The fundamental problem with DRM is that it burdens legal buyers, but not people that use a pirated version. So the more restrictive the DRM, the more your actual customers suffer.
Suddenly, you can play something only on a restricted set of devices (users hate this!), or you cannot use it at all because the DRM server went down, or even worse, DRM products get in each others way and crash the PC.
Doesn't that make it sound attractive to simply get a copy off a torrent?
Also, you seem to equate "giving away for free" with "selling without DRM". That's nonsense. A lot of ebook stores (for example, Oreilly) succesfully sell ebooks without DRM.
The fundamental problem with DRM is that it burdens legal buyers, but not people that use a pirated version. So the more restrictive the DRM, the more your actual customers suffer.
Doesn't that make it sound attractive to simply get a copy off a torrent?
I agree, and this comic is an excellent illustration: http://www.virtualshackles.com/207. But this is primarily not a problem with DRM in general, but with how DRM is implemented, right? Again, using Netflix and Hulu as an example, I've never found their DRM burdensome. Whereas I have found the iTunes device limit to be a major pain.
Also, you seem to equate "giving away for free" with "selling without DRM".
I certainly don't intend to do that. You can definitely sell things without DRM, and selling without DRM may make more economic sense than selling with DRM.
I guess I maybe just see legitimate uses for DRM alongside of the obvious problematic uses.
Suddenly, you can play something only on a restricted set of devices (users hate this!), or you cannot use it at all because the DRM server went down, or even worse, DRM products get in each others way and crash the PC.
Doesn't that make it sound attractive to simply get a copy off a torrent?
Also, you seem to equate "giving away for free" with "selling without DRM". That's nonsense. A lot of ebook stores (for example, Oreilly) succesfully sell ebooks without DRM.