[Gllug] Anti-DRM event in Central London tomorrow!

[Simon Morris]

On 29/09/06, Martin A. Brooks <martin at hinterlands.org> wrote:
> Simon Morris wrote:
> > I really hope to see some of the GLLUG membership at the event.
>
> It's not often we directly disagree, but I think this event is confusing
> intent with implementation.  The implementation _is_ appalling but
> saying "DRM Bad" as an absolute is, at best, misleading.  There's
> nothing wrong, in principle, with copyright holders dictating how their
> product is distributed and managed.

Copyright law is very important.. it protects the original
author/artist and defines regulated free use.

What organisations that are developing and deploying DRM are doing is
enforcing restrictions that go over and above copyright law. They are
enforcing the regulated uses of copyright and then restricting the
fair uses that are allowed by copyright law ordinarily.

This is what I object to. I know you are a free software user - why is
it acceptable that media companies are able to define which software I
should use to listen to the media I buy?

Or that I cannot make a second copy to play in my car? Or non-approved
mobile media player?

Or that I cannot convert the music to an acceptable format (Ogg)

These are all fair uses that are allowed under copyright law AIUI but
these organisations see fit to enforce their own laws using
restrictive technology.

> Let's have everyone present at
> this demonstration sign a public declaration that they've not downloaded
> copyrighted material  _before_  they start protesting their rights to
> use the stuff they've actually purchased.

Why? DRM is only partially aimed at stopping so called piracy.

Lessig says it best in that Keynote when he says... (paraphrased)

"My stance against DRM is not aimed at helping you listen to music for
free. This is not Free Beer culture. If I thought protesting against
DRM was helping you listen to Britney Spears music for free I would be
on the other side.

I don't believe people should be able to listen to Britney Spears
music for any price" :-)

As a sidenote have you seen the F.A.C.T. (Federation Against Copyright
Theft) adverts at the end of DVDs nowdays. They have moved on from
warning that if kids watch the latest Disney films using a pirate copy
they will have a fuzzy picture and poor sound.

They now show a man next to a burning pit with a red hot branding
iron. He has red glowing eyes. They speak of piracy and show you
demonic images to enforce the view that this is evil. They then speak
of piracy funding international terrorism and drugs industries.

It is a strong message that they convey and personally I don't buy it.

The Defective By Design campaign is not aimed at condoning or allowing
illegal file sharing. It's about the preservation of choice and
digital rights and I think that's an important distinction to make.

Thanks

-- 
~sm
Jabber: sm at jabber.fsfe.org
www: http://beerandspeech.org
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug