DRM != locked up

>From: David.Parrott@reuters.com
>Message-ID: <T596eb11cb0c407b707194@reuters.com>
>Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 16:58:43 +0000
>To: Susanne Guth <susanne.guth@wu-wien.ac.at>
>Cc: www-drm@w3.org
>Subject: Re: European Commission considers mandatory digital 
>rights   management
>The problem I have in discussing DRM is that most people
>assume it is all about "locking up" content with encryption and
>restricting access to it.  It's a fair misconception, given the case
>history to date.  However, the more enlightened are trying to
>move away from that and towards an enabling infrastructure,
>built from a mixture of legal, commercial, and technical tools,
>that will promote business and improve the consumers lot too.
>If that sounds too idealistic, then perhaps we should give up on
>digital commerce altogether.  Personally, I think there is much
>positive work to do.  DRM is in its infancy.  There have been
>false starts.  I hope that everyone's voice is heard by legislators
>and standards makers.  It won't go away, so let's make it work.

I totally agree with Dave on this one.  It's harder than it should be to 
find (since it took me searching the doc for "free" instead of just 
skimming it) but it's expressed in the description of the XMCL initiative:

"Second, it proposes that all media content has business rules (implicit or 
explicit). Attaching business rules to content isn't necessarily about 
enforcing payment or maintaining security. It is equally valid for a 
content creator to want to allow free loans of the content or to prevent 
others from charging for the use of their digital media." from 

The point of automated rights management is that "works" can be made more 
accessible and more easily found because the rights holder can be assured 
their wishes are respected without having to resort to off line restrictions.


Received on Wednesday, 27 March 2002 19:36:16 UTC