Slashdot Mirror
Today Is International Day Against DRM
jrepin writes "Digital restrictions management (DRM) creates damaged goods that users cannot control or use freely. It requires users to give-up control of their computers and restricts access to digital data and media. Device manufacturers and corporate copyrights holders have already been massively infecting their products with user-hostile DRM. Tablets, mobile phones and other minicomputers are sold with numerous restrictions embedded that cripple users freedom. The proposal at table in W3C to put DRM into HTML goes even further. Fight it: use today's today is international Day Against DRM, so spread the word and make yourself heard!"
The EFF suggests making every day a day against DRM.
EA retaliates with International "Fuck You, You're Going To Buy Our Games Anyway" Day.
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
But if one wants to have a specific day to agitate for something, maybe give some advance warning? Also, a better though-out plan than "spread the word and make yourself heard" might also be useful.
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
Simple solution that politicians would have a hard time saying no to. All products that have DRM should be forced to display a DRM warning message on the outside of the packaging in print, TV and on line advertising. The message should explain in simple terms what the DRM does. IE - requires on line connection all the times, Requires Disk in drive all the time, prevents back up copies...etc. There should be stiff fines for selling products with DRM and no warning label. Then let the market decide. DRM is toxic to computers and users. So the proper warning is the right thing to do.
If you don't like a product with DRM, don't buy it.
A required security module can not be activated. Your comment can not be posted.
SecuROM has determined a debugging or an emulation tool is running. Please refer to the following procedure to remedy:
Only on
There are too many awareness days to keep track of, and most of the time you don't even hear about them until the day is almost over. What we need is an International Day Day, so that we can let people know what days are the international awareness days for what topics.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
There is nothing wrong with DRM. Personally, I think it is not a good idea for music or games. Those are things that should exist perpetually and for your own personal use.
However, it is short sighted to say that DRM should not exist. I brought this up in the previous DRM related thread, but people don't think of its best possible uses.
- When a doctor is sharing your medical information to another doctor, wouldn't you want control over when/where that medical information can be viewed? Wouldn't you want it to self destruct?
- When you work under SEC rules and have to provide your financial statements to management for compliance, wouldn't you want control over where/when those can be viewed?
Yes, it is a bad idea to treat your customers like thieves. But it isn't a bad idea when 3rd parties are distributing your private information to other 3rd parties.
You could go to O'Reilly and celebrate by buying any of their 50% ebooks. It jumps to 60% if you're like me and load up your shopping cart like a madman whenever their stuff goes on sale...
There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell 'em.
I'm old enough to remember when the term "minicomputer" was used to describe a computer that fit in a single room. Our desktops were "microcomputers" and our phones and tablets were "science fiction". :-)
Except, in your examples, existing regulatory/enforcement methods seem to work reasonably well already (like HIPAA regulations). Unlike mass media content being sold to (and potentially copied by) zillions of people, it's pretty trivial to determine who is responsible when your medical records show up on the Pirate Bay. Medical and financial professionals might want to build automated compliance safeguards into their own computer systems to, e.g., automatically delete expired "borrowed" files --- but, unlike DRM, such systems can be *entirely under the control of the computer user* (not forced on them by third parties).
1) So what if it's older.
Well it means that they were provably against such things before google came on the scene. Therefore google appear to have not modified the EFF's behaviour.
And so they dance like any hired gun.
[citation needed]
i.e. put up or shut up.
Show one thing where the EFF have gone against their stated goals as a result of google's influence.
3) DRM is secure communication. The pirates are the eavesdroppers.
There's no notion of "pirate" in the cryptography world. Please make some attempt to stick to established terminology otherwise understanding you is quite difficult.
The eavesdropper is the same as the recipient. That's the difference. Eve and Bob are the same person.
Locking up my love letter so only my spouse can read it is the exact technological challenge as locking up my artistic creation so only the non-pirates can view it.Locking up my love letter so only my spouse can read it is the exact technological challenge as locking up my artistic creation so only the non-pirates can view it.
Not even slightly. Pirates aren't eavesdroppers. Your spouse is the pirate. DRM is an attempt to make it readable but not copyable by your spouse.
Quit being a sap for leeching business models
That's an odd allegation.
Quit being a sap for leeching business models. The EFF and Google just want to manipulate you into hating DRM so the money will keep flowing to them.
I disliked DRM before google even existed. It was called copy protection then.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
However, it is short sighted to say that DRM should not exist.
- When a doctor is sharing your medical information to another doctor, wouldn't you want control over when/where that medical information can be viewed?
I think you're confusing encryption (a Good Thing) with DRM (a Bad Thing). If encrypted, only authorized doctors would have the decryption key. They can access the data when needed. If DRM'd , the moment the controlling body -- think online gaming server -- dies or is obsoleted, no doctor will ever again be able to access your records. Not an ideal situation.
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
When a doctor is sharing your medical information to another doctor, wouldn't you want control over when/where that medical information can be viewed? Wouldn't you want it to self destruct?
Hell no, imagine all the medical staff who are kept in the dark because time is of essence and the DRM key is not there. Imagine your data leaked in DRM'ed format, so every hacker can have a go at it. Leaking sensitive information is a completely separate problem. DRM is just an envelope. A problematic one for whoever means good, and a laughable one for whoever means bad. Sensitive information should not be leaked PERIOD. Not DRM'ed, not auto-destructing (if you believe that is possible). DRM is no answer to leaks or security issues.
When you work under SEC rules and have to provide your financial statements to management for compliance, wouldn't you want control over where/when those can be viewed?
Off course not. Management is usually digitally challenged, so you can trust management to treat keys in the worst possible fashion imaginable. So they probably cannot read it anyway AND have published the key in a random social network site before you even know there is a key. If you cannot trust management to deal with sensitive information, you have a completely different problem. DRM will not help you there either. The only thing DRM does is break and annoy by design.
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
Don't buy Televisions from Westinghouse. They're using DRM to restrict over-the-air broadcast reception - the primary purpose of a TV! You have to get a special code from them just to use your TV.
This is one of the very few cases where DRM benefits the consumer, as it keeps the price of the TV lower. Westinghouse does this so that they only have to pay patent royalties for the tuner technology if the tuner is actually used.
Once the tuner is activated, it is permanent until a complete reset of the TV. Even with a reset, the same code will re-activate the tuner, as it is only tied to the serial number. So, yeah, it's a very weak form of DRM, but it's not much of a problem as far as real world use is concerned.
You're describing some kind of science fiction fantasy, not DRM. DRM, as we currently know it today, means that neither your own doctor or the other doctor, is able to view the medical information at all, unless they pay some third party (not you) for some kind of tech license, and passes that cost on to you. And then the licensing body (not you) decides what can be done with the information.
If we had DRMed medical records, every patient would have to ask their doctor to store a second copy of all the records, outside of the broken DRM system, so that the information would actually be accessible when it's needed.
The DRM fantasy industry has had ample opportunity to come up with a non-stupid DRM scheme. They have a 100% failure rate: EVERY SINGLE TIME that DRM has been used, it has interfered with customers and providing incentive for them to cut off revenue, and there have been only a few (edge!) cases (DivX) where the DRM prevented misuses. It's all expense and never provides any benefit. Every time. If DRM failed only 99% of the time, maybe we could chalk it up to growing pains, but right now all evidence points to it being a complete scam.
Imagine an industry where, after a few decades and many many products, 100% of the time it turned out to be fraud. DRM is right up there with astrology. That's how seriously we should take it, and it is an outrage that our government is for it, rather than neutral toward it (the conservative, pre-DMCA approach) or outlawing it (the progressive approach).
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.