Does DRM Impact Democracy?
from the questions-questions dept
jar writes "If you think DRM only effects your music collection, think again. It goes to the very heart of democracy. While most consumers associate DRM with what happens on their iPod, Bruce Perens discusses how policies that propose "eliminating piracy" actually limit political freedoms. DRM is far from just another consumer issue when legislative efforts like PERFORM and the WIPO broadcasting treaty aim to protect proprietary formats and put choice in the hands of just a few." Specifically, Perens is talking about the legislation we've discussed in the past that would require DRM on streaming audio, noting that this could hold back the discussion. The real situation here is that these laws are misplaced. They're trying to help protect the traditional one-to-many broadcast model of content production on systems that have historically been many-to-many communications platforms. The problem in doing so is that in order to enforce the one-to-many system, you often have to block out parts of the many-to-many system. That's breaking the system to protect one particular business model. The argument, then, is that forcing DRM on a communications system limits the ability of people to communicate -- and, if good communications and discourse is the key to a functioning democracy, forcing DRM on methods of communication could stifle democracy. Obviously, some may see this as a bit of a stretch, but it is at least worth recognizing that there are unintended consequences in calling in regulators to prop up a single business model -- especially when the changes required impact plenty of other systems.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Stretching it further ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Stretching it further ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Stretching it further ...
The DRM activator is an Adobe thing though... and that's just one nice example of how DRM limits what legal buyers can do with electronic media with DRM on it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Stretching it further ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Stretching it further ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM = BullShitake
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: DRM = BullShitake
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: DRM = BullShitake
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
jesus, jezik, shut your damn mouth or you'll give
seriously, i wouldn't put it past someone in hollywood/redmond to try that very thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I understand that some level of security is necessary, that's why my home has a lock on the door, but DRM today is more like the equivalent of martial law:
you can only leave your house between sun up and sun set and there will be roadblocks every 1/4 mile, you must carry id at all times, and violators will be shot on sight.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Retail stores assume everyone's a thief. Ever notice the anti-theft devices when you exit a store? Shame on them, hey assume everyone is a thief! How dare they! Naughty naughty...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
what about me?
Maybe they want their music to be ripped and shared, just to help them gain popularity. The real money for these kinds of artists comes from the shows, not the sales of CD's.
As was said above, they break many models to "fix" one. I wonder if that will come back to bite FM broadcasters in the ass... Gotta protect that streaming audio at any cost!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Not sure if that was meant to be sarcastic or not, but if it wasn't, it is a horrible analogy. With that line of thinking, it's like saying someone assumes their neighbors are thieves for locking their door at night. Then again, you might argue "I lock my door at night because I can't watch it while I sleep." If that is the case, then retail stores, in the same light, only put anti-theft devices on their merchandise because they can't watch it all at once. I mean, the devices do come off when you purchase the product, unlike DRM that is meant to stick with it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Nope, it was not meant to be sarcastic. So if the stores are not putting the security devices on their CD's and DVD's and electronics because they assume someone is going to steal it, then why do they do it? If you don't lock your door because someone out there might be a burglar, why do you lock it? If you don't lock your car when you park downtown Chicago because you think someone might break into it or steal it, why do you lock it?
When it comes to DRM, it's not that they assume everyone's a thief, it's because they know there are some people out there who would rather steal it than buy it.
Now, do I agree with DRM totally? Not anymore. The hundreds of stories and message boards our there did teach me DRM is not all good... I do feel you should be able to buy a song in any form of media and thansform it into any other form of media (like from CD to MP3 to listen to it on your portable audio or vice versa). I don't agree that it should be free. And if you sell it or give it away, you should not be allowed to keep any copies of that song in your posession.
At least that's how I see it. If you prefer, we can agree to disagree on this one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Heck, you even disagree with yourself. No need for anyone else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The analogy to that would be not letting you download your music file until you've paid for it (which I don't think anyone complains about).
A closer analogy to DRM would be the store having a security guard following you around for ever more to make sure you only ever play the CD you bought on their approved CD player - and don't even think of lending that CD to your buddy to listen to...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM is a trade tarif, but worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I Hate DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just something to think about... What if someone set up a website where music cd's were bought and sold for very cheap prices between random people. Could that be deemed illegal?
OK Back to work... hope that makes sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sorry, Brian, that won't work
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sorry, Brian, that won't work
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
correct me if im wrong
if that cd has DRM on it than you are breaking the law just by making a copy, even though another law says it is fair use to make 1 backup of the original.
great laws
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]