Group: Defective by Design/Frequently Asked Questions

From LibrePlanet
Jump to: navigation, search
(added "which formats support DRM" question from existing page so it can be edited by this group.)
 
(24 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
== What is DRM? ==
+
This is the drafting page for edits and improvements to the [http://www.defectivebydesign.org/faq Defective by Design DRM FAQ].
  
−
Digital Restrictions Management is technology that controls what you can do with the digital media and devices you own. When a program doesn't let you share a song, read an ebook on another device, or play a single-player game without an internet connection, you are being restricted by DRM. In other words, DRM creates a damaged good. It prevents you from doing what would normally be possible if it wasn't there, and this is creating a dangerous situation for freedom, privacy and censorship.
+
'''If we want to avoid a future in which our devices serve as an apparatus to monitor and control our interaction with digital media, we must fight to retain control of our media and software.'''
  
−
'''If we want to avoid a future in which all information is controlled by just a few companies and our devices serve as an apparatus to monitor and control our interaction with media, we must fight for the alternative.'''
+
== What is the social impact of DRM? ==
  
−
== Why does DRM exist? ==
+
Proposed question. Response needed.
  
−
While it is advertised as a mechanism to prevent copyright infringement, DRM is actually designed to prevent all of the incredible possibilities enabled by digital technologies and place them under the control of a few, who can then micromanage and track everything we do with our media. This creates the potential for massive digital book burnings and large scale surveillance over people's media viewing habits. These digital book burnings may target any media (literature, music, video, anything) or group of people on a scale we have never come close to in all of human history, and it's already started to happen. In 2009, Amazon remotely deleted copies of George Orwell's dystopian novel, 1984, distributed through the Kindle store. This would have never been possible with printed books.
+
== What is DRM? ==
 +
Digital Restrictions Management is the practice of imposing technological restrictions that control what users can do with digital media. When a program is designed to prevent you from copying or sharing a song, reading an ebook on another device, or playing a single-player game without an Internet connection, you are being restricted by DRM. In other words, '''DRM creates a damaged good; it prevents you from doing what would be possible without it.''' This concentrates control over production and distribution of media, giving DRM peddlers the power to carry out massive digital book burnings and conduct large scale surveillance over people's media viewing habits.
  
−
== Who does DRM benefit? ==
+
== What does DRM stand for? ==
 +
Industry supporters of DRM refer to it as "digital rights management," as if to suggest that users should be powerless and relinquish their ability to decide how they can use and interact with their media. DRM is a mechanism to enforce severe restrictions on users' media that would otherwise be impossible, so DRM is about restrictions, not rights. Users should have control over their own media, not be left at the mercy of major media and technology companies. For that reason, opponents of DRM refer to it as "Digital Restrictions Management."
  
−
DRM gives media and technology companies the ultimate control over every aspect of what people can do with their media: where they can use it, on what devices, using what apps, for how long, and any other conditions the retailer wants to set. Digital media has many advantages over traditional analog media, but DRM attempts to make every possible use of digital goods something that must be granted permission for and exploited for private gain. This concentrates all power over the distribution of and participation with media into the hands of a few companies. For example, DRM gives ebook sellers the power to remotely delete all copies of a book, to keep track of what books readers are interested in and, with some software, even what notes they take in their books.  
+
== What are some examples of DRM? ==
 +
Depending on the DRM system, various limits and controls are imposed on both hardware and software. Users may be forced to use certain hardware or software platforms, limited to accessing their media on a predetermined number of devices, required to have a persistent Internet connection to use local files, have their files tied to an online account, unable to use accessibility software such as screen readers, cut off from accessing media in certain locales, or even stripped of their media by having their files silently and remotely deleted at any time.
 +
* If you purchase electronic copies of games from [https://store.steampowered.com/ Steam], you [https://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1790394 can't sell them or share them with a friend] after you're done playing them. If you so much as try, Steam will [http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showpost.php?p=21229829&postcount=10 disable your account], which takes away your entire game collection.
 +
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal During the mid-2000s], Sony bundled its music CDs with DRM that tracked users' listening habits, created security vulnerabilities in their computers, and prevented CD copying software from functioning.
 +
* Netflix and YouTube have constructed anti-features to prevent customers from viewing their media in certain countries or on a certain number of devices.  
 +
* In 2009, Amazon remotely deleted copies of George Orwell's dystopian novel, 1984, that were distributed through the Kindle store. This chilling example of potentially malicious behavior would have never been possible without DRM.
  
−
Every new technology for distributing information has lowered barriers to access, produce, and distribute media, but the most powerful influences always resist the progression until they have engineered a way to maintain their position when adopting new media. Supposedly, the printing press threatened those who hired scribes, the record industry threatened live music, the radio and later home taping threatened the record industry, film threatened live performances, and vhs threatened film. What they really threatened was who had disproportional power in each. Digital media distributed over the internet is the final stage of media convergence, so it is critical to prevent its monopolization by big media and technology companies.  
+
== What is the purpose of DRM? ==
 +
While it is advertised as a mechanism to prevent copyright infringement, DRM is actually designed to restrict all of the incredible possibilities enabled by digital technologies and place them under the control of a few, who can then micromanage and track every interaction with digital media. In other words, DRM is designed to take away every possible use of digital media, regardless of legal rights, and sell some of these functionalities back as severely limited services.  
  
−
== DRM is about restrictions, not rights ==
+
== Doesn't DRM limit copyright infringement? ==
 +
DRM is not about limiting copyright infringement. Such an argument attempts to make DRM appear beneficial to authors and is based entirely on a (very successfully advertised) misrepresentation of DRM's purpose. To illustrate the absurdity of the argument, consider the nature of file sharing: to obtain a copy of a file without permission, downloaders go to a friend or a file sharing network, not a DRM-encumbered distribution platform. If DRM existed only to prevent unauthorized sharing, every distribution method for that particular piece of media would have to be distributed by an uncrackable DRM-encumbered distribution platform, which is impossible on its own. So long as one copy becomes available without DRM, countless more are easily produced. '''Industry proponents of DRM are well aware that DRM is not a copyright enforcement mechanism. DRM is only marketed as a copyright enforcement mechanism to mislead authors into tolerating and even defending it.'''
  
−
Industry supporters of DRM refer to it as "digital rights management" as if they are the ultimate authority to grant us our rights, as if they are the ones who should have complete and total control over how we use and interact with our media. What they are really doing is managing the restrictions they impose on our media and devices that we would normally have control over in the absence of DRM. We should own our media, not be at the mercy of media companies. For that reason, we refer to it as "Digital Restrictions Management".
+
== What is the difference between DRM and copyright enforcement? ==
 +
DRM restricts entirely different activities than copyright does, and serves an entirely separate function. While Copyright restricts who can distribute media, DRM restricts how users can access their media. Copyright already provides leverage against illegal distribution, meaning that the largest distribution platforms must already adhere to the demands of large publishers, studios, music labels, and software companies. DRM provides antifeatures (features that exist only to worsen the service for users) and charges for their removal. This gives major media and technology companies much broader control over the use of media than is enabled by copyright law, while copyright allows them to force all legal media distribution services to use DRM.  
  
−
== What are some examples of DRM? ==
+
== Who does DRM harm? ==
 +
DRM only restricts and punishes those who have acquired their media legally through DRM-encumbered platforms. Even authors, along with independent labels, studios, and publishers suffer. When a distributor gains significant control over a particular market, DRM enables them to lock in their customers to their platform. Once customers are locked in, so are labels, studios, and publishers. If an independent publisher wants to switch away from a DRM-encumbered distributor, customers might have to re-purchase their media on the new platform. As with any instance of monopolization, businesses which dominate a market can arbitrarily dictate the price they charge, as well as the price they pay for media, because suppliers are dependent on them. Without DRM, users have control over their own media such as where, when, how, and on what platforms they choose to use their files.
 +
 
 +
== Doesn't DRM make sense for streaming media and rental services? ==
 +
The problem with this argument is that it invites a future in which nobody has any control over their devices, and can only access media through DRM-encumbered distribution services. This argument is also based on misinformed claims that DRM prevents copyright infringement (see above). Streaming media services are rising in popularity, and DRM turns this into an opportunity to bring an end to personal media ownership. Rather than having services that can stream a user's media to any device using whatever software they choose, DRM consolidates distribution and services, such that all access to media must be through these services.
  
−
* You can purchase electronic copies of games from [http://store.steampowered.com/ Steam], but you [http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1790394 can't] sell them or give them to someone less fortunate after you're done playing them. If you so much as try, Steam will [http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showpost.php?p=21229829&postcount=10 disable your account], which takes away your entire game collection.
+
For devices, DRM limits media distribution by groups of countries, thereby frustrating intercontinental travelers and cultural exchanges. Furthermore, older devices, even those that accept flash memory upgrades, often cannot be equipped with new keys because of the weakness that distributing those keys over the Internet would imply. Although major media distribution companies accept returns in such cases, shipping expenses and frustration remain in charge of consumers, who may want to switch to unofficial distributions just in order to enjoy better usability.
  
−
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal During the mid-2000s], Sony bundled DRM with its music CDs that tracked users' listening habits, created security vulnerabilities in their computers, and prevented CD copying software from functioning.
+
== Isn't DRM ineffective anyway? ==
 +
The argument that DRM "doesn't work" because it can often be circumvented misses the point, because DRM is not about copyright enforcement. DRM is very effective at what it does: limiting the freedom of anyone who uses DRM-encumbered services so that some functionality can be sold back as severely limited services.
  
−
* Netflix has constructed anti-features to prevent customers from viewing their media in certain countries, or on a certain number of devices.  
+
== Why is DRM bad for software user freedom? ==
 +
DRM is incompatible with free software. DRM is only possible by keeping some parts of a computer secret from users and unmodifiable, which is a direct attack on users's freedom. DRM cannot function while being free software as this would allow the antifeatures enforced by DRM to be undone.
 +
 +
== Are Hollywood and the media companies to blame for DRM? ==
 +
Not exclusively. Major media companies work in tandem with technology companies to create DRM and force all legal media distributors to encumber files with it. This way, all their customers remain dependent on them, and helps maintain their dominant position in the market.  
  
−
== Isn't it a reasonable way to discourage copyright infringement? ==
+
== Is watermarking DRM? ==
 +
Watermarking is different from DRM, but may used in conjunction with DRM or proprietary file formats.
  
−
DRM is not about protection from copyright infringement. That argument is a strawman attempting to make opposition to DRM appear detrimental to authors, but it's based entirely on a (very successfully advertised) misrepresentation of DRM's purpose. To illustrate the absurdity of the idea that DRM exists to prevent copyright infringement, consider the nature of file sharing. To obtain a copy of a file without permission, downloaders would go to a friend or a file sharing network, not a DRM-encumbered distribution platform.  
+
Watermarking is typically used to identify the source of unauthorized copies. When authorized copies are distributed, each receives a unique watermark, a hidden indicator which does not affect the file's function, but can be used to identify who it was given to. The goal is to be able to identify the source of unauthorized copies found online, and punish the person who originally obtained the authorized copy and shared it. This technique doesn't affect the ability to play such files with free software, nor does it add any technical restriction to control its use.
  
−
If DRM existed to prevent that method of copyright infringement as advertised, every distribution method for that particular piece of media must only be distributed by an uncrackable (which is impossible on its own) DRM-encumbered distribution platform. So long as one copy becomes available without DRM, countless more are easily produced. Proponents of DRM are well aware of this, and it is entirely besides their interests.
+
== Shouldn't people who make digital works be able to get compensation for their work? ==
  
−
DRM only restricts and punishes those who acquired their media legally through DRM-encumbered platforms. Without DRM, users have control over their own media such as where, when, how, on what platforms, and using what software they choose to view or use their files. DRM allows service providers to construct antifeatures (literally, features that exist only to worsen the service for users) that take legal rights away in order to be re-sold as a service. This is the defining difference between copyright protection and DRM.  
+
Yes, we believe that it's important for artists and developers to be able to make a living. We recognize that developing new business models that don't use DRM is challenging. However, we believe that DRM is never acceptable because it harms users. It's worth noting that, in most cases, media owners impose DRM to stymie competition or twist the elbows of distributors, not to protect artists and developers.
  
−
DRM is far more restrictive than copyright, and serves an entirely separate function. '''DRM is designed to enable service providers to build antifeatures which take away every possible interaction with media through digial technology, regardless of legal rights, and sell some of these functionalities back as services again and again.''' Copyright is merely the source of power granted to media rightsholders to create, maintain, and enforce the use DRM.  
+
A community of DRM-free businesses successfully compete with others who do use DRM. In fact, part Defective by Design's mission is to connect those businesses with likeminded customers through our [https://www.defectivebydesign.org/guide Guide to DRM-free Living].
  
−
Copyright already provides leverage against illegal distribution, meaning that the largest distribution platforms must already adhere to the demands of large publishers, studios, labels, and software companies. DRM allows them to have much broader control over the use of media than is enabled by copyright law, but copyright allows them to force all legal media distribution services to use DRM.
+
== Which formats support DRM? ==
  
−
This maintains the current monopolistic (or oligopolistic) market positions of those big companies at the expense of independent publishers, studios, and labels as well as all media participants. This is not about fair compensation; it's about digitally-enforced exploitation.
+
It's important to remember that sometimes DRM is built into software and not part of a file format, and also file formats that support DRM do not necessarily require it. If you are wondering whether the file you are using could possibly be encumbered by DRM, we maintain the following list. Please note that this is only a list of formats which support DRM, and bears no weight on any other technical merits or restrictions of the formats.  
  
−
== Isn't DRM ineffective anyway? ==
+
Here is a list of formats that support DRM:
  
−
The argument that DRM "doesn't work" because people still find ways to share media is missing the point, because that isn't what DRM is for. DRM is about controlling what legal downloaders can do with their files and has no impact on those who acquire their files outside of DRM schemes. DRM is very successful at is limiting the freedom of anyone who uses DRM-encumbered services so that the company behind said service can sell any and all functionality back to them.
+
'''Ebooks'''
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>Archos Diffusion - Archos Reader (<em>.aeh</em>)</li>
 +
<li>Broadband eBooks (BBeB) - Sony media (<em>.lrf; .lrx</em>)</li>
 +
<li>EPUB - IDPF/EPUB (<em>.epub</em>)</li>
 +
<li>PalmDOC eReader (formerly Palm Digital Media/Peanut Press) - Palm Media (<em>.pdb</em>)</li>
 +
<li>Founder Electronics - Apabi Reader (<em>.xeb; .ceb</em>)</li>
 +
<li>Apple - iBook (<em>.ibooks</em>)</li>
 +
<li>Amazon Kindle - KF8 (<em>.azw; .kf8</em>)</li>
 +
<li>Microsoft LIT - Microsoft Reader (<em>.lit</em>)</li>
 +
<li>Mobipocket - PRC (Palm OS) - (<em>.prc; .mobi</em>)</li>
 +
<li>Portable Document Format (.pdf)</li>
 +
<li>TEBR - TEBR (<em>.tebr</em>)</li>
 +
</ul>
  
−
== Why is DRM bad for free software users? ==
+
'''Audio'''
  
−
DRM is incompatible with free software. In the same sense that you cannot hide something from someone while showing it to them, DRM cannot function while being free software as this would allow the antifeatures enforced by DRM to be undone.  
+
To avoid DRM and other restrictions, we recommend using free audio formats such as Opus (http://www.opus-codec.org) (.opus) or Vorbis (http://www.vorbis.com/) (.oga; .ogg) for general use and FLAC (https://www.xiph.org/flac) (.flac) for lossless, and Speex (.spx) for speech.
  
−
== Doesn't DRM make sense for streaming media and rental services? ==
+
<ul>
 +
<li>Advanced Audio Coding (<em>.m4p; .aac</em>)</li>
 +
<li>Adaptive Transform Acoustic Coding (ATRAC) - Sony Corporation (<em>.aa3; .oma; .at3</em>)</li>
 +
<li>MPEG-1 or MPEG-2 Audio Layer III  (<em>.mp3</em>)</li>
 +
<li>RealAudio (<em>.ra; .ram</em>)</li>
 +
<li>Windows Media Audio (<em>.wma</em>)</li>
 +
</ul>
  
−
The problem with this argument is that it invites a future in which nobody has any personal ownership over their own media, and can only access files through DRM-encumbered distribution services. This argument is also based on a misunderstanding of the purpose of DRM, which is not to prevent copyright infringement (see above).
+
'''Video'''
  
−
== Aren't Hollywood and the media companies really to blame for DRM? ==
+
To avoid DRM and other restrictions, we recommend using free video formats such as Theora (http://www.theora.org/) (.ogv; .ogm), VP8 (http://www.webmproject.org/) (.webm), or Daala (https://www.xiph.org/daala).
  
−
Not exclusively, no. Hollywood and media companies work in partnership with technology companies to create DRM and force all legitimate media distributors to use it so that they, along with their users (and authors looking for publishing/distribution) remain dependent on those giant companies, and the big businesses maintain their market position, which has control over the entire industry.
+
<ul>
 +
<li>DivX Media Format (DMF) - DivX, Inc. (<em>.divx</em>)</li>
 +
<li>Flash Video (<em>.swf; .flv; .f4p</em>)</li>
 +
<li>M4V - Apple, Inc. (<em>.m4v</em>)</li>
 +
<li>MPEG-4 Part 14 - MP4 (<em>.mp4</em>)</li>
 +
<li>QuickTime File Format (QTFF) - Apple, Inc. (<em>.mov; .qt</em>)</li>
 +
<li>RealVideo (<em>.rm; .rmvb</em>)</li>
 +
<li>Windows Media Video (<em>.wmv</em>)</li>
 +
</ul>
  
 
{{featured resource|month=August|year=2013}}
 
{{featured resource|month=August|year=2013}}

Latest revision as of 15:56, 18 September 2017

This is the drafting page for edits and improvements to the Defective by Design DRM FAQ.

If we want to avoid a future in which our devices serve as an apparatus to monitor and control our interaction with digital media, we must fight to retain control of our media and software.

What is the social impact of DRM?

Proposed question. Response needed.

What is DRM?

Digital Restrictions Management is the practice of imposing technological restrictions that control what users can do with digital media. When a program is designed to prevent you from copying or sharing a song, reading an ebook on another device, or playing a single-player game without an Internet connection, you are being restricted by DRM. In other words, DRM creates a damaged good; it prevents you from doing what would be possible without it. This concentrates control over production and distribution of media, giving DRM peddlers the power to carry out massive digital book burnings and conduct large scale surveillance over people's media viewing habits.

What does DRM stand for?

Industry supporters of DRM refer to it as "digital rights management," as if to suggest that users should be powerless and relinquish their ability to decide how they can use and interact with their media. DRM is a mechanism to enforce severe restrictions on users' media that would otherwise be impossible, so DRM is about restrictions, not rights. Users should have control over their own media, not be left at the mercy of major media and technology companies. For that reason, opponents of DRM refer to it as "Digital Restrictions Management."

What are some examples of DRM?

Depending on the DRM system, various limits and controls are imposed on both hardware and software. Users may be forced to use certain hardware or software platforms, limited to accessing their media on a predetermined number of devices, required to have a persistent Internet connection to use local files, have their files tied to an online account, unable to use accessibility software such as screen readers, cut off from accessing media in certain locales, or even stripped of their media by having their files silently and remotely deleted at any time.

  • If you purchase electronic copies of games from Steam, you can't sell them or share them with a friend after you're done playing them. If you so much as try, Steam will disable your account, which takes away your entire game collection.
  • During the mid-2000s, Sony bundled its music CDs with DRM that tracked users' listening habits, created security vulnerabilities in their computers, and prevented CD copying software from functioning.
  • Netflix and YouTube have constructed anti-features to prevent customers from viewing their media in certain countries or on a certain number of devices.
  • In 2009, Amazon remotely deleted copies of George Orwell's dystopian novel, 1984, that were distributed through the Kindle store. This chilling example of potentially malicious behavior would have never been possible without DRM.

What is the purpose of DRM?

While it is advertised as a mechanism to prevent copyright infringement, DRM is actually designed to restrict all of the incredible possibilities enabled by digital technologies and place them under the control of a few, who can then micromanage and track every interaction with digital media. In other words, DRM is designed to take away every possible use of digital media, regardless of legal rights, and sell some of these functionalities back as severely limited services.

Doesn't DRM limit copyright infringement?

DRM is not about limiting copyright infringement. Such an argument attempts to make DRM appear beneficial to authors and is based entirely on a (very successfully advertised) misrepresentation of DRM's purpose. To illustrate the absurdity of the argument, consider the nature of file sharing: to obtain a copy of a file without permission, downloaders go to a friend or a file sharing network, not a DRM-encumbered distribution platform. If DRM existed only to prevent unauthorized sharing, every distribution method for that particular piece of media would have to be distributed by an uncrackable DRM-encumbered distribution platform, which is impossible on its own. So long as one copy becomes available without DRM, countless more are easily produced. Industry proponents of DRM are well aware that DRM is not a copyright enforcement mechanism. DRM is only marketed as a copyright enforcement mechanism to mislead authors into tolerating and even defending it.

What is the difference between DRM and copyright enforcement?

DRM restricts entirely different activities than copyright does, and serves an entirely separate function. While Copyright restricts who can distribute media, DRM restricts how users can access their media. Copyright already provides leverage against illegal distribution, meaning that the largest distribution platforms must already adhere to the demands of large publishers, studios, music labels, and software companies. DRM provides antifeatures (features that exist only to worsen the service for users) and charges for their removal. This gives major media and technology companies much broader control over the use of media than is enabled by copyright law, while copyright allows them to force all legal media distribution services to use DRM.

Who does DRM harm?

DRM only restricts and punishes those who have acquired their media legally through DRM-encumbered platforms. Even authors, along with independent labels, studios, and publishers suffer. When a distributor gains significant control over a particular market, DRM enables them to lock in their customers to their platform. Once customers are locked in, so are labels, studios, and publishers. If an independent publisher wants to switch away from a DRM-encumbered distributor, customers might have to re-purchase their media on the new platform. As with any instance of monopolization, businesses which dominate a market can arbitrarily dictate the price they charge, as well as the price they pay for media, because suppliers are dependent on them. Without DRM, users have control over their own media such as where, when, how, and on what platforms they choose to use their files.

Doesn't DRM make sense for streaming media and rental services?

The problem with this argument is that it invites a future in which nobody has any control over their devices, and can only access media through DRM-encumbered distribution services. This argument is also based on misinformed claims that DRM prevents copyright infringement (see above). Streaming media services are rising in popularity, and DRM turns this into an opportunity to bring an end to personal media ownership. Rather than having services that can stream a user's media to any device using whatever software they choose, DRM consolidates distribution and services, such that all access to media must be through these services.

For devices, DRM limits media distribution by groups of countries, thereby frustrating intercontinental travelers and cultural exchanges. Furthermore, older devices, even those that accept flash memory upgrades, often cannot be equipped with new keys because of the weakness that distributing those keys over the Internet would imply. Although major media distribution companies accept returns in such cases, shipping expenses and frustration remain in charge of consumers, who may want to switch to unofficial distributions just in order to enjoy better usability.

Isn't DRM ineffective anyway?

The argument that DRM "doesn't work" because it can often be circumvented misses the point, because DRM is not about copyright enforcement. DRM is very effective at what it does: limiting the freedom of anyone who uses DRM-encumbered services so that some functionality can be sold back as severely limited services.

Why is DRM bad for software user freedom?

DRM is incompatible with free software. DRM is only possible by keeping some parts of a computer secret from users and unmodifiable, which is a direct attack on users's freedom. DRM cannot function while being free software as this would allow the antifeatures enforced by DRM to be undone.

Are Hollywood and the media companies to blame for DRM?

Not exclusively. Major media companies work in tandem with technology companies to create DRM and force all legal media distributors to encumber files with it. This way, all their customers remain dependent on them, and helps maintain their dominant position in the market.

Is watermarking DRM?

Watermarking is different from DRM, but may used in conjunction with DRM or proprietary file formats.

Watermarking is typically used to identify the source of unauthorized copies. When authorized copies are distributed, each receives a unique watermark, a hidden indicator which does not affect the file's function, but can be used to identify who it was given to. The goal is to be able to identify the source of unauthorized copies found online, and punish the person who originally obtained the authorized copy and shared it. This technique doesn't affect the ability to play such files with free software, nor does it add any technical restriction to control its use.

Shouldn't people who make digital works be able to get compensation for their work?

Yes, we believe that it's important for artists and developers to be able to make a living. We recognize that developing new business models that don't use DRM is challenging. However, we believe that DRM is never acceptable because it harms users. It's worth noting that, in most cases, media owners impose DRM to stymie competition or twist the elbows of distributors, not to protect artists and developers.

A community of DRM-free businesses successfully compete with others who do use DRM. In fact, part Defective by Design's mission is to connect those businesses with likeminded customers through our Guide to DRM-free Living.

Which formats support DRM?

It's important to remember that sometimes DRM is built into software and not part of a file format, and also file formats that support DRM do not necessarily require it. If you are wondering whether the file you are using could possibly be encumbered by DRM, we maintain the following list. Please note that this is only a list of formats which support DRM, and bears no weight on any other technical merits or restrictions of the formats.

Here is a list of formats that support DRM:

Ebooks

  • Archos Diffusion - Archos Reader (.aeh)
  • Broadband eBooks (BBeB) - Sony media (.lrf; .lrx)
  • EPUB - IDPF/EPUB (.epub)
  • PalmDOC eReader (formerly Palm Digital Media/Peanut Press) - Palm Media (.pdb)
  • Founder Electronics - Apabi Reader (.xeb; .ceb)
  • Apple - iBook (.ibooks)
  • Amazon Kindle - KF8 (.azw; .kf8)
  • Microsoft LIT - Microsoft Reader (.lit)
  • Mobipocket - PRC (Palm OS) - (.prc; .mobi)
  • Portable Document Format (.pdf)
  • TEBR - TEBR (.tebr)

Audio

To avoid DRM and other restrictions, we recommend using free audio formats such as Opus (http://www.opus-codec.org) (.opus) or Vorbis (http://www.vorbis.com/) (.oga; .ogg) for general use and FLAC (https://www.xiph.org/flac) (.flac) for lossless, and Speex (.spx) for speech.

  • Advanced Audio Coding (.m4p; .aac)
  • Adaptive Transform Acoustic Coding (ATRAC) - Sony Corporation (.aa3; .oma; .at3)
  • MPEG-1 or MPEG-2 Audio Layer III (.mp3)
  • RealAudio (.ra; .ram)
  • Windows Media Audio (.wma)

Video

To avoid DRM and other restrictions, we recommend using free video formats such as Theora (http://www.theora.org/) (.ogv; .ogm), VP8 (http://www.webmproject.org/) (.webm), or Daala (https://www.xiph.org/daala).

  • DivX Media Format (DMF) - DivX, Inc. (.divx)
  • Flash Video (.swf; .flv; .f4p)
  • M4V - Apple, Inc. (.m4v)
  • MPEG-4 Part 14 - MP4 (.mp4)
  • QuickTime File Format (QTFF) - Apple, Inc. (.mov; .qt)
  • RealVideo (.rm; .rmvb)
  • Windows Media Video (.wmv)

This page was a featured resource in August 2013.


Retrieved from "https://libreplanet.org/wiki?title=Group:Defective_by_Design/Frequently_Asked_Questions&oldid=47395"