> how should streaming companies protect against their content being stolen/ripped/etc without DRM?
They shouldn't because it is useless. DRM can always be circumvented.
> it's in the contract of every streaming service that they have to protect the licensed content to the best of their ability
This is the only reason why DRM exists: Stupid, greedy rights sellers. They don't care why or how people consume the media. They only see licenses and money. "Protecting" licenses equals protecting money for them.
DRM is not bad because I want to "steal" anything. It is bad because proprietary software with the main goal of restricting its users leads to a bad experience. Amazon Prime Video for example is horribly buggy and hard to use. If I could use a decent player, I would pay more money for the service. Both sides would benefit from no DRM, but greedy rights sellers don't have logical thinking in their toolbox.
They shouldn't because it is useless. DRM can always be circumvented.
> it's in the contract of every streaming service that they have to protect the licensed content to the best of their ability
This is the only reason why DRM exists: Stupid, greedy rights sellers. They don't care why or how people consume the media. They only see licenses and money. "Protecting" licenses equals protecting money for them.
DRM is not bad because I want to "steal" anything. It is bad because proprietary software with the main goal of restricting its users leads to a bad experience. Amazon Prime Video for example is horribly buggy and hard to use. If I could use a decent player, I would pay more money for the service. Both sides would benefit from no DRM, but greedy rights sellers don't have logical thinking in their toolbox.