Slashdot Mirror
FSF Sees Hopeful Signs Before Sunday's 'Day Against DRM' (defectivebydesign.org)
The Free Software Foundation's anti-DRM initiative "Defective By Design" argues that since last year's annual Day Against DRM, "we've seen cracks appearing in the foundation of the DRM status quo."
The companies that profit from Digital Restrictions Management are still trying to expand the system of law and technology that weakens our security and curtails our rights, in an effort to prop up their exploitative business models. But since the last International Day Against DRM, the TPP trade agreement -- a key pro-DRM initiative -- crashed and burned. And our allies at the Electronic Frontier Foundation brought major legal and regulatory challenges against DRM in Washington DC... If we play our cards right, this may be the beginning of the end of DRM.
On Sunday, July 9, 2017, we will channel this momentum into the International Day Against DRM. We'll be gathering, protesting, and making -- showing the world that we insist on a future without Digital Restrictions Management. Will you join us? Here's what you can do now:
They're asking supporters to plan a protest, translate their fliers into more languages, voice support in videos and blog posts, or make endorsements. And you can also join the "DRM Elimination crew" mailing list or their Freenode IRC channel #dbd for year-round conversation and collaboration with the anti-DRM movement -- or simply make a donation to show your support.
On Sunday, July 9, 2017, we will channel this momentum into the International Day Against DRM. We'll be gathering, protesting, and making -- showing the world that we insist on a future without Digital Restrictions Management. Will you join us? Here's what you can do now:
They're asking supporters to plan a protest, translate their fliers into more languages, voice support in videos and blog posts, or make endorsements. And you can also join the "DRM Elimination crew" mailing list or their Freenode IRC channel #dbd for year-round conversation and collaboration with the anti-DRM movement -- or simply make a donation to show your support.
It is correct though.
They use language that's intentionally deceptive to fool people and lawmakers, and the FSF just fights back.
DRM manages restrictions. So it's fine to call it that.
Whether you believe it's a misnomer or not, DRM usually refers to "digital rights management" instead of "digital restrictions management" like what's in the summary.
I would argue that it is usually meant to stand for "digital rights management" but that it does actually refer to digital restrictions management. Once it gets to the user, DRM does not manage rights; indeed, it interferes with actual rights, like fair use. That is why DRM is best referred to as "digital restrictions management".
Slashdot used to actually be a news site
You must be new here. That's never been true. Slashdot has always been a discussion site, and has never been a news site.
hence the former motto of news for nerds, stuff that matters. Now, it's run by terrible editors and spews propaganda.
You must be new here, it has always been run by terrible editors and it has always spewed propaganda. What's different today is all the apologists like you who love sucking corporate cock.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
...most people would not understand what I am talking about.
It does not matter whether it is Widevine CDM, HTML 5 standards, Trusted Computing or something else.
Most people roll their eyes, when I mention freedom, privacy, and rights in the context of electronics. They often say, "Let them track me. I am not doing anything wrong." or "I need this for work." or "I don't care how it works. Just make it work." They slowly accept their freedom crumbling away.
The general populace is not impressed by:
-Examples where people are stopped or pulled over to have their phones searched.
-By police raids based on incorrect information upon users of IP addresses.
-By illegal seizures of bank accounts.
-By texts used as courtroom evidence on a daily basis.
-By people who are rendered unemployable, stalked, or killed over social media content.
and many more stark examples of their rights being violated.
While I am a true believer in Richard Stallman's wisdom, I find it disheartening to work toward compelling the ignorant masses to do what is in their own best interest. Unfortunately, many seem to be perpetually immune to common sense.
Citation needed.
No, it really isn't. This is just basic logic. For example, if everyone did as the infringers do, taking a copy of a work without paying for it, would the creators receive any compensation at all, never mind more than they would have received if everyone just paid directly?
We have libraries for more than 2 kiloyears and they never needed DRM.
And how many of those libraries could buy one copy of a work and then provide infinite copies simultaneously for all of their visitors to keep? Indeed, how many bought works at all? How many works did they even have, and how many libraries were there?
When it took a skilled artist thousands of hours to produce a single duplicate copy of a book, everything was copy-protected, yet somehow society and culture survived.
When the only way to fund such work was patronage of one kind or another, the creation, reproduction and distribution of substantial works was a viable profession for only a few people, and far less work was created, and it was enjoyed by far fewer people.
If you want to have a reasonable debate about the merits or otherwise of copyright in the 21st century, it's helpful to talk about the economics and society of the 21st century as well.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Consumers of content should also be able to choose any lawful mechanism to enjoy the intellectual property that they've paid for, and DRM interfers with that. In particular, when it prevents fair use, which is instituted by the very same law that defines the existence of intellectual property, DRM is as illegal as unauthorized copying.
I buy DVDs from the local second hand place and watch them. That way the copyright holders never see a penny of what I spend
Yes they do. The existence of a 2nd-hand market supports a higher 1st sale price. I will pay more for a new DVD or book if I know I can resell it to get some of that money back.