Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
>
> "DRM is one of the most salient, and least understood, facts about
> technology in
> the contemporary world"
>
> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2014/feb/05/digital-rights-
> management
>
Putting aside the fact that the Guardian Article you linked us to is "© 2014
Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights
reserved." and that Cory was paid to write that political puff piece, he did
mention one important fact:
"You see, contrary to what the judge in Reimerdes said in 2000, this
has nothing to do with whether information is free or not – it's all about
whether people are free."
Removing a person's (or company's) ability to enforce their legal right around
copyright removes a fundamental freedom as well.
Cory is right about one thing: why DRM exists is one of the least understood
facts about technology in the world. Cory continues to perpetuate that myth
that when you "buy" a movie or audio track that somehow you own that creative
work. You don't.
Let me repeat that again - you don't *own* the creative work.
You have a license to use it, and that license also specifies certain
restrictions and restraints. If you are unhappy with that license, you have 2
choices: negotiate a different license or do not enter into the contract in the
first place.
It really is that simple.
This isn't about Free as in Speech, it is about Free as in Beer, and there is
not a sane person in the world who believes that just because you brew beer,
you should be forced to allow anyone to come into your brew-house and help
themselves to your beer.
Finally (and this point keeps getting conveniently pushed aside), if you are
unhappy with the numerous laws around the world that support content owners
right's to enforce copyright, then take your fight there: change the laws.
Whining about a technology that exists because of demand does no-one any good:
if you want to see digital rights controls removed, go fight that in the right
forum. Continued moaning and groaning at the W3C has zero affect on DMCA and
other legislation, and will not remove the need for some form of technology to
ensure that people are "free" to legally profit from their creative works
without the fear of pirates stealing their livelihood or reducing it to a
near-worthless collection of ones and zeros.
JF
