ghosty12 opened this issue on Oct 28, 2015 · 501 posts
[maxgrafix](https://www.renderosity.com/?uid=240453) posted at 11:20PM Mon, 02 November 2015 - [#4236492](#msg4236492) > [Razor42](https://www.renderosity.com/?uid=313712) posted at 11:38AM Mon, 02 November 2015 - [#4236420](#msg4236420) > > > This all adds up to, don't try as it can't inevitably be stopped? Unfortunately as a business this is a pretty flimsy option and I definitely wouldn't be putting you on the payroll for advice in this area. I'm having trouble discerning your actual point in all of this other than what I just stated, which is doing nothing, is better than something/anything. > > **_You're trolling and making things up again about me suggesting DAZ shouldn't go ahead with DRM. The only thing I've said is that DRM has failed because it's been reverse engineered. And as long as there are those who are willing to crack DRM it will remain unfit for purpose. And I wouldn't employ you either. Why?, because you're the most unconvincing PR guru I've ever come across_** > > > > > I think Black__Days just pretty clearly explained above how DRM can be effective if not %100 ironclad guarantee forever of contents security. No one is talking about locking a file up for ever, I'm not sure anyone even thinks this is currently possible. > > **_Many tech savvy people will disagree. All it takes is a simple internet search to know DRM has failed on many fronts. > You know this but still troll this debate with your one sided opinion_** > > > > Why make laws if people will only break them? How effective is a law if it is broken? > > **_DRM isn't a law!!_** > > > The one point you have made abundantly clear is **YOU DON"T LIKE DRM**. > > **_Wrong! I'm all for it, if it worked that is, and you're trolling again because you've clearly lost the debate. Can I suggest you brush up on your debating skills for future reference_** Lol, okay mate :D getting a little personal aren't we?