[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dvd-discuss] Cross post of my own work on a DRM committe...

I think this is fairly well thought out:

One of the problems we often have is that:
"Their side" is well funded, and has professional spokesmen, legal staff,
advertizing, and lobbying.  Perhaps more importantly, they are able to
twist the trust into something sounding reasonable, and approach the
matter in a unified way.

"Our Side" is made up of different factions, some too extreme, and so
average people see the extremists and get turned off because many of those
more extreme  views are simply not viable in today's society (i.e. all
content should be forced to be free, IP shouldn't exist, etc.).

Your mini-report here is well thought out, and well reasoned to appeal to
people other than those who just want to leech, and actually to those in
the business of IP, which I am sure was your intention.

 -- noah silva 

On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, John Zulauf wrote:

> Ironically (or not) I'm involved with the DRM committee for a large
> streaming media initiative.  I've been attempting to raise concerns (and
> FUD) regarding the viability and liability of being involved in any
> DRM.  Here (with deletions) is my latest post to that group... 
> Essentially I'm arguing that much (most) of the DRM/TPM efforts are at
> best counter-productive.
> -- begin quote --
> "All views not necessarily held by the author..."
> Another in my series of contrarian DRM views.  These are stated with a
> minimum of moderation, as the intent is to raise a strong devil's
> advocate position to ensure that we act in such a way to maximize the
> success and profitability of (particular semiconductor) hardware members
> (as well as the other stakeholders) deploying with the results of the
> <deleted>
> committee.  
> The fundamental doctrines of this devil's advocate view are: