Microsoft's DRM vision - It won't work.

Microsoft's DRM vision - It won't work.

Posted Aug 1, 2005 19:15 UTC (Mon) by chel (guest, #11544)
Parent article: Microsoft's DRM vision

Just read part 3. I think you must live in Redmont to invent something like this. Just read this paragraph:

"Perhaps most significantly, the PE will be subject to a "global revocation list" maintained by Microsoft and distributed through Windows Update and possibly other channels. Microsoft will maintain and sign the revocation list, and its updates will have ever-increasing version numbers. Works meant to be played back through PMP can require a particular minimum revocation list version number; the PE will not allow a restricted work to be played at all unless the computer has loaded a revocation list at least as recent as the one specified by the work. If a software component appears on the revocation list, the PE will not load it, or will warn applications that a revoked software component has been loaded."

The system is too complex, too shortsighted, too centralized, too single vendor to work. It won't happen and if it happens, it will be broken. If it happens and is not broken immediately, it is against several laws that protect competition.

Gee, what a chain of hardware, software and network requirement to enable you to play the music you bought.

Just one thought. The rights on a recording of a performance will last for 50 years, after that the recording will be free of rights (unless law changes during these years). Will the system work for five decades? Will it evaporate after that? Will I have to use the same hardware for 50 years to execute the rights I have bought. Where do I go if I can't play my music after 15 years? (Ever tried to open a 15 yoears ol MS Word document?)

The demand for this functionality is not a real demand but just some paranoia from the entertainment industry. An industry build on the idea that recording, duplication and distribution is difficult, and now wants to keep the world from turning. You had the same kind of stupid ideas about Xerox machines. There were some restrictions like these in DAT and DCC hardware. DCC failed completely, DAT never reached the consumer market. Professional users of DAT are not at all amused by these features. When will the industry understand that "making copies" is fair use in most countries.

The schema reminds me of the stupid SCO license enforcement schema. That schema helped a lot to convince management to completely dump SCO and switch to Linux.

---

(Log in to post comments)