- From: Andreas Kuckartz <a.kuckartz@ping.de>
- Date: 16 Dec 2013 21:39:31 +0100
- To: "David Singer" <singer@apple.com>, "public-restrictedmedia@w3.org" <public-restrictedmedia@w3.org>
- Cc: "Fred Andrews" <fredandw@live.com>, "public-html-admin@w3.org" <public-html-admin@w3.org>, "timbl@w3.org" <timbl@w3.org>
David Singer: > you continue to confuse surveillance and DRM; the fact that you don’t > like either does not, in fact, make them the same or even related > problems. I disagree with much of what Fred Andrews wrote. But this statement is correct: >> DRM is a security problem that would take away citizens control of >> their own computer and would be a vector for commercial and state >> actors to compromised citizens privacy. DRM can in practice not be implemented using copyleft FOSS licenses and proprietary software generally is less trustworthy than FOSS. As Bruce Schneier wrote: "Closed-source software is easier for the NSA to backdoor than open-source software." http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/05/nsa-how-to-remain-secure-surveillance And to make this even worse some jurisdictions have made it illegal to disassemble or reverse engineer DRM software. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management#Laws_regarding_DRM And we all remember what perhaps is the most well known DRM software so far, the Sony BMG rootkit, do we? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal I suggest to move this discussion to public-restrictedmedia@w3.org where it belongs. Cheers, Andreas
Received on Monday, 16 December 2013 20:39:58 UTC