viewpoint on the general public, which clearly does not agree with you.
As for your statement that Hollywood is being delusional about DRM being able to prevent piracy. They are not delusional about it at all. They know exactly what's going on. They want DRM that prevents casual copying so that Uncle Bob doesn't give a copy of the latest movie to his entire family which is not an attempt at monetary gain. That way they only have to spend money going after serious piracy efforts that exist for the purpose of making money. Your statement assumes that Hollywood is being run by stupid people and that's a serious mistake to make in this type of debate.
>> The general public doesn't have an issue with DRM, they happily purchase the content as-is today.
Do they?
>> They may grumble when they have to purchase a movie for the second or third time.
So not happily then. And not what they actually want.
>> but they continue to do so
Because the choice is that or piracy, and many choose piracy. 'Not participating in popular culture' is a choice, but it's never going to be a big one.
>> You are attempting to apply your viewpoint on the general public, which clearly does not agree with you.
The general public are dolts, but even you have admitted they grumble and don't get what they want.
>> They want DRM that prevents casual copying so that Uncle Bob doesn't give a copy of the latest movie to his entire family which is not an attempt at monetary gain.
Then they have failed, because cousin bill, Bob's kid, has that figured out on them innernets.
>> That way they only have to spend money going after serious piracy efforts that exist for the purpose of making money.
Serious piracy efforts like usenet, torrents, IRC etc? Nobody makes much money there. There are for profit piracy-streaming services that advertise I guess. Never seem to have much legal trouble.
>> Your statement assumes that Hollywood is being run by stupid people and that's a serious mistake to make in this type of debate.
It is. Powerful, litigious stupid people with a lot of vested, anti-consumer interests.
Yes, yes they do. Take a look at the proceeds from those industries and tell me people are not handing over money for said content.
>> So not happily then...
Ah, I see the problem. When I said happily I meant this definition: "felicitously; aptly; appropriately". Meaning they pay because that's what they are supposed to do. My bad. What they want and what they do are two different things. You see, they don't want to pay for multiple copies but they do, not because of DRM. They do so because that's what they are "supposed" to do. This is more of a philosophical, economical, and/or legal issue they complain about, not technological. DRM is technology that most people are probably not even that much aware of in their day-to-day lives.
>> ... many choose piracy...
I didn't claim otherwise. But, as you say, they have the choice to not participate. That's my current answer to what I feel is outlandish cable subscription fees as compared to my perceived value of what they offer. It doesn't work for me, therefore I don't pay for cable. I use other means to access the media that I wish to consume.
>> The general public are dolts...
I think it's rude of you to apply your viewpoint on a large group of people that aren't even aware of your problem. Then when they don't go along with what you think they should be doing or what you think they should know, your method to convince them otherwise is to insult them? You're not going to win anyone over with your argument.
>> Then they have failed...
Due to record profits, I think the situation has worked out quite nicely for them. I think you are exaggerating in your own mind the number of kids who are sharing movies with their families and the impact this actually has.
>> Serious piracy efforts...
If you think trading torrents is serious piracy, then you need to read up on what true media piracy is. I'm not talking streaming or torrenting content. There are areas of the world where you can buy a perfect copy of a DVD or Blu-Ray for very little and the original content owners get nothing. It's a huge industry and I'm not talking just movies/music here. Plus in these areas this is practically endorsed by the local governments as legal. And I believe there's been a few cases of big-time streamers having legal troubles, Megaupload comes to mind. Before you say anything, that fell apart because of government incompetence, not because of the lack of anyone actually breaking the law.
>> It is...
Then you are naive. Stupid people don't make that kind of money and do the things they do. Just because you think they're stupid and you can cast opinions on things they do as stupid doesn't make it true. Their anti-customer interests, which is only a recent thing mind you, are possible due to carefully crafted legal systems that took years of planning and execution that you claim they are too stupid to have accomplished. If you're going to fight this battle then you need to understand what you're up against.
>> Stupid people don't make that kind of money and do the things they do.
Very few people are intelligent in all areas, these people are clearly shortsighted and stupid in many.
I'm not going to address the rest of your comment, needless to say I disagree with pretty much everything you have to say on the topic, and I think that you set up and knock down a variety of convenient straw men on your response there.
I didn't claim they are smart in all things. I claimed they are smart in their own industry that they control.
But if you want to skip the rest of the response by claiming straw men without defending your claim then that's fine. Especially since you did it yourself with your "very few people are intelligent in all areas" comment. I was directly responding to your statements so I fail to see how the straw man fallacy applies. I did not present a distorted version of your position, I directly responded to it. But, who cares, it's only a discussion between strangers on the Internet. We're not creating world peace here.
Hollywood is delusional, though. They are missing out on a huge potential revenue stream by having DRM-free distribution platforms. Why was Megaupload so popular if people really liked DRM?
As for your statement that Hollywood is being delusional about DRM being able to prevent piracy. They are not delusional about it at all. They know exactly what's going on. They want DRM that prevents casual copying so that Uncle Bob doesn't give a copy of the latest movie to his entire family which is not an attempt at monetary gain. That way they only have to spend money going after serious piracy efforts that exist for the purpose of making money. Your statement assumes that Hollywood is being run by stupid people and that's a serious mistake to make in this type of debate.