- From: Emmanuel Revah <stsil@manurevah.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 23:16:34 +0200
- To: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
On 2013/06/11 19:46, Mark Watson wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Andreas Kuckartz > <A.Kuckartz@ping.de> wrote: > >> B. Ross Ashley: >> >>> On 13-06-10 09:20 AM, Emmanuel Revah wrote: >>>> EME/DRM is more comparable to an alarm designed to protect home >> owners >>>> against their own guests. >>> Actually, it is even more comparable to an alarm system to defend >> teh >>> guest against the houseowner! I am not on their machine, they are >> on mine. >> >> +1 (I intended to write the same.) >> >> The houseowner will not be allowed to find out what the alarm is >> really >> doing. It might be monitoring his house silently. Maybe on behalf >> of >> media rights owners, maybe on behalf of the NSA, maybe on behalf of >> both. > > Extended analogies aside, what would be a good way to address this > concern ? That is, how can we give the user the _option_ to > _voluntarily_ accept that certain restrictions be applied to certain > data without opening the door to the security and privacy concerns > expressed above ? I prefer to ask: If there is no other way to restrict content other than by involving privacy concerns, should we still do it ? -- Emmanuel Revah http://manurevah.com
Received on Tuesday, 11 June 2013 21:17:05 UTC