- From: Casey Callaghan <caseyc37@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 06:43:29 +0200
- To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Cc: Fred Andrews <fredandw@live.com>, "public-html-admin@w3.org" <public-html-admin@w3.org>, "timbl@w3.org" <timbl@w3.org>
On 16 December 2013 21:30, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote: > Fred > > 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. As I understand the situation, the purpose of DRM is to ensure that a certain piece of media is consumed only in accordance with the rules laid down by the seller of said media (usually, this implies a limited number of viewings, of viewed only on a single computer). There are two ways, as far as I can see, in which this can be implemented. The first is control; the DRM technology can attempt to take control of the computer, at least with regard to certain activities (e.g. copying the entertainment media onto a CD) away from the user. A particularly infamous example of this approach is the Sony rootkit. The second possible approach is, yes, surveillance; the seller ensures that they know about any uses of the media, and can identify illegal ones or duplicate registrations and take relevant steps. Any system that involves registration of the media on some server, or media that can only be consumed by visiting some website, falls under this approach. Is there some approach to DRM that I am missing, some way to handle it that does not fall under either Control or Surveillance? Casey
Received on Tuesday, 17 December 2013 04:44:48 UTC