Slashdot Mirror


Digital Restrictions Management for P2P Systems

Anonymous Coward writes "Digital restrictions management for an open-source peer-to-peer network. Researchers at the Georgia Tech Information Security Center have created a content protection system that is a plug-in for LimeWire/Gnutella. The paper argues that DRM is beneficial to everyone including independent musicians and end-users."

5 of 240 comments (clear)

  1. Re:WTF ? by GigsVT · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why would anyone want to do that ?

    If you havn't installed the plugin, or any DRM plugins, you must be a thief!

    If you aren't doing anything wrong, then why don't you install it?

    (Maybe now all the people that made that idiotic argument in the past in regards to every sapping of our rights will wake up a little)

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  2. Every Time I read "Content" in this article by dfenstrate · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I want to vomit a little more.

    Maybe I'm young and naive, but it seems to me that the entire notion of "content" is offensive. Like the music or pr0n videos or what have you was simply items in a box, with no regard for what's inside.
    Though I suppose you could fairly call Britney Spheres, Backdoor Boys, and We'Stync to be nothing more than worthless coporate content, I cannot equally call the 405 short, Mudhens, Indigo Girls, or a great number of other independant, thoughtful works "content."
    It's their blood & sweat, not a packaged good.

    The notion of content is what allows them to call copyright infringement "piracy", what makes them want to license every listening. The music/videos/whatever are cheap, taiwan-made products to be whored around as much as possible for the greatest profit.

    What they're really exchanging is ideas, peoples feelings, and as Jefferson once said (paraphrasing) 'When I give an idea to you, I am not deprived of it's possesion, but we are both richer for it'


    I'm not saying anything about the entire legality of it, or what I think of this paper (Gee, I didn't know academics were whoring themselves to the entertainment industry lately) but this talk of 'content' is cheapening to the work serious musicians, directors, and artists perform.

    Just venting. thank you for yer time.

    --
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
  3. Re:WTF ? by SirSlud · · Score: 5, Insightful

    >DRM in itself isn't bad, because if the artist wishes to release their song in that format, that is their right.

    Sorry, can you explain to me what exactly the rights of artists are? And why those rights are relevant to the artist given that 98% of the copyright in the western world is owned by corperations?

    The artist is obligated to ensure that, upon claiming protection via copyright, his work is freely accessible 20 years after his death. Should he DRM-ize all his songs to expire after 6 months, and never publish them again, it is the artist that is breaking copyright law (by not making his work available to the commons after his copyright protection has expired.)

    --
    "Old man yells at systemd"
  4. Re:Censorship is never beneficial by AntiNorm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If a company uses the app to spy the contents, they are in voliation of the EULA and you sue

    But then you'll set an EULAs-are-good legal precedent that M$ would just love to exploit...

    --

    I pledge allegiance to the flag...
    of the Corporate States of America...
  5. "We argue... we argue... we argue..." by dpbsmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Go ahead, argue all you like. White is still white, black is still black, two and two still make four.

    "We argue that the lack of content protection is currently hindering the introduction of richer content systems." Yeah, right... and here I thought the INTRODUCTION of Napster and AudioGalaxy had been VERY successful.

    "Content owners will not make content available in the variety, quantity, and format that users want until adequate protection measures are in place." Bullpuckey. I own a Rocket eBook (= REB1100) which has hardware-based DRM locked to a serial number in the device. When I go on a trip I like to load it up with nice easy-reading current mainstream books. And, you know what? They're mostly not available. Never have been, even before the whole eBook scene died. I recently did a check--of about 44 titles on Oprah's book club, which I think is a good test since they're good books, widely distributed, have been out long enough to give plenty of time for conversion, etc.

    In eBook format, with good DRM, about 6 titles are available.

    In audiobook (cassette tape) format--with no DRM, and a much more expensive production process, about 35 titles are available.

    So don't tell me that DRM will increase the choices available to me. It exists, and it doesn't.

    Indeed, one of the whole premises behind the Rocket eBook/REB1100 was good hardware-based DRM. Why did it fail? It was (and is) a pretty good device from a techical, UI, and product point of view. The screen is a lot more pleasant to read than a Palm; it's a lot more portable than a laptop; I can settle in and have a fine "immersive" reading experience with it.

    It failed BECAUSE of a) lack of content--I have more choice in the average airport bookstore than I do in the online "bookstore" for my device; b) overpriced content; and, c) BECAUSE of DRM.