It is probably impossible to design such a DRM scheme, but let us assume that:
- You can copy/transfer/access your content whichever legal way you like. Assume a perfect system that enables you to do that, but that doesn't allow you to do anything illegal. If it is simpler, assume that the content is watermarked (in a secure, unbreakable way) so that you can do illegal things as well but they can be traced back to you.
- To be allowed to sell DRM'ed stuff, a company's content must also be uploaded in un-encrypted form to a state-controlled agency (a sentralized, digital library) which will automatically release it in unencrypted form once the copyright expires. (Or rather, once you stop re-enforcing the copyright every year, just to release all "comercially dead" stuff
If you can't answer a hypothetical question, just stay quiet -- don't attack the current DRM system (we all hate that).
Given these assumptions, what then?
My personal opinion, given this unlikely scenario, is that DRM is ok. Not perfect, and maybe not necessary, but still acceptable.
We've bought a 1TB SnapApplicance and it sucks. UPS doesn't work, our backup system doesn't work (absolutely no logs or error messages, impossible to debug), and we've had a total of 3 hard drive failures so far _this_ year. We don't dare to use it, so we keep using our p-pro no-brand home-built server, which have been working for 3 years... and are taking the necessary steps to get our money back.
Oh, and by the way, the support people suck too: Quite friendly, nice to talk to, and they know slightly more about this computer stuff than my grand ma.
Oh, and in addition to incomplete logs: If you reboot your system: Poof. No logs. Which is quite inconvenient, to say the least.
Slashdot Mirror
It is probably impossible to design such a DRM scheme, but let us assume that: - You can copy/transfer/access your content whichever legal way you like. Assume a perfect system that enables you to do that, but that doesn't allow you to do anything illegal. If it is simpler, assume that the content is watermarked (in a secure, unbreakable way) so that you can do illegal things as well but they can be traced back to you. - To be allowed to sell DRM'ed stuff, a company's content must also be uploaded in un-encrypted form to a state-controlled agency (a sentralized, digital library) which will automatically release it in unencrypted form once the copyright expires. (Or rather, once you stop re-enforcing the copyright every year, just to release all "comercially dead" stuff If you can't answer a hypothetical question, just stay quiet -- don't attack the current DRM system (we all hate that). Given these assumptions, what then? My personal opinion, given this unlikely scenario, is that DRM is ok. Not perfect, and maybe not necessary, but still acceptable.
We've bought a 1TB SnapApplicance and it sucks. UPS doesn't work, our backup system doesn't work (absolutely no logs or error messages, impossible to debug), and we've had a total of 3 hard drive failures so far _this_ year. We don't dare to use it, so we keep using our p-pro no-brand home-built server, which have been working for 3 years... and are taking the necessary steps to get our money back. Oh, and by the way, the support people suck too: Quite friendly, nice to talk to, and they know slightly more about this computer stuff than my grand ma. Oh, and in addition to incomplete logs: If you reboot your system: Poof. No logs. Which is quite inconvenient, to say the least.