Re: [Fsfe-uk] DRM, TPM, or what? was: TV show about copyright, the Internet and DRM

[Simon Waters]

Shane M. Coughlan wrote:
> 
> I usually call this DRM measure my handy public key encryption.  It
> existed before the hype of DRM, and I am guessing OpenPGP stuff will
> exist after.

Ah but that isn't DRM, that is encryption. As is the signed binary
example. I've no problem with signed binaries, but DRM would have
someone else controlling whose signed binaries you can run [or how
often, or if you can copy them etc] (rather than yourself, or your
companies IT security officers deciding which were permitted).

DRM is about getting legislation in to control peoples activity, when
cryptography is doomed, i.e. when you ship the decryption keys to
everyone because you want a broad audience for your content. Think DVD,
or Adobe eBooks.

As such DRM will always be about restricting peoples freedoms.

Admittedly it will probably make some doubtful activities (copyright
infringement) marginally harder, but at what cost to the freedoms of others?

Admittedly if you are prepared to only accept executables from signed
parties trusted by a third party, the scope for viruses is reduced
(although assuming Sony and Microsoft are representative sample of
organisations controlling DRM, the scope for spyware may not be
decreased as much as some expect). Although I get most of the benefit by
only installing software signed by Debian developers, and they don't
seem that keen on installing spyware (the popularity-contest deb aside).

Whilst we are about it perhaps we should let the Catholic church decide
which books should be published, I believe they have a list ready and
waiting of those that shouldn't be read.