WWW inventor Tim Berners-Lee slams plans by Amber Rudd and Donald Trump

[najaB]

And as for Sir Tim he's hardly whiter than white after endorsing DRM as a web standard

DRM makes sense - if you find it reasonable that content creators get paid for their work - so an open web standard is better that multiple conflicting proprietary standards.

 

[SS4]

DRM makes sense - if you find it reasonable that content creators get paid for their work - so an open web standard is better that multiple conflicting proprietary standards.

Having it as a standard means that all browsers will have to include it if they want to conform. Binary blobs (especially closed source) are the antithesis of a free and open web. I suspect firefox will keep it optional but, like all closed source programming, it's impossible to be sure that it's not doing anything if disabled. Remember Flash? How malware prone it was? How buggy it could be? The amount of CPU/RAM it took up? I certainly do and I don't want anything like that forced upon me.

I do not see DRM having much of an impact on piracy. If anything I'd expect to see an increase as 4K takes off - the requirements for netflix 4K in particular are particularly onerous:

Microsoft Edge up to 4K...Streaming in 4K requires an HDCP 2.2 compliant connection to a 4K capable display, Intel's 7th generation Core CPU, and the latest Windows updates. Check with the manufacturer of your system to verify specifications.

Source: https://help.netflix.com/en/node/23742

Then recall that they can change that any time they like and everyone will need to get new hardware to watch in 4k. I can totally see people pirating 4K shows and whilst I don't bother myself I certainly empathise with those who do. DRM lasts until it's cracked too unlike traditional copyright law


I want content creators to get paid as much as the next person but as a consumer I also feel that I should have the right to make personal backups, store it in any manner I see fit, convert it into whichever format I like, consume it on as many devices as I like simultaneously regardless of network status and software/hardware combination. And to have all of them in perpetuity.

That certainly sounds rather Stallmanite but consider a physical CD you may have and count how many of the above you can actually do with it.

 

[najaB]

...consume it on as many devices as I like simultaneously...

How many other things can you do this with? If you buy a car you get one car. If you buy a book you get one book...

 

[HSTEd]

But that's not actually misuse, is it? To my mind, misuse would be something like, deliberately using the data to spy on someone's private life, or to falsely frame someone of a crime they didn't commit, or supplying the data to a company in order to give it an unfair advantage in negotiations and so on. Merely having access to the data doesn't by itself constitute misuse (although it may be unnecessary or disproportionate, depending on the context).

Do you have anything concrete to justify your assertion of a long track record of misuse?

There was that study a few years back that demonstrated that a significant number of NSA data mining requests turned out to be analysts checking up on ex girlfriends and on wives etc etc.

 

[SS4]

How many other things can you do this with? If you buy a car you get one car. If you buy a book you get one book...

Books are cars do not have DRM (sort of). One is free to copy them, lend them, borrow them and modify them.

Other physical objects include CDs, digital music (which tried DRM and failed) and DVDs. Naturally consuming these simultaneously means that a copy must be made which is usually via a digital go-between even if the copy is burnt onto physical media which I see no issue with because that quote was taken out of context which refers to digital media

My issue with DRM is that it can arbitrarily and without notice be used to prevent access to content which has been paid for as well as the ever-present privacy issues common to all closed-source doftware

 

[SS4]

But that's not actually misuse, is it? To my mind, misuse would be something like, deliberately using the data to spy on someone's private life, or to falsely frame someone of a crime they didn't commit, or supplying the data to a company in order to give it an unfair advantage in negotiations and so on. Merely having access to the data doesn't by itself constitute misuse (although it may be unnecessary or disproportionate, depending on the context).

Do you have anything concrete to justify your assertion of a long track record of misuse?

Proving it's being used properly and fairly is all but impossible. The FoI Act has provision to deny requests on a number of grounds and all May has to do is say one of the magic words (terrorism or children) and the press will support her.

The above paragraph ties into the importance of net neutrality - slow down or block sites which are "fake news" and you have a very suspicious broadcast of information

 

[najaB]

My issue with DRM is that it can arbitrarily and without notice be used to prevent access to content which has been paid for as well as the ever-present privacy issues common to all closed-source doftware

Hence why I said that if DRM is going to exist, it should be an open standard rather than a mishmash of competing proprietary ones.

 

[HSTEd]

DRM only works on players that obey it in most cases.
AACS has been broken, just as HDCP 1 was and HDCP 2 is almost certain to be.

Better we let the music and film industry think they are having an impact before they try and do anything drastic. Like trying to make it illegal to play Blu-rays on a player that does not have Cinavia-respecting software installed. Or illegal to make backups of blu-rays in a person's possesion. Or try and turn all items of consumer electronics into legal black boxes that we can't even open.

They haven't yet tried to legislate to prevent us splicing directly into the TV decoder card - panel connection, but they might.