Digg

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at defectivebydesign.org

DefectiveByDesign - Action alert: Don't let EU sanction DRM

defectivebydesign.org — "As of today, all of the world's largest music labels, have announced the sale of DRM-free music downloads in the United States. That you would take this moment to propose that the European Union seek to impose DRM on European citizens is both senseless and irresponsible."

Bury

joshuagay 229 days ago, made popular 229 days ago

882 diggs
digg it

columb, on 01/05/2008, -4/+29***** DRM.

on the other side- EU is NOT that stupid! (vide - IP, Microsoft etc...) There is a common sense in Brussels :)
- open_sauce, on 01/05/2008, -0/+13agreed, but to the drm-unaware, her proposal may well sound like a good idea, i.e. creating interoperability, simplifying things for the end user, thankfully defective by design is around to keep an eye on things and step up whenever needed.
  - schestowitz, on 01/05/2008, -7/+4Good point. They are trying to turn fire into a friendly fire (fighting fire with fire) rather than simply _extinguishing_ it.
  - therooker, on 01/05/2008, -1/+1True. That's the dangerous thing about this proposal: It could even be used to argument that the major US labels dumped DRM *only* because of interoperability issues, and that they could resume it once that has been straightened out.
    yikes!
- Protonz, on 01/05/2008, -9/+3The solution to problems caused by government is not more government. The EU is not a good thing, but I didn't understand that a few years ago.
  
  You'll come around.
- prophetpimp, on 01/05/2008, -3/+3That belief of the other side being smarter was completely shattered when France introduced their new anti piracy measure late last year. So apart from Sweden don't have high hopes for Europe.
- widgetmaker, on 01/05/2008, -0/+2Brussels isn't a bastion of sensible policy, not tech related but try CAP, their never passing budgets, over zealous health and safety, working time directive
- masamunecyrus, on 01/05/2008, -2/+3"EU is NOT that stupid!"
  
  There's a block of words I thought I'd never see put together.
pupeno, on 01/05/2008, -15/+6I've also posted it on Reddit: http://reddit.com/info/64l7o/comments/
- Scoobies, on 01/05/2008, -0/+1So?
ringokamens, on 01/05/2008, -1/+15Go defectivebydesign! You are heroes
schestowitz, on 01/05/2008, -9/+8The EU intent is to do well, but someone has got to explain DRM to them. Tell them about digital preservation for starters -- and they shall listen.
- Zachariah, on 01/05/2008, -0/+4http://craphound.com/msftdrm.txt
  - schestowitz, on 01/05/2008, -5/+4Watch this new one and be shocked:
    
    http://www.cypherpunks.to/~peter/vista.pdf
    
    Microsoft's DRM plot exposed!
  - Zachariah, on 01/05/2008, -0/+1I guess I should have specified that it's this part they need to read because it will "explain DRM to them" as schestowitz requested:
    
    > Cryptography -- secret writing -- is the practice of
    > keeping secrets. It involves three parties: a sender, a
    > receiver and an attacker (actually, there can be more
    > attackers, senders and recipients, but let's keep this
    > simple). We usually call these people Alice, Bob and Carol.
    >
    > ...
    >
    > Now, let's apply this to DRM.
    >
    > In DRM, the attacker is *also the recipient*. It's not
    > Alice and Bob and Carol, it's just Alice and Bob. Alice
    > sells Bob a DVD. She sells Bob a DVD player. The DVD
    > has a movie on it -- say, Pirates of the Caribbean --
    > and it's enciphered with an algorithm called CSS --
    > Content Scrambling System. The DVD player has a CSS un-
    > scrambler.
    >
    > Now, let's take stock of what's a secret here: the
    > cipher is well-known. The ciphertext is most assuredly
    > in enemy hands, arrr. So what? As long as the key is
    > secret from the attacker, we're golden.
    >
    > But there's the rub. Alice wants Bob to buy Pirates of
    > the Caribbean from her. Bob will only buy Pirates of
    > the Caribbean if he can descramble the CSS-encrypted
    > VOB -- video object -- on his DVD player. Otherwise,
    > the disc is only useful to Bob as a drinks-coaster. So
    > Alice has to provide Bob -- the attacker -- with the
    > key, the cipher and the ciphertext.
    >
    > Hilarity ensues.
    >
    > DRM systems are usually broken in minutes, sometimes
    > days. Rarely, months. It's not because the people who
    > think them up are stupid. It's not because the people
    > who break them are smart. It's not because there's a
    > flaw in the algorithms. At the end of the day, all DRM
    > systems share a common vulnerability: they provide
    > their attackers with ciphertext, the cipher and the
    > key. At this point, the secret isn't a secret anymore.
- therooker, on 01/05/2008, -0/+2Preservation of cultural heritage is indeed a very important thing. I've talked to many people working in governmental broadcast archives - and I was shocked! Most of them don't know about DRM, or didn't think about consequences for archives.
  So if the EU was to be told about digital preservation, they would ask the broadcasters and archivists - and I have little hope that their answers would be helpful. :(
dualityone, on 01/05/2008, -2/+16Please digg this, and even more important: please sign the petition. Most people aren't interested, so also take the time to explain to people what this means, and ask them to sign too. Stupid things are passed by politicians not understanding what they're doing, so it's important we tell them.
- init100, on 01/05/2008, -1/+1"Please digg this, and even more important: please sign the petition."
  
  I won't sign anything that doesn't care to explain how they handle my personal information. They ask for my email address, but how can I trust that it doesn't get posted on a web site (it is an open letter after all), and I'd really not like that.
  
  By the way, why are there two signature boxes? There is no explanation for that either.
  - ubernerd845, on 01/08/2008, -0/+1That's why you have multiple accounts. I used my main one, big deal if it gets published. Nothing will hold me back from signing this thing.
GeorgeWKush, on 01/05/2008, -10/+4Everyone pisses and moans about DRM. Just don't buy anything with it. It's that simple. It might take a decade for EU to find out they're wrong, but it's inevitable.
- ozydingo, on 01/05/2008, -1/+6It might hinder a decade's worth of progress in a continent, but whatever. Brilliant.
- therooker, on 01/05/2008, -1/+1Just not buying it "would" be sufficient, if the majority of people would even know that DRM exists and what it is.
  
  Consumers out there do know and do not care as long as it "works for them" - and furthermore, most of them believe that the ones in charge (e.g. EU councils) know what they're doing. Why should they not buy DRM'd stuff if it they don't see/feel any consequences for them - immediately?
  
  I always here: "Why should I care? I don't know anything about computers and stuff. I just want to play, watch, listen and have fun! I just want my dose of soma"
  - init100, on 01/05/2008, -0/+2Consumers do care about DRM on music. If they didn't, why would the large record companies abandon it? The truth is that DRM is *the biggest* source of complaints for online music stores.
    - GeorgeWKush, on 01/05/2008, -0/+1Exactly. I even feel like an idiot reading about DRM on Digg considering how old news it is.
aimhelix, on 01/05/2008, -2/+8Just like here in the US, they will learn. It might take some time, but THEY will learn and wish they had - sooner.
iAlex, on 01/05/2008, -12/+5European Union at work. Regulations. Bureaucracy. Socialism. No accountability. No voting for Europeans to decide if they want the "EU constitution". The European Union is a nightmare. It's like the "North American Union" in the US, but for Europe. But people in Europe are so brainwashed so they don't give a ***** what EU does, and they don't seem to care so much about politics either because they get their free education.
- lysdexia, on 01/05/2008, -3/+6I don't think I've leapt to the defence of the EU before, but you appear to be someone who has clearly not benefited from EU educational standards. And you had to pay to attain that level of stupidity?
  - iAlex, on 01/05/2008, -5/+2What's stupid? And EU's education doesn't make you smarter, don't you understand that. Truth is hard for some people.
    - iAlex, on 01/05/2008, -4/+2Besides, calling someone stupid is not very effective, you seem to lack arguments.
tgunner, on 01/05/2008, -0/+2It appears to me that the EU is looking more to ensure that consumers do not screwed by harmful DRM (ex. Root-kits.) I don't think that the EU has the power to make US companies sell DRM'ed music when they have stopped such practices in their home country. Isn't Europe still a free market? The consumers will decide what prevails.
- therooker, on 01/05/2008, -0/+0Currently, consumers do not care - and mostly because they do not know.
  I've even seen people who do know, go out and buy the most proprietary DRM'd gadget they could find, because "look! isn't it cool?"
  - init100, on 01/05/2008, -0/+2I assume that you are talking about the iPod. I can confess that even I, who care a lot about DRM, own an iPod. This does not mean that I own any DRM:ed music. The iPod plays unprotected mp3 files just fine.
- martinwguy, on 01/05/2008, -0/+0Mmm. But the rootkits are only possible because MS Windows is so pathetically insecure, booting off a CD as soon as it is inserted, automatically running anything on it without asking you, and immediately giving unlimited access to the entire machine to anything that is run from it, including the installation/replacement of OS components. Same goes for the virus storms that cripple our information structure and make the computin experience a nightmare for most people. *Anything* but windows! :)
shazzb0t, on 01/05/2008, -0/+1Just about all the major labels have started to drop DRM technology, but it wouldn't hurt to oppose this move anyways. In a truly free market shouldn't he consumers' voices be louder than companies'?
kcap122, on 01/05/2008, -10/+1does this matter? EU won't support the U.S. in iraq, why should the U.S. support them over DRM?
- P5ycHo, on 01/07/2008, -0/+1To my horror, the EU was deceived into supported the US in iraq, so shut the ***** up moron. The fact that we got out time must be hurting.
  B.t.w. Why are you guys even there? Oh wait, I remember. Some idiot in the Intelligence Agency drew a picture of a mobile atomic bomb factory and imagined it was real.
  - gnosaj, on 01/07/2008, -0/+1I wholly agree with your sentiments (and I'm an American, even) but I think you're just stepping in trollbait here. Life is too short to waste on morons -- why not simply diggem' down & move on to a comment that warrants a response?
JohnP, on 01/05/2008, -3/+1Sorry but how is developing this DRM solution somehow going to affect you? It sounds like a good idea, DRM isnt only for music!

The EU isnt going to magically apply this to things, im sure the idea is to develop a CHOICE of DRM that isnt quite the devil. Where it is applied is up to the people with digital content to distribute...
- therooker, on 01/05/2008, -0/+1The trend currently is that hardly anyone knows what they're doing - and what consequences that will/could have. Not even the ones that should: For example: Broadcasters, Artists and Archivists.
  
  Most of them do not know or understand the technical aspects of DRM - and thus are incapable of making proper choices in that regard, neither do they think about social/cultural consequences if creative-lock-in became a standard.
  - JohnP, on 01/05/2008, -2/+1Im sorry but thats *****. You all just want something for nothing. Look at the BBC iPlayer, its flawlessly using DRM...
    
    Just because something is utterly retarded when applied to one aspect of life doesnt mean you should scrap it all together.
    
    At the end of the day its up to the distributor. If you think the EU has the power to control all digital distribution then you have no ***** idea about the EUs role.
    
    The problem here is the "me" generations immaturity and short attention span. DRM means that they cant have it for free, so its useless and evil. Naturally. :|
umber2007, on 01/05/2008, -3/+0DRM has died. With the announcement of Sony dropping DRM, we can finally see that the consumers have the ultimate power. DRM free downloads will revive the music industry as we know it. Amazon has started this already.
The proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOU8GIRUd_g
Drakazz, on 01/05/2008, -0/+4I wrote her an e-mail.

I believe in the world of freedom of choice. Not in the world of DRM.
I believe in the ability to have the freedom to choose to do both good or bad things. Not to be restricted to doing a good thing.
I believe in the training of people to make the right decisions. Not to be taught that it is simply against the artificial law.
harlowsmonkeys, on 01/05/2008, -3/+1Wow...all those comments above, and I'm apparently the first here to actually click on the story, click the link in that to get to the report, and click the link there to get the full thing. I deduce this from the fact that no one has pointed out yet that the description here is completely wrong. They aren't seeking to impose DRM. Rather, they are trying to get companies that want to use DRM in Europe to get together and settle on one scheme, so they won't have the mess of multiple schemes that aren't compatible with each other.

This is a very good idea, as DRM is not going away soon. Yes, it is dwindling on music, but what about games, satellite TV, cable TV, DVDs, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, online video distribution? (That's not a complete list).
- therooker, on 01/05/2008, -0/+0I've read the whole proposal - and yet I disagree with you: Having "one DRM to rule them all" does not make anything better. It will only make it easier to keep the customers blind.
  
  As I've already posted above:
  The trend currently is that hardly anyone knows what they're doing - and what consequences that will/could have. Not even the ones that should: For example: Broadcasters, Artists and Archivists.
  
  Most of them do not know or understand the technical aspects of DRM - and thus are incapable of making proper choices in that regard, neither do they think about social/cultural consequences if creative-lock-in became a standard.
  ----
  Just think about where you would be today if the enforcement of intellectual property could have been controlled as seamlessly as DRM-promoters are hoping? (small example: Almost every teacher violates several copyright laws by handing out copies, etc...)
  
  Sharing knowledge and artistic work is what makes a great culture - impeding this can never be good!
- init100, on 01/05/2008, -0/+1I disagree. More incompatibility means more angry customers, which is good as it probably means that DRM is going away sooner than later.
HayaBusaMan, on 01/05/2008, -7/+0EU IS stupid,just see how many laws they have about everything!!!
Communiststate that wants to DECIDE OVER your life!!
Down with Eu!!!
- P5ycHo, on 01/07/2008, -0/+1do some research
bdbr, on 01/05/2008, -1/+1I really wish people would look beyond the scope of purchased music. DRM can still have its place for content that hasn't yet been purchased. Subscription services are the most obvious example, but I think it makes the most sense for previewing. The more compatible these services are with various consumer devices, the better it is for the consumer. Clearly, DRMed content will always be limited in its usefulness to the consumer, but it could be useful for promotional purposes.

This is where government intervention could be useful: to provide a compromise that is fair to both reseller and consumer. They should standardize a method of DRM (so it'd work on any player) but only authorize it for copies that are not for sale. DRM should be illegal on works that are for sale.

This could enable interesting business models. Example: an album is usually completed a couple of months before official release. A label could seed a DRMed version on bittorrent that will let people listen to it as much as they want prior to release (after release, they could be authorized to listen to it as much as they want during a one-week period). The customer hasn't spent a dime yet, and the label get free promotion with only the overhead of the DRM service. If consumers like it, they can then buy a DRM-free copy and do whatever they want with that.

Sure, the DRM will get stripped and pirate versions will be around, but that can't be stopped.

Somehow I expect the biggest objection to this (on Digg) will be the notion that the customer has to actually pay for the DRM-free download. It seems like what people really want is the ability to do anything they want with content they've never purchased; I find myself wondering why anyone (other than garage bands) would bother to create content in such an environment.
jakethecake, on 01/05/2008, -0/+2Signed.
pnrl, on 01/06/2008, -0/+1I don't need commercial entities managing my freedom. Improving business model for extortion isn't a good idea.
Himself, on 01/08/2008, -0/+1great. And once they offer open, lossless formats for download I'll buy, otherwise I'll stick to CDs.
cuzinvinnie, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0I love Freedom
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

DefectiveByDesign - Action alert: Don't let EU sanction DRM

Login or register to add a comment