[governance] Digital restrictions management in HTML standards

[Norbert Bollow]

Am Sat, 11 May 2013 15:47:36 -0400
schrieb Catherine Roy <ecrire at catherine-roy.net>:

> 
> On 11/05/2013 12:08 PM, McTim wrote:
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/QA/2013/05/perspectives_on_encrypted_medi.html
> >
> > "Different publishers use the Web differently, some choosing to
> > make content available free of charge, others preferring to control
> > access. Most people would agree that individuals and institutions
> > in general should have the right to limit access to proprietary
> > information, or charge for access to content they own."
> >
> > is the crucial bit here...is the CSIGC against folks limiting
> > access to stuff they own?
> >
> 
> 
> As noted by others in the comments section of the W3C's blog post, it
> is already possible to compensate creators or owners of content on
> the Web. The Web can host all kinds of content. It is possible to pay
> for content online. Copyright holders already have access to
> proprietory technologies that enable them to limit access or use of
> content.
> 
> So the issue actually is whether the CSIGC is for enshrining into the 
> core language of the Web, i.e. HTML5, mecanisms for digital rights 
> management, at the behest of the MPAA and other big corporations,
> when mecanisms already exist to do so otherwise. Is the CSIGC for
> allowing these interests to use user agents, i.e. browsers, to police
> access and uses of content and therefore, limit control users have
> over their agents.
> 
> As the saying goes, code is law...
> 

Further, those who hold the keys to those mechanisms (in particular,
the encryption keys) are not likely to allow them be used on Free
Software operating systems (where the freedom properties of the
underlying operating system as a matter of logical necessity would make 
circumvention of the DRM system easy for anyone who has just minimal
knowledge of programming), with the net effect of embedding into the
very foundation of the Web discrimination against Free Software
operating systems.

I don't object against some content being sold. An offer of "if you
want this PDF, pay $x and then you may download the PDF" is ok. I can
choose to accept it or not, and if I accept it, I pay and then
download the PDF, and I'm reasonably confident that it will be usable
on the operating system of my choice (GNU/Linux).

If the idea of embedding DRM into the fabric of the Web is accepted by
W3C and then also in practice, very likely the net effect will be that
users of Free Software operating systems will be locked out. If that
results in Free Software operating systems no longer being a viable
alternative (and hence competition!) to the rather small number of
proprietary operating systems with significant market share, that is
not only bad news for those of us who prefer Free Software operating
systems. It will be very bad news for consumers and consumer rights and
privacy everywhere, because it will dramatically increase the economic
power of proprietary operating system vendors with significant market
share.

Greetings,
Norbert

-- 
Recommendations for effective and contructive participation in IGC:
1. Respond to the content of assertions and arguments, not to the person
2. Be conservative in what you send, be liberal in what you accept

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t