Intellectual property Toolkit

Story: Anti-DRM day announced

• 
• 

DRM is about controlling access to data. Nothing more, nothing less.

First of all, until DRM prevents me, for example, from taking photos (or print screens) of a computer monitor and rerouting speaker output to a recording device DRM is more about market control then data (security) control.
Remember that DRM is proclaimed as being the answer to what the laws and corporate hotshots want to prohibit but technically can't.

Until then DRM should be avoided at all costs because what looks great and innovative right now will come at a cost sometime in the near future. You like your downloaded and payed for DRM protected data at the moment? Well wait until your computer goes belly up, or you're not up-to-date with the lates software patches, or you don't agree with the latest (future) license agreements. Or you find out that your newly purshased hardware/software isn't DRM compliant enough (e.g., didn't pay enough to the DRM manufacturer), etc, etc.

Keep in mind the choices you have when talking about DRM protected data. Usually you'r vendor locked so whatever the vendor demands you either follow or else. DRM protected data usually comes with restricted access in one way or another, also where paying, legitimate, parties are concerned, so it's not that unlikely that you'll come to a disagreement sooner or later. Most consumers, EU wide, already have significantly more rights then DRM allows them to have (e.g., the right to download whatever music as long as it is for personal use only). DRM usually not only restricts you in terms of what and how but also in terms of where and with what, thus restricting your choise of (software) product and usage rights (which can change over time and not for the better).

In short, today DRM is mostly about market control and in general that is lock-up and therefor not a good thing. Not at least from a consumer point of view. After all, consumers want the best product to win by means of voting with their wallet. Not by having to choose between the least bad choice between available bad choices. Based upon general opinion influenced by huge corporate PR budgets.

So, investing in today's state of DRM actually means voting that this is how you want things to be. Any reasonable amount of (non commercially motivated) research would tell you otherwise, so why vote for the current state of DRM by means of spendig money on it?
Because you don't have any other choice? Really, are you that spineless and uncreative? Or is it the "I don't care as long as they pay me" attitude speaking?

• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

Full Talkback thread