Hi Shane,
I think DRM will annoy people, but I also believe they will
substantially accept it simply because most large companies will use it.
It'll be the norm.
Yes I see what you are saying especially in the context of products off
the shelf; they'll get what they're given. However, there
Gerry Hickman wrote:
As I see it, the way forward for DRM and trusted computing will annoy
people and they will end up shunning it. To some extent this is
happening already, but even Adobe is in on the act now with their secure
PDFs and most end users will simply end up with what they're given
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
BruceIrving wrote:
That is a very thoughtful and interesting article, Shane. We need more
information of this type and, you are right, we NEED to discuss it. In the
past, DRM fell into the same category as Microsoft's COM -- it does
something,
chris evans wrote:
Who defines this assumed trust in software? The user of the
manufacturer? The way I see it the file can have a crc or md5 signed
trusted info block to verify who wrote/and distributed it. and the user
can have control over which is excluded.
In 'Trusted Computing' the user
Hi Shane,
I think there are four aspects to this that should probably be treated
separately, but are somewhat lumped together in your article.
1. Copyright Protection
2. The reality of what corporates claim is copyright protection
3. Controlling what people can/can't do with their own kit
That is a very thoughtful and interesting article, Shane. We need more
information of this type and, you are right, we NEED to discuss it. In the
past, DRM fell into the same category as Microsoft's COM -- it does
something, but I haven't the slightest idea what it is supposed to do!
Bruce
I think these issues are really important to all Free Software
development. FreeDOS (for instance) does not really help spread
multimedia and therefore is largely excluded from the DRM conversation.
Who defines this assumed trust in software? The user of the
manufacturer? The way I see it the
