Re: DRM definition Re: What change could we make? (was Re: Letter on DRM in HTML)

Don't forget situations like Kindle where Amazon remotely has deleted files
without noticying the users, that's something really annoying...
El 26/06/2013 11:38, "Nikos Roussos" <comzeradd@mozilla-community.org>
escribió:

> On Wed, 2013-06-26 at 04:58 -0400, Karl Dubost wrote:
> > Renato Iannella [2013-06-26T04:05]:
> > > On 25 Jun 2013, at 22:52, Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> * Could you define DRM in one or two lines?
> > >
> > > Sure, happy to. 12 years ago [1] we defined it as:
> > >
> > > "DRM covers the description, identification, trading, protection,
> monitoring and tracking of all forms of rights usages over both tangible
> and intangible assets including management of rights holders relationships"
> >
> > ok that illustrates one of the core issues in our discussions. This is
> the formal definition of DRM as a system helping to manage the rights. But
> in the pop culture and inside this list I'm pretty sure that most people
> are using the term to say "content obfuscation without user control".
>
> Nobody talked about obfuscation. The "no-user control" part though is
> true. Actually I think the Wikipedia article is pretty good.
>
> "DRM technologies attempt to give control to the seller of digital
> content or devices after it has been given to a consumer. For digital
> content this means preventing the consumer access, denying the user the
> ability to copy the content or converting it to other formats. For
> devices this means restricting the consumers on what hardware can be
> used with the device or what software can be run on it."
>
> >From where I stand this clearly seems to be outside the scope of W3C's
> mission.
>
>
>
>