DMCA bad for Apple Users
Aguazul writes "TidBITS has published a really strong article on the DMCA and on how this is bad for Apple users, with some good links and suggestions for action. The author, Adam Engst, is regularly voted the most influential person in the Mac world outside of Apple, so this is a serious wake-up call to Apple users everywhere."
You know, the DMCA and DRM are two quite different beasts, and you don't have to agree with one to agree to the other.
I have severe issues with the current incarnation of the DMCA. It's broken, it can go after that most sancrosanct of creatures, the software engineer, and it gives ridiculously strong legal protections. It's also way to abusable for things that it wasn't intended to cover, like MS using it to keep (non content-related) protocols closed. Having the government, which I pay money to, enforce laws that prevent me from writing software is objectionable to me.
OTOH, I think that DRM is a great idea. Fun, even. The satellite TV wars are, I think, one of the neatest things going. The company engineers manage to make it annoying enough that your average Joe is willing to just pay for his TV. Hackers are having a fun time competing with the engineers. It's a technical war at its finest. If the company engineers eventually come out on top, more power to them. They fought the good fight and won. Just as I support not artifically restricting the rights of someone to write copy protection bypassing software, I support the right of the TV engineers to write whatever protection software they want. This has always been the case, ranging from the days of colored watermarks to screw up Xeroxing to now.
But, you might think, digital copy protection is harder to get by than analog copy protection? Tough. It's also much easier to *copy* digital information en masse than it is to Xerox something a thousand times.
I'd like the DMCA gone, but that doesn't mean that DRM should go away.
May we never see th