Duncan Bayne wrote:
>
> Here's an example of how DRM allows content providers to do the exact
> opposite: charge people signficantly more than others, based on the
> country in which they reside.
I don't see *any* example of DRM in this article, but rather of
"geo-blocking" by IP range, a common and long-standing practice that has
nothing to do with media encryption - the same practice can and is used
today to "tailor" the delivery of "ordinary" (text-based) web content. It is
something of a stretch to somehow associate this practice to media
encryption, but I understand how desperate some are to lay blame for all of
the ills of the internet at the feet of DRM.
I also note with a wry and cynical smile the following statement in the same
article:
"In order to gain proper statistics on online purchasing, it was
recommended that the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) develop a
comprehensive program to monitor and report on IT purchases, both
domestically and internationally, and to look at the size and volume of the
online retail market."
http://www.zdnet.com/the-australia-tax-is-real-geo-blocking-to-stop-70000186
44/
Wait... government tracking of on-line purchases by Australians for data
mining?... Are you suggesting then that government internet tracking is
somehow less "evil" than the private key-exchange and decryption capability
facilitated by Content protection mechanisms such as EME?
No further comment.
JF
