Slashdot Mirror
More About Copy Control on Hard Drives
ErikSev writes "I know there's already been one /. story about this, but The Register is running a few more that might be of interest regarding the whole scheme to put copy protection on hdds. First is the proposal, then Alan Cox and RMS' responses, and finally the IBM spin on the whole deal. This is definately something we need to be afraid of."
As i see it they are making a very calculated step around your rights.
We have the 'fair use' right because we can purchase equipment that allows us to make copies of digital content.
So the Entertainment Industry (EI) can't break/challenge the courts ruling that allows consumers to have 'fair use' (personal use, archiving, time shifting, etc). So what does the EI do? Lobby the hardware standards bodies to create a method to control content in the hardware that consumers use to copy content (for whatever reason). Bingo, they neatly bypass any 'fair use' problems. Sure you have the RIGHT to make copies of content, but you do not have the RIGHT to equipment that will make copies of content. Once they remove the equipment that anyone can use for copying, the EI neatly excises the 'fair use' thorn that has been in it's side for the last 20 years, neatly putting any/all control back in their hands.
Modify the hardware to make copies of content that has been marked 'do not copy' or 'copy once'? Oops, that falls under the DMCA.
A nice, calculated one-two punch to give the control of 'content' back to the media houses. Stop and take the long term view of the situation. The EI is doing everything that they can to become big brother to all the consumers in the world.
Repeat ad infinitum: Educate the consumers, educate the consumers...
Let people know the following: 1. These new hard drives may break their old software and data. 2. The new drives will not be defragable and will degrade in performance over time. 3. The new drives will be inherently more prone to become corrupted and/or require expensive repairs. 4. They are being presumed dihonest and are being asked to pay the freight for piracy in a way that will inconvenience them far more than a hard drive tax would.
Consumers will say "NO" in the market place and the tech will be DOA. Remember too, a "consumer" is not just joe sixpack shopping at Best Buy. Consumers are: RAID solution providers, OEMs, IT departments who might have to buy all new equipment and software.
If enough large corporate consumers sign some sort of statement to the effect that they won't tolerate this, they can kill it.
Even as a long time defender of intellectual property rights, I am firmly opposed to this technology. It places an undue burden on the innocent in order to punish the guilty (already a disturbing trend in other aspects of society). It will create a lot of uneccessary problems for a lot of people. Efforts can be (and are) better spent going after people in Asia who illegally mass produce copyrighted materials. Don't make my life inconvenient just because of what some overseas criminals and teenagers are doing.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
In the "IBM spin" the IBM rep notes that "These [backups, etc] are good points, these issues will have to be addressed in the marketplace and you're absolutely right - but these have not even been discussed yet." It sounds like they don't really even give a shit about what appear to be fairly serious problems and they are going to resolve them in the "marketplace". So just leave it up to the backup software to take care of it? We'll just create this giant mess and dump it in someone else's lap, as long as hollywood is happy.....or am I reading this wrong?
You now have the means to use a piece of "unapproved" software to view your DVD's and * IT IS LEGAL.*
It is only illegal to * create or distribute* such software.
Anything you can leagally do with your IP you may still do with DeCSS without breaking the law. Only your SOURCE of the software has broken the law.
Read the DMCA very carefully, as well as the decisions handed down by the judges and you will find that this is true. If fact, note that the MPAA and the DVD consortium have not ONCE prosecuted for possesion and/or use, even though they have charged people who both possess and use said software with its distribution.
The law is VERY specific, and again, ONLY its distribution has been, so far, banned.
Maybe there is no compromise between free and proprietary software, or perhaps between free and proprietary information in general. This proposal is just one more indication that the proprietary side simply wants total control over what you can read or see or hear and when you can do it.
Will free software become extinct through judicial order soon? Will Linux become an circumvention device?
I would *think* not since it should be easy to prove that Linux's sole reason for being is not to circumvent this protection scheme, but who knows these days... :(
I can't see any reason why a hardware manufacturer would be stupid enough to implement this. Hardware makers want to sell units. Anything that ticks of customers is not going to sell units.
What's going to happen is IBM and others will make these drives, meanwhile overseas companies like in China will continue to make non-compliant drives and everyone will just buy them instead.
Frankly, I think if I was a stockholder in any company that makes hard drives, I think I'd want to make it very clear that caving to SOFTWARE interests is finacially a stupid move.
It's like 3COM implementing dongles for the PalmPilot to appease software developers. A) it costs 3Com a lot of money B) makes the devices more expensive C) pisses off customers who now have to deal with it and. So, if 3COM did it anyway, their shareholders could sue them for it.
Hardware manufacturers should be like backbone providers and common carriers. It isn't their jobs to regulate or restrict content.
- JoeShmoe
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
The Register, in their series of articles, suggests copy control, which, I agree, is direct, and to the point. This is exactly about control over copying. Right now, the user mostly has it, modulo SecuRom and a few other copy protection tricks, but the companies want it. Badly.
The real differences here are that everyone will be affected, and that the coding won't be easy to circumvent. You see, the hard disks will be made with the coding, well, hard-coded into them. And the principles behind the idea are outragous. It's like telling a person "Yeah, you paid for the book, but you'll have to send us an extra $5 every time you want to read it again." Tell me that doesn't piss you off.
The concept behind Pay Per Read (PPR) is that the people you pay have to have access to your computer. Ergo, companies will gain complete and total control over your computer. Once your can give direct signals to the hardisk, you can do anything you want!
So, if you disagree with anything I've said above, please reply to this comment. I'd really like to hear why having to pay to read a book every time doesn't piss you off.
Now, to take a different view, hardisks aren't licsensed in the way that DVDs are. That means that hardisk makers aren't bound to follow the coding standard. That means that you'll likely end up with 2 standards: encoded (E) and (N) not encoded. However, the E manufacturers will probably want software to recognize that their drive is an E drive. Uh-oh. That means game/software makers can keep their software from being installed on your computer! So now we're back to the "it's-a-problem-again-dept."
So, if that prophecy comes true, what will happen then? Well, you'll end up with a lot of consumers who are even more pissed off. There are 2 solutions to that (for the companies). 1) Team up and beat down the revolt (which, surpriseingly enough happens often), or 2) Give up and go home.
Obviously, you've got to get a lot of people already using the E drives to implement that strategy and be able to use solution 2. So, as long as an initial uprising happens, we'll be OK, right? Probably. And it most likely will happen (everyone, admit it or not, breaks at least one copyright law a week. It's like speeding. Everyone does it, most people do it often, some don't do it often, but everyone does it.) So, since none of what I said above is going to happen, I've needlessly spent 20 minutes pondering and pecking at my keyboard...:(
Conclusion: Make sure you go against copyright protecting drives!
It's all about the Karma Points...
Moderators: Read from the bottom up!
SIG: HUP