3 ms·

I find it interesting the DRM hate of the crowd given the Libertarian leanings. I'm personally somewhat excited about the prospect of a democratized/p2p and ope

I find it interesting the DRM hate of the crowd given the Libertarian leanings. I'm personally somewhat excited about the prospect of a democratized/p2p and open/ubiquitous DRM. It seems much of the hate is that we don't like being shown we don't really own something completely with no restrictions (the HW or the DRM good) even though we bought it or that DRM gets too much in the way. Seems like the GPLv4 could help with the first former (where the trusted computing bits are opt-out, like in a BIOS or registry).

belorn 10y ago
Which libertarian philosophy is against strong property rights? When someone sell property, the seller should not have a right to exercise powers that are exclusively to the new owner. DRM is the technical method to remain in control over property after sale, where contract would be the legal method when renting out property. In open DRM, how and whose digital rights are being managed by said technology? If I lock down my laptops boot loader, is the laptop the digital right that I am "managing" with said security, or is it simply the terms TPM and DRM that is being incorrectly used interchangeable? To use "Open" DRM on property that the digital property owner also own seems as a very rare situation, for example a music studio whose owner want to prevent employees at the studio from making unauthorized copies. The benefit of "open" DRM seems very minor to the world, where the benefit of open security technologies, such as a TPM, seems as a much grander goal.
- bryanbuckley 10y ago
  > When someone sell property, the seller should not have a right to exercise powers that are exclusively to the new owner. Sorry to say, but it is already the case of many computing devices: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbYXBJOFgeI&feature=youtu.be&t=19m44s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbYXBJOFgeI&feature=youtu.be... If you buy an iPhone, what exactly do you own? I hope this stuff gets cleared up, of course. Would be nice to run some free software on any computing device you own. > DRM is the technical method to remain in control over property after sale, where contract would be the legal method when renting out property. I agree at least the "owner" should be allowed to boot alternative SW, but it means DRM for digital assets will not be functional (you could dual boot..), as well as some silicon, I imagine. > In open DRM, how and whose digital rights are being managed by said technology? If I lock down my laptops boot loader, is the laptop the digital right that I am "managing" with said security No. I mean SW or digital assets (or digital titles to physical assets). Open DRM would be one in which anyone that has some SW/digital asset they wish to use DRM to control the usage of is capable of doing so. Whether or not the gatekeepers will allow it remains to be seen. The effect of p2p DRM on society would be hard to predict.

belorn 10y ago

Which libertarian philosophy is against strong property rights? When someone sell property, the seller should not have a right to exercise powers that are exclusively to the new owner. DRM is the technical method to remain in control over property after sale, where contract would be the legal method when renting out property. In open DRM, how and whose digital rights are being managed by said technology? If I lock down my laptops boot loader, is the laptop the digital right that I am "managing" with said security, or is it simply the terms TPM and DRM that is being incorrectly used interchangeable? To use "Open" DRM on property that the digital property owner also own seems as a very rare situation, for example a music studio whose owner want to prevent employees at the studio from making unauthorized copies. The benefit of "open" DRM seems very minor to the world, where the benefit of open security technologies, such as a TPM, seems as a much grander goal.

bryanbuckley 10y ago
> When someone sell property, the seller should not have a right to exercise powers that are exclusively to the new owner. Sorry to say, but it is already the case of many computing devices: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbYXBJOFgeI&feature=youtu.be&t=19m44s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbYXBJOFgeI&feature=youtu.be... If you buy an iPhone, what exactly do you own? I hope this stuff gets cleared up, of course. Would be nice to run some free software on any computing device you own. > DRM is the technical method to remain in control over property after sale, where contract would be the legal method when renting out property. I agree at least the "owner" should be allowed to boot alternative SW, but it means DRM for digital assets will not be functional (you could dual boot..), as well as some silicon, I imagine. > In open DRM, how and whose digital rights are being managed by said technology? If I lock down my laptops boot loader, is the laptop the digital right that I am "managing" with said security No. I mean SW or digital assets (or digital titles to physical assets). Open DRM would be one in which anyone that has some SW/digital asset they wish to use DRM to control the usage of is capable of doing so. Whether or not the gatekeepers will allow it remains to be seen. The effect of p2p DRM on society would be hard to predict.