[olug] Fw: FC: Linus Torvalds on digital rights management in Linux kernel

[Brian Wiese]

On Thu, 1 May 2003 11:06:46 -0500 (CDT)
"William E. Kempf" <wekempf at cox.net> wrote:

|
|Brian Wiese said:
|> I like the Register's satirical commentary on the whole story...
|>
|> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/30450.html
|>
|> What's great is the closing lines, similiar to our discussions about
|> the(inevitable?) slippery slope of the argument...  =)
|>
|> ----------
|> Larry McVoy did have a nice summary which, although he may have been
|> talking about patent implications, resonates here:
|>
|> Me: Action A is leading to reaction B which you don't want.
|> You: Action A is perfectly legal, etc., etc.
|> Me: It's not about whether it is legal or not, it's about reaction B.
|> You: Action A is perfectly legal, etc., etc.
|> Me: Reaction B is what you don't want, it's behaviour A which is the
|> cause. You: Action A is perfectly legal, etc., etc.
|> Me: You keep missing the point about the reaction B.
|> You: Action A is perfectly legal, etc., etc.
|> Me: Err, umm, how many times do I have to tell you it is the reaction
|> that is what you want to avoid? You: Action A is perfectly legal, etc.,
|> etc. Me: Sigh.
|> -------------
|
|Absolutely flawed logic, and I agree with Linus.  Technology isn't "an
|action", it's just technology.  By itself, it doesn't "lead to reation
|B". From a technical stand point, digital signing is A Good Thing (TM). 
--
|Copyright laws and the directions they are taking is in this digital age
|scare the $@$!*^$ out of me.  But this isn't occuring because of the
|technology.
--
|So, the technology doesn't "lead" to what you and I both fear.  It really
|has nothing to do with it, other than it's a mechanism that can be used
|to enforce the real issue... bad laws.

I don't think it's flawed logic at all, it's a projection of what may
happen ... not a certainty, but a strong likelihood considering the laws
the way laws are being made.  I don't think the "Action A" is the creation
of DRM technology... but the "way they wan't to apply it" (which is bad).

I don't have much of a problem with DRM, technology, information in
general at all... it can all be used for good or evil purposes... but
thats the catch, the way this DRM is being used, the laws that may make it
mandatory[1] for every "computer" and the way the trust is laid out
(computer actions must be trusted by M$[2], or the user?[3]), I just
currently don't agree that it should be done 'this way'.

Just because something can be done, we need to question whether we should.

[1]  "code but dont try programming act" mandating DRM in everything
http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cbdtpa/

[2] Can you trust your computer?
http://newsforge.com/newsforge/02/10/21/1449250.shtml?tid=19

[3] Cryptographers sound warnings on Microsoft security plan
http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20030415S0013

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html

  Brian Wiese | bwiese at cotse.com | aim: unolinuxguru
------------------------------------------------------
  GnuPG/PGP key 0xF3220030 | "FREEDOM!" - Braveheart 
------------------------------------------------------  
This is not about Napster or DVDs. It's about your Freedom.
  I'll see your DMCA and raise you a First Amendment.
              http://www.anti-dmca.org