BBC on DRM and Trusted Computing

distantbody writes "This BBC article by Bill Thompson is balanced and concise on the issues of DRM and 'Trusted Computing,' and offers some insights as to why such systems are the wrong path to follow for consumers and businesses alike. From the the article: 'We need to ensure that trusted computing remains under the control of the users and is not used to take away the freedoms we enjoy today ... the flexibility of copyright law is something that should be embraced and not taken away.'"

Comments

rms on treacherous computing

[latroM]

rms on the subject if someone hasn't read that yet.

Keep in mind

[JohnnyKlunk]

BBC on DRM and Trusted Computing

Bill Thompson is the Beebs geeky, slashdotty type technology editor. His articles are not representitive of BBC corporate policy, as the headline seems to imply.

EFF and Berkeley

[millette]

The EFF has been following the DRM issue for quite some time now. See also this 2003 conference on DRM at Berkeley.

Re:re-asking the question

[mrchaotica]

if theirs were a "trusted computing" machine, and I had tried to do the same thing for them with my Knoppix CD, would I have been able to?

Absolutely NOT, and that's entirely the point.

Not 100% correct

[jd]

BBC Enterprises makes a decent income from the sale of videos and DVDs to consumers, and master tapes to overseas broadcasters. As such, BBC Enterprises would be hard-hit if piracy were to destroy their markets, which would (in the end) impact the BBC in general.

It is an interesting twist of fate, though, that a significant fraction of the BBC Enterprise's income come from Black and White footage that the BBC Archives destroyed in the 1970s, but was later recovered by enthusiasts, media history fanatics, broadcasters with a sense of history, etc.

Had DRM existed in the 1960s, virtually everything prior to 1970 would have been lost forever. This would have included virtually all the Doctor Who stories, the BBC coverage of the moon landings, and many other recordings now regarded as historic and of extreme interest.

Fans of The Avengers would also have lost out, as many Catherine Gale episodes were recovered from a landfill site, as were the two known surviving episodes from the first season with Dr. Keel.

No, television today would be poorer, had they had DRM back then. The BBC would appear to have learned the hard way, but nonetheless have learned that copyright cuts both ways. It hurts EVERYONE and not just those supposedly targetted.

Orrin Hatch and American broadcasters have never really experienced the devastating losses that can result from a single bad decision. (Well, at least, not in broadcasting. The US has suffered many losses due to bad decisions in other areas of life.) Their refusal to recognise the lessons demonstrated so clearly by others is frightening. Faulty policies, through ignorance, can be excused. But there is no ignorance here. They know perfectly well what others have experienced, and either through arrogance or contempt, do not make any effort to avoid repeating those experiences here in the US.

Re:re-asking the question

[pentalive]

Trusted Computing is necessary, and is good, as long as the user has the last word on using it or not.

If the major reason for Trusted Computing is to protect Copyrighted Works, Then the final password will be in the hands of the copyright owner and not the end user.

Remember they are trying to take over the computer so they can "trust" it, becuase they belive that they can't "trust" the end user.