I’d like to get the community’s feedback on this. I find it very disturbing that digital content purchased on a platform does not rightfully belong to the purchaser and that the content can be completely removed by the platform owners. Based on my understanding, when we purchase a show or movie or game digitally, what we’re really doing is purchasing a “license” to access the media on the platform. This is different from owning a physical copy of the same media. Years before the move to digital media, we would buy DVDs and Blu-Rays the shows and movies we want to watch, and no one seemed to question the ownership of those physical media.

Why is it that digital media purchasing and ownership isn’t the same as purchasing and owning the physical media? How did it become like this, and is there anything that can be done to convince these platforms that purchasing a digital copy of a media should be equivalent to purchasing a physical DVD or Blu-Ray disc?

P.S. I know there’s pirating and all, but that’s not the focus of my question.

  • Mahlzeit@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    Digital media means that there is an ongoing service behind it. The servers use energy. The parts age and break. It requires a continuing feed of labor and resources to keep going.

    Imagine a streaming service that is all based on buying media, instead of subscription or renting. Then suppose all the customers somehow decide that the media they own are enough for now (maybe because money is tight, because inflation). With no more cash coming in, the service goes bankrupt.

    In principle, you could have a type of license that allows you to get a new copy in any way you can (torrent, etc.). That would be hard to police, though.

    FWIW, owning a physical copy isn’t all that, either. There are various ways built-in to make life harder for customers, like geo-blocking. Bypassing these tends to be a criminal offense.

    • dandi8@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      And yet, somehow, GOG and Itch still exist, allowing you to download games completely DRM-free, as often as you like. If they ever go out of business, you can still use your local copies forever.

      How do they do it? A mystery…

      • Mahlzeit@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        That takes a lot less bandwidth than streaming. All business have fixed costs. Blockbuster Video had to pay rent for physical stores, for example. Delivering via the net is relatively cheap compared to stores or physical postage. I’d be surprised if GOG’s cost aren’t much lower than anything physical.

        • dandi8@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Well then let me actually download the movie like it was a game, then! And how exactly does it take less bandwidth? It’s still tens or hundreds of gigabytes to download every time someone wants to install a game, most people only use the offline installers as backups.

          • Mahlzeit@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            But how often do you install the same game? A streaming movie needs to be (partially) downloaded every time someone watches it. But yes, I shouldn’t jump to the conclusion that this ends up being a higher bandwidth cost per dollar purchasing price.

            When you keep a backup, then the download was basically just a way of delivering a physical copy. I answered why we can’t have online property.

            As to why many don’t allow you to keep a private copy. For the obvious reason: To maintain control over their property and monetize it to the highest degree possible.

    • gjoel@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Digital media means that there is an ongoing service behind it.

      I could download my file and be done with it. If I throw away or damage my super fragile bluray I’m not entitled to a new copy. I don’t even need to be able to redownload (although it’s a nice service). It means there is an ongoing service behind it because they decide it and because they are afraid I will share with my friends - which is about as difficult as finding the media elsewhere online.

      With no more cash coming in, the service goes bankrupt.

      Same issue with physical media. Suddenly your expensive factory is idle, your employees don’t produce anything. We still get to buy movies and not rent them perpetually.

      • Mahlzeit@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I could download my file and be done with it.

        That’s true, but that’s kinda delivering a physical copy via the net, and you pay the storage medium. I understood OP as talking specifically about online “property”.

    • sederx@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Bypassing these tends to be a criminal offense.

      lol no, nobody is in jail for ripping their stuff or even straight up torrenting it.

      • Mahlzeit@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        If it doesn’t bother you that you are threatened with jail over something you might do with your own property, in your own home, without affecting others, then… Well, I can see that you would be living a very jolly life indeed. Good on ya.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      Thank you! Lemmy seems to believe everything digital is free forever. There are real costs associated with maintaining infrastructure.

      Having said that, I pay Google $100/yr. for 2TB of storage. I steal all my media and place it there. Local backups as well, of course.

      Y’all do whatever works for you, but don’t whine when these companies drop “your” media.

      • EliasChao@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        There’s a case to be made about “buying” digital media and being able to keep the file in your local storage, that way it wouldn’t cost anything to the publisher when you play the content.

        I understand the piracy implications, but most of the content is pirated anyway regardless of DRM, so the only ones affected are those who actually pay for content.

      • sederx@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Thank you! Lemmy seems to believe everything digital is free forever. There are real costs associated with maintaining infrastructure.

        then dont fucking call it “buying”