[governance] Digital restrictions management in HTML standards

[Avri Doria]

good point, but re;

> 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 

Is this really the case?

avri

On 11 May 2013, at 16:13, Norbert Bollow wrote:

> 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


-------------- 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