However much we might not like the term, and however much it is, indeed, a "propaganda term of the enemy," "Technological Protection Measure" is the term defined and used in bill C-11 (just as it was in C-32, C-61 and C-60 before it), and is on its way to becoming the term in law.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Docid=5144516&File=72#16 We can argue about whether or not it is a good, meaningful or useful term to use, but if we're talking about the bill specifically, there isn't another term to use. Darcy. On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 3:27 PM, David C Dawson <[email protected]> wrote: > To be clear, I was referring to "Technological Protection Measures", > Not "Trusted Computing Model". > My objection to "Technological Protection Measures" was that > in my mind, the excessive vagueness would make it open to > abuse. - (this seems to have been addressed further down in the thread.) > > On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 01:33:12AM -0500, Michael Faille wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> I think end users can control TPM since they must own private key. >> >> So, where is the probleme with TPM? It's like data encryption for me. >> >> The problem is the misuse of TPM (when motherboard owner didn't own the >> privatekey). It's like the misuse of UEFI : >> http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/ >> >> My 2 cents, >> -- >> Michael Faille >> >> On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 1:24 AM, David C Dawson <[email protected]>wrote: >> >> > Quick response -- >> > I regard these strictly as concepts: >> > I think of 'TPM' as a superset of 'DRM'. >> > Both are a convenient fiction. >> > They both give a 'rights holder' cart blanche, up to a point. >> > but 'TPM' provides more scope for abuse - terrifyingly so in my view. >> > >> > I sent the link to Matthew Skala's excellent article because >> > I thought his line of reasoning could be developed further to >> > encompass 'TPM' >> > >> > I think, already that his article demonstrates the sort of thinking >> > from which the 'DRM' concept came - that is, 'DRM' is supposed to be >> > able to make 'content' 'change colour' if 'DRM' is circumvented. >> > >> > That might be fuzzy thinking in my feeble old brain. but there it is. >> > >> > Is it useful and/or possible to ask Matthew Skala for his input on this? >> > /Dave >> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 03:51:34PM -0500, Russell McOrmond wrote: >> > > >> > > On 12-02-17 01:09 PM, David C Dawson wrote: >> > > >Please take a look at this link: >> > > >http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23 >> > > >> > > I did, back in 2004. I also skimmed again today to remind me of >> > content. >> > > >> > > Matthew Skala is one of the people who has been actively involved >> > > in this area of policy from the beginning, including on the general >> > > digital-copyright.ca forums. (even back when it was still called >> > > canada-dmca-opponents http://www.digital-copyright.ca/discuss/10 ) >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Curious what made you think of it? >> > > >> > > The colour being discussed in the article is a human trait, and >> > > one of the obvious failings of attempts at "DRM" (however you want >> > > to define that acronym) is to try to program computers to make human >> > > decisions. Even if we can make sentient computers, they still won't >> > > be human. Computers can help humans with metadata to make good >> > > decisions, but can't make those human decisions for us. >> > > >> > > >> > > It is separate from the question of how rules for decisions are >> > > encoded (in software) and where are those decisions made (in >> > > hardware, not in "content") when those decisions are made by a >> > > computer. The colour of the bits of the content addresses a >> > > different set of confusions between technical and non-technical >> > > people. >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/> >> > > Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property >> > > rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition! >> > > http://l.c11.ca/ict >> > > >> > > "The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware >> > > manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or >> > > portable media player from my cold dead hands!" >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > fsfc-discuss mailing list >> > > [email protected] >> > > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfc-discuss >> > >> > -- >> > David Dawson VE7HP VE7HDC >> > IRC: (Freenode) VE7HP >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > fsfc-discuss mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfc-discuss >> > > > -- > David Dawson VE7HP VE7HDC > IRC: (Freenode) VE7HP > > _______________________________________________ > fsfc-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfc-discuss _______________________________________________ fsfc-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfc-discuss
