Re: Re: Re: Change to "Nintendo's is one of the most" SUCCESSFUL!
The DRM itself is not the reason for Steam's success. It is all the features that come with agreeing to use DRM. The Achievements, the play on any device with the same account. The cloud saving and storage., The massive friends lists. The gifting features. The sales. Many many more positive features. With all that, the DRM seems pretty much unnecessary.
If all else fails, Yahoo could send them 2.7 billion Pesos claiming they thought that was what they were asking for. While $208 million is still no laughing matter, it is a far less bitter pill to swallow.
So what exactly is your complaint? Are you claiming that changing copyright violates the 5th and 14th amendments? That doesn't make any sense at all. The Due Process Clause is all about the government confiscating personal property without proper judicial review in which the person whose property is being seized gets to contest the charges brought against them. If anything, the site seizures that have been reported on recently are clear violations of those clauses.
Game Maker has ensured that I will NEVER use their software.
As a game developer, I am always on the lookout for new software to use to make my games. Fortunately, Game Maker has never really been on my radar as it is Windows only and I only develop PC games that are cross compatible with Windows, Mac and Linux.
However, this DRM has now ensured that I will never use their software even if it become cross platform. I will not use software that treats me like a pirate after I had already paid for it.
Of course, I don't really understand why anyone would want to use this when there are so many free and open source game development libraries. I guess the idea of being able to create a 2d game without having to program is a promising one. However, having to deal with crap like this should turn anyone off.
Check out Smashwords. They have a large collection of books and they are DRM-free.
From their about page:
What is Smashwords’ position on digital rights management (DRM)?
We think DRM is counterproductive because it treats lawful customers like criminals. Consumers value non-DRMed content and there's a growing body of evidence that digital content producers who have abandoned DRM are enjoying greater sales. Many buyers of ebooks resent DRM because it limits their ability to fully own and enjoy their digital book. At Smashwords, we only publish DRM-free works. By the same token, we strictly discourage illegal pirating of an author’s works.
Giving up freedoms for more national security, such as through the PATRIOT act = Perfectly acceptable.
Only for those who fall for the "but but but terrorism" BS. For everyone else, the Patriot Act is a clear and dangerous violation of Constitutionally protected natural and human rights. Just as bad if not worse than this school RFID crap.
Re: Re: "But, if we all agree that [Mike's fantasy] scenario B..."
Once they do, it's up to the government to decide who has the right to do anything with it
That is not accurate. That same end could be made via a large scale social contract between the creator and the rest of society. However, since such a large scale social contract is on the verge of impossible for a single person do undertake, we have agreed to let a central body, namely government, to be the arbitrator of that contract.
Unfortunately, the government is no longer an arbitrator and has become a lapdog of special interests.
Is this really what the government has become? A glorified band of thugs and hooligans bent on extracting as much money as possible from the people and businesses within the US?
"We really want to extract money from Google. How can we do this?"
That is basically what Leibowitz's thought process seems to have been. If a government agency is no longer interested in protecting people from harm, but rather in extracting money from successful businesses, then it is time to get rid of the agency.
Not quite. They asked for it with the 17th amendment and we the people gave it to them by ratifying it. The 17th amendment was the beginning of concentrated federal power. Prior to that, the Senate, representing the individual stat governments, had the prerogative to keep as much power in the hands of the states.