[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dvd-discuss] Viant report (was Washington Post Article)
- To: "'dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Viant report (was Washington Post Article)
- From: Richard Hartman <hartman(at)onetouch.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 12:09:15 -0800
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
Is this evidence of collusion/conspiracy?
--
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com
186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
-----Original Message-----
From: microlenz@earthlink.net [mailto:microlenz@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 8:06 PM
To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject: [dvd-discuss] Viant report (was Washington Post Article)
> http://www.viant.com/pages2/pages/frame_thought_copyright.html
Here's a few nice exerpts...sorry about the formatting since it was pulled
from a PDF file...that they hadn't exercised their DRM ability in the Adobe
Acrobat to prevent me....
Moreover, DRM has the greatest odds of being effective if it is introduced
subtly, so as not to present an obvious target of opportunity for hackers
(who you know will crack it), but rather to convince non-partisan consumers
who are uninterested
in conflict or complexity that legitimate content is desirable and easy,
rather than challenging and restrictive. What's needed is a "sneak attack."