Not so fast
Posted Aug 2, 2005 14:40 UTC (Tue) by
Ross (subscriber, #4065)
In reply to:
Copyright is NOT Censorship by AnswerGuy
Parent article:
Microsoft's DRM vision
First of all, it depends on how copyright is implemented. But the simple
fact is that because it gives one group the right to tell other groups to not
do certain things that it can be used for censorship. It conflicts with the
first ammendment. The answer to that has always been to limit the coverage
of copyright: it is only on the fixed expression, not the idea; it can't
protect parodies or commentary; it can't limit usage of small portions; it
can't limit usage at a different time/place; etc.
However DRM isn't directly the same as copyright. And the DMCA is not
really a copy right, but an additional right granted to copyright holders
who use technical methods to lock up their works. These can certainly be
used to censor and they have none of the mitigating factors of traditional
copyright.
Essentially the way it is designed is that the person who designs the DRM
sets the rules. Maybe they say that you can only run drivers signed by
Microsoft. Maybe they say you can only play music with watermarking from
one of the major studios. Maybe they say you can't install another OS on
your computer. There are a zillion ways that censorship can happen (and
has), and not only that but we know that certain companies are motivated
to censor their competitors and sometimes even their customers.
(
Log in to post comments)
