Thread: Nokia only manufacturer without 'kill switch'?
View Single Post
wmarone is offline wmarone
2010-06-26 , 17:53
Posts: 1,746 | Thanked: 2,100 times | Joined on Sep 2009
#73
Originally Posted by mmurfin87 View Post
I see those two use cases as the same. Please explain the difference you perceive?
You're right, they largely are the same.

Digital Rights Management. It doesn't imply some overarching capitalistic extreme.
Considering it imposes restrictions and no real rights, I don't see the need to expand the acronym. "Digital Restrictions Management" is equally applicable.

Its merely a tool to insure that only paying customers have access. PEOPLE may USE it to implement these sorts of ideas. Then your malice should be directed at those people, not the tool.
Well, the essential -tools- in question are that of encryption and key management. I have no problems with those so long as they're under the control of the user. DRM is deliberately outside the control of the user, whom the vendor sees as a hostile entity to be protected against.

A perfect DRM system would allow people to do what they should be able to do. No more and no less.
Well, that's -your- opinion of a perfect DRM system. I'm sure the RIAA and MPAA's vision of a perfect DRM system is much more draconian and much, much more likely (since they can throw money at it.)

The question is can such a system be created? I am inclined to believe that it can, but I admit I don't want to be the guinea pig for all the iterations it may take to reach it.
The deal here, of course, is that you have no real say in the matter. They will not push for the middle of the road system you described. And if you think they will, you have far, far too much trust in organizations whose sole goal is to earn money.

Man, I'm highly amused at all the pro-DRM arguments on a forum centered on a (mostly) open source phone OS.