Originally Posted by bradleys
Once the product is all 0's and 1's the concept of ownership that you get with a physical product dies. You have simply licensed the right to use the product based on an arbitrary set of rules that may or may not have been defined as of yet.
And the content owners / content delivery services get to set those rules.
Do you really think it was any different when it was analog tape (VHS or Beta)?
You don't own the content, you never owned the content and unless you are involved in creating it or paying lots of money you probably never will.
Ditto with books, magazines, etc.
Now I do agree, with physical media like a real paper book or magazine, tape, DVD, BR, etc. you can have more flexibility as far as loaning it out, consuming it multiple times or different ways. But really, in the grand scheme of things does it matter that much? For the vast majority of content, for me, I've found it does not the more I think about it logically. Yes there are a few things that I want that "archival" Bluray or hard cover book... but I find it's increasingly less and less. As long as the DRM-all-digital content is cheaper than the "old ways" and has just enough flexibility, it's a good set of trade off's for me.
And there are some upsides - what Apple has done with iTunes Match is awesome - I can access practically my entire music library from anywhere. I think it's going to be a while before they get there with video - and if you buy video (not rent) from Apple or other providers you basically get unlimited re-downloads which isn't quite streaming, but getting there. But that's not Apple's problem - that's a general infrastructure and bit-shuffling problem since video - especially high quality high bitrate video - is huge compared to everything else and it's all but impossible to download in realtime or faster than to allow for sufficient buffering.