Imagine purchasing a movie ticket. But when you go inside, they strip search you and place a tracking collar around your neck. Once inside, they then reserve the right to throw you out of the movie for any reason. That is how many DRM schemes feel at times. If I am to drop upwards of 50 or 60 dollars on a product, I expect to be able to use it relatively easily. DRM's on the other hand often times give you a limited amount of installs for the product, giving you a phone number to call to receive more. Many also put monitoring software on your computer to make sure you aren't trying to steal the product. There are many, many more methods in use that hamper proper use of the product as well. In very few (if any) other entertainment industries where such treatment would be considered fair and equal. I understand that companies want to protect their product from theft, but that doesn't mean they get to run rampant with safeguards. They have no right to treat all of their consumers as if they are common thieves. Besides all that, I don't think there has been a really successful DRM scheme that HASN'T been cracked by delinquents. If they haven't (and in all likeliness cant) come up with a DRM solution that is invulnerable to one of those cracking rings out there (RAZOR-1911, deviance, etc), then why bother with a DRM scheme? What is the point of a DRM if it does nothing to prevent theft in the first place? Intrusive and restrictive DRM's do NOTHING but hassle the consumer. They don't work, they hinder use of software, and some times (Starforce) can even damage home computers.
FTC Town Hall to Address Digital Rights Management Technologies - Event Takes Place Wednesday, March 25, 2009, in Seattle #539814-00482
FTC Town Hall to Address Digital Rights Management Technologies - Event Takes Place Wednesday, March 25, 2009, in Seattle