Digital ownership seems like a wonderful use case for blockchain technology, and it baffles me that there hasn't been a DRM company yet that's jumped on this idea.
For this to change there either needs to be incentive for the platform and IP owners or there needs to be legal changes to require it.
Also, blockchain means that anyone who has your ID can know you entire catalog of ownership. This removes privacy.
Why would any content creator (outside of those specifically pushing it on idealogical grounds) want to lose control over the distribution of their content by using blockchain and cloud storage technologies?
Not even "big media companies". Why would even say, an indie game developer, want to have a secondary marketplace where there games are sold?
Should the governments (=laws and regulations) be protecting a few media houses or millions of consumers?
Because it's less valuable than one that could be resold, and thus should be obtainable more cheaply.
What goes unsaid in all these threads is that people don't just want "ownership", they want it for the same price that they're currently getting whatever it is they're getting today. The inability to resell or lend something is priced in; the market has established that people will pay $x for a license to access something that they can't lend or resell.
Gabe Newell once said "piracy is not a pricing issue, it’s a service issue", but it's not, it's a value issue. The reason content providers don't provide the service people want is because they know no one would pay the price at which they would consider offering it, so they don't bother.
Why are the physical versions of games the exact same price as the digital version? Shouldn't the digital version be much cheaper because you can't copy, lend, or resell it?
Ditto for all forms of media
> copy
Crucially, most retail physical media is not copyable (by most people). If it were, the market landscape would look very different.
Nowadays, there's enough market capture that they can simply charge the same amount due to greed, though. But there are early reasons for that.