On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 15:28:50 -0800 Stephan Somogyi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 16:38 +1300 04.01.2008, Peter Gutmann wrote: > > >At $1.40 each (at least in sub-1K quantities) you wonder whether > >it's costing them more to add the DRM (spread over all battery > >sales) than any marginal gain in preventing use of third-party > >batteries by a small subset of users. > > I don't think I agree with the "DRM for batteries" characterization. > It's not my data in that battery that they're preventing me from > getting at. Correct. In a similar case, Lexmark sued a maker of print cartridges under the DMCA. Lexmark lost in the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court declined to hear the case. See http://www.eff.org/cases/lexmark-v-static-control-case-archive and http://www.scc-inc.com/SccVsLexmark/ --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
