Lionsgate and Steam team up to offer over 100 films on Steam

I don't get it: STEAM is not the future. In fact they have done nothing except bringing more and faster games to Linux as a whole platform. And now they bring more of the same DRM and there is a celebration about the "future"? There is not real future regarding STEAM. The magic word is "DRM-free" based on customer rights.

And turning the concurrent Linux-distribution in another Windows-like system does not help getting free and open-source software. To be honest: That's the way to be called people are doing when installing a client for this and that. This is all proprietary nonsense! :)


Last edited by throgh on 26 April 2016 at 5:28 pm UTC

Unfortunately, it's unrealistic to expect major corporations to suddenly embrace the open source mindset and basically place their revenue at the mercy of honest consumers. It's just not going to happen, at least not quickly. Look how many years it took the music industry to finally loosen its grip and allow music to be sold DRM-free. Game publishers and movie studios may get there eventually, but it's a long ways off. For that matter, even digital books are encumbered with DRM and artificial scarcity!

Unfortunately, it's unrealistic to expect major corporations to suddenly embrace the open source mindset and basically place their revenue at the mercy of honest consumers.

They already do. Those who don't pay don't, duh.

Unfortunately, it's unrealistic to expect major corporations to suddenly embrace the open source mindset and basically place their revenue at the mercy of honest consumers.

They already do. Those who don't pay don't, duh.

I'm not sure what you're saying. DRM isn't meant to stop piracy, it's meant to prevent "casual" copying. It adds a little bit of inconvenience so that the average consumer is more likely to buy the game/movie/book/whatever than they are to simply get a "free" copy from a friend, and this works as intended for the most part. I think most companies are afraid that if they release something with no copy protection in place then it'll be a free-for-all, and they won't make any money.

Also, this article seems a little off-topic for this site. It's GamingOnLinux, not SteamOnLinux. What does this news have to do with this site's core topic?

I love when people get so arrogant in a way they tends to forgot the FACTS of the topic.

Quite simple, like it or not, without Valve/Steam there would not be such a thing like "gaming on linux", dont forget it.

And then while the 1% of the internet is still crying about DRM stuff, the other 99% is just login on their software of their preference for gaming or watching movies with zero problems.
But lets see how people loves to talk about "back up" their movies they "own" (funny fact you never will ever own a game, movie or music, read the eula, you are renting even if you are allowed to download it to your PC), which for me means you will be copying the movie in your friends/family usb so they dont have to pay a penny because you already did pay for it, right? If that is what you want, you can still get DVDs/Bluray disc but no, you want it cheaper, and why not, free!! Thats why this DRM-free topic will be still here in 20 years, the 1% still crying about why digital stuff are tied to DRM software, simple, because people will always abuse in some way of their rights. Steam at least let you share your games on family share with its inconvenients, but some people wants all the games on GOG because is so easy to copy an installation folder to a USB storage card to "share" it and thats why in 20 years you will see how GOG is still 10 years behind Steam in game releases. Good luck waiting for digital DRM-free stuff.

I think most companies are afraid that if they release something with no copy protection in place then it'll be a free-for-all, and they won't make any money.

So in effect, they think every consumer is basically an opportunistic thief with no moral scruples at all. Or maybe they only think that when they sell stuff that's artificially scarce. Bugger 'em sideways, I say. Personally I'm prepared to pay more for goods and services from companies I respect, and that doesn't include ones that treat me like a potential criminal.

(funny fact you never will ever own a game, movie or music, read the eula, you are renting even if you are allowed to download it to your PC)

After I read the eula, I simply ignore any bullshit that's not legal basically anywhere. In most civilized countries corporations still can't just write any old bullshit into law. They have to do it through the lobby system. :F


Okay, double rant over.

But lets see how people loves to talk about "back up" their movies they "own" (funny fact you never will ever own a game, movie or music, read the eula, you are renting even if you are allowed to download it to your PC), which for me means you will be copying the movie in your friends/family usb so they dont have to pay a penny because you already did pay for it, right? If that is what you want, you can still get DVDs/Bluray disc but no, you want it cheaper, and why not, free!!

Ehm, no. When people talk about backing up 'their' movie (which they paid money to 'own' ), they talk about making a backup copy in case their hard drive breaks. You know, backups.
Of course, if anyone working in the movie industry thinks like you do, that anyone is a thief and a liar, that's why we can't have anything nice. A little trust towards your clients would go a long way, you know.

But lets see how people loves to talk about "back up" their movies they "own" (funny fact you never will ever own a game, movie or music, read the eula, you are renting even if you are allowed to download it to your PC), which for me means you will be copying the movie in your friends/family usb so they dont have to pay a penny because you already did pay for it, right? If that is what you want, you can still get DVDs/Bluray disc but no, you want it cheaper, and why not, free!!

Ehm, no. When people talk about backing up 'their' movie (which they paid money to 'own' ), they talk about making a backup copy in case their hard drive breaks. You know, backups.
Of course, if anyone working in the movie industry thinks like you do, that anyone is a thief and a liar, that's why we can't have anything nice. A little trust towards your clients would go a long way, you know.

Precisely. Or in the case of physical discs, in case the media wears out or you know, you just like having your films digitally on your media centre, without having to go fetch a disc, turn on the bluray player and then sit through messages telling you not to be the thief you obviously aren't since you bought the damn disc. Besides, most blurays I get these days are special editions that aren't released where I live, meaning I have to break the encryption since optical media films are region locked! If I didn't have a bluray player, I'd have to break the DRM anyway just to play it on my Linux computer!

Also, I've never heard of anyone copying DVDs or Blurays to their friends. Everyone I've ever met, that lent movies to their friends, either lent them the actual disc or a burned copy downloaded off the internet. In short, DRM didn't even factor into it.

TL;DR: DRM only hinders the consumer in their right to play the contents they paid for and has basically no effect on piracy. (note: only talking film and music here)


Last edited by Cybolic on 27 April 2016 at 4:59 pm UTC

Also, apart from the only 11 titles show in Europe, it's down to just 6 in Big Picture Mode for some reason.

I'm not sure what you're saying. DRM isn't meant to stop piracy, it's meant to prevent "casual" copying. It adds a little bit of inconvenience so that the average consumer is more likely to buy the game/movie/book/whatever than they are to simply get a "free" copy from a friend, and this works as intended for the most part.

It does not work. Hitting TPB and downloading whatever is already faster and don't require you to jump through numerous hoops. All copyright holders manage to do is to throw their own money into a black hole. Well, that and whine to pass more laws that encroach on human rights while shedding crocodile tears.

I think most companies are afraid that if they release something with no copy protection in place then it'll be a free-for-all, and they won't make any money.

So in effect, they think every consumer is basically an opportunistic thief with no moral scruples at all. Or maybe they only think that when they sell stuff that's artificially scarce. Bugger 'em sideways, I say. Personally I'm prepared to pay more for goods and services from companies I respect, and that doesn't include ones that treat me like a potential criminal.

That's fine. I'm not justifying or defending DRM. I'm just explaining the corporate mindset and why you shouldn't expect movie studios to let you buy DRM free movies any time soon. It may happen, but it's going to take years.


Last edited by Mountain Man on 29 April 2016 at 12:17 pm UTC

.


Last edited by Mountain Man on 28 April 2016 at 7:17 pm UTC

I'm not sure what you're saying. DRM isn't meant to stop piracy, it's meant to prevent "casual" copying. It adds a little bit of inconvenience so that the average consumer is more likely to buy the game/movie/book/whatever than they are to simply get a "free" copy from a friend, and this works as intended for the most part.

It does not work. Hitting TPB and downloading whatever is already faster and don't require you to jump through numerous hoops. All copyright holders manage to do is to throw their own money into a black hole. Well, that and whine to pass more laws that encroach on human rights while shedding crocodile tears.

The average mom and pop consumer has never heard of The Pirate Bay, and their eyes would glaze over if you ever tried to explain the concept of a torrent to them. This is who most DRM is aimed at and not the technologically savvy gamer.

It does not work. Hitting TPB and downloading whatever is already faster and don't require you to jump through numerous hoops. All copyright holders manage to do is to throw their own money into a black hole. Well, that and whine to pass more laws that encroach on human rights while shedding crocodile tears.

The average mom and pop consumer has never heard of The Pirate Bay, and their eyes would glaze over if you ever tried to explain the concept of a torrent to them. This is who most DRM is aimed at and not the technologically savvy gamer.

That mom or pop would just as happily buy their streaming media sans DRM without even knowing the difference, so that point is pretty much moot. It's not like it would be legal to share these copyrighted works even if they didn't include these technical roadblocks, so you'd still need to torrent them.

Pretending that DRM doesn't prevent casual copying is as naive as pretending that it hinders hardcore pirates.

Pretending that DRM doesn't prevent casual copying is as naive as pretending that it hinders hardcore pirates.

It's also naive to pretend there's nothing between those two extremes. I'm not a casual consumer, nor a hardcore pirate. Does that mean I don't exist? To make things worse, I recently saw my wife's 9 year old nephew playing a pirated game he downloaded from some malware-ridden website. (He had no idea why he shouldn't have done it.) Does that make him a hardcore pirate?

The only thing a would-be pirate needs to know is how to use a search engine. Others have ripped the media and cracked the games already. For the people who are too "casual" to manage the downloading part, DRM hardly makes a difference.