Re: DVDs - err what gives?
On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 10:51:05PM -0500, Kevin Mark wrote:
> Hi A,
> welcome to your first exposure to politics of Free software! DVD css was
> the first flagpole that the entertainment lobby put in the ground to lay
> claim to your property. Css provides no other use but to forbid you from
> fully owning your own property. The next flagpole is apple's DRM that
> they use on their music that stop you from using it anywhere you want.
> Then there was Microsoft windows media player DRM. The other day I
> wanted to see channel4.com's new video-on-demand but it even tighens the
> noose more: it requires you to be in the UK to watch the content (that
> you pay for), only on one computer (that cant be transfered) and you
> need to install window xp, .net 2.0 and window media player 10 and then
> you can only watch it once and when you start to watch it, you have a
> time limit of a day before you are no longer authorized to watch it, the
> DRM essentially prevents you from watching something that you payed for,
> on your own computer. At least the DVD only has CSS and its companion
> the DMCA and it doesnt stop you from watching your own DVD. The point
> with Free software is any free software program that you use to play a
> DVD, apple i-tunes file, other other DRM formats will always be a crime
> according to most nations laws with help from WIPO.(there are exceptions
> to this statement, as other can attest, but its not getting better) Go
> to wikipedia and check out 'drm', 'dmca' and 'decss' for the basic
> details. Anyway, even Pink Floyd could not have dreamed up something so
> twisted as DRM :-)
> cheers,
> Kev
(hope these links still exist.)
http://www.eff.org/Infrastructure/trusted_computing/20031001_tc.php
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html
OK, these links are old but they are indicative of worse to come.
--
Chris.
======
" ... the official version cannot be abandoned because the implication of
rejecting it is far too disturbing: that we are subject to a government
conspiracy of `X-Files' proportions and insidiousness."
Letter to the LA Times Magazine, September 18, 2005.
Reply to: