Started by C-Chan, July 22, 2007, 01:13:31 am
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
QuoteDigital rights management (DRM) is an umbrella term that refers to access control technologies used by publishers and other copyright holders to limit usage of digital media or devices. DRM can also refer to restrictions associated with specific instances of digital works or devices. The term is often confused with copy protection and technical protection measures, which refer to specific technologies that control or restrict the use and access of digital content on electronic devices. Such technologies act as components of a full-blown DRM design.
QuoteConsumer Rights: The most basic argument against DRM is highlighted in the name of the Defective by Design campaign -- namely that DRM technologies result in inferior products with deliberately disabled features. Just as importantly, even if DRM were effective in protecting manufacturers against illegal copying -- which seems questionable, considering how quickly DeCSS appeared once the demand for it existed -- it does so at the cost of existing consumer rights. Users can borrow books from each other, but may not be able to borrow ebooks or mp3 files where DRM is implemented. Similarly, they may not be able to play DVDs from some distributors or install free software, because their hardware only allows registered products from a particular manufacturer to be used or installed. They may not be able to make a backup copy, even in jurisdictions where doing so is legal. From this perspective, DRM continues the trend begun by software end-user license agreements and subscription services, both of which promote the idea that users buy only the right to use the software they buy and do not own it outright. In all these cases, the general tendency is to reduce consumers' rights while reducing the obligations of manufacturers.Violation of Privacy: In the fall of 2005, publicity over Extended Copyright Protection, better known as the Sony root kit, alerted consumers to the possibility that DRM-enabled hardware can be controlled by the manufacturer, and report regularly on its users' activities. This scenario is any system administrators' nightmare; basically, it makes a secure system impossible. Moreover, it violates the privacy provisions in many jurisdictions (but not in much of the United States), most of which gives users the right to know that data is being gathered. Typically, privacy laws also give users the right to know that the data is gathered for a reasonable purpose and used only for the reasons stated and that the data is stored securely. Privacy concerns are the largest non-technical argument against DRM, although conceivably DRM could simply be recognized as an exception to existing laws.Anti-competitiveness: Depending on the implementation, DRM may allow only compatible digital material to play on a given piece of a technology. In other words, to play a Sony CD, you would need to have a Sony player, and non-Sony CDs would require their own separate players. In this scenario, DRM becomes a back door entrance to monopoly. It would prove a detriment to second tier hardware manufacturers unless they could license a major manufacturer's DRM technologies. Even more importantly, it would literally mean the end of free software.Industry Standards: So far, no universally agreed-upon standard for DRM exists. Instead, each manufacturer sets its own standards. To see why this situation is undesirable, you only need to imagine the chaos if car manufacturers could set their own crash safety standards. Not only would people waste endless time shopping around for compatibility, but consumer protection would be impossible. There's a reason why, in other industries, standards are set by consultation and overseen by government agencies -- it's the only way to ensure that the standards are not based entirely on self-interest. If DRM standards were regulated, we might hope that, if DRM were not banned, it would at least be restricted to mild forms that did not violate existing copyright and privacy legislation. The way things are, DRM sets an alarming precedence for other industries by placing the interests of a few manufacturers above the public good.
QuoteAnd naturally compiling your own kernel will help improve speed and performance of Linux on your lappy, although even I can't do that quite yet. ^^;
Quote*straps on crazy sandwich-board, grabs bell and theatrically yells*OPEN SOURCE AT MICROSOFT!!!THE FINAL SIGN ON THE APOCALYPSE!!! BWAHAHAHA!oh, wait, "Applesoft" will be the final sign...*walks away...*
QuoteYou had better be joking XD
Quote'd be afraid anyway. ^___^Normally I'd be happy, but M$ has been quite bipolar about it. On the one hand, you have one section of the megacorporation working towards at least some shady collaboration with Linux developers.. On the other hand, you also have the other half of the company (+ suits) foaming at the mouth and wishing the whole FOSS thing would just shrivel and die, and take Red Hat and Google along with them. ^^;
QuoteAlmost like watching the Crazy Cat Lady from the Simpsons.... -v-;
Quote from: "Bella"*straps on crazy sandwich-board, grabs bell and theatrically yells*OPEN SOURCE AT MICROSOFT!!!THE FINAL SIGN ON THE APOCALYPSE!!! BWAHAHAHA!oh, wait, "Applesoft" will be the final sign...*walks away...*
QuoteComputer with an enforced lifespan? Don't give them any ideas.... ^___^;