DRM is no solution but a problem.

Am Dienstag, 20 de März de 2007 18:15 schrieb Philippe Verdy:
> > I'll oppose any DRM scheme.
>
> I have not proposed to make DRM mandatory. 

I said, I'lll oppose any DRM scheme, regardless of mandatory or not. 

DRM isn't a solution but a problem, and there are better ways to do what you 
want without using DRM. 

> Only as a way to prove that the 
> licences are valid. Nothing would prohibit to use the file without the
> attached DRM which could be detached easily, whenever the user needs to do
> it legally for its personal use.

For that you don't need DRM. 

A signed (i.e. GnuPG signature) file completely suffices. 

The party you buy from gives you a signed license file which contains your 
name/ID and the file ID. 

The program can then check if you have the proper receipt or not. 

Done. No DRM necessary and secure nontheless. 

DRM would mean, restricting the user from accessing the file, if there's no 
fitting receipt, just as if people took away your goods, when you lose the 
receipt. 

> We, users, are deseperately waiting for reliable backup solutions for the
> costly licences we get. 

We, the GNU/Linux users, want to keep control of our own devices. 
So any DRM will just push all GNU/Linux users away from Gnutella. 

> A licence is nothing else than a service, it is immaterial by nature and

A license is nothing but a receipt which proves that you have the legal right 
to use a file. 

You don't need any DRM to archieve that, as shown before. 

> Remember that if you need to change your hardware just to be allowed to use
> a licence, 

DRM is bad per se, because it takes all control of the computer from the user 
and only gives back a tiny part. 

Talks about how this scheme is less bad than others just avoid the fact that 
it is still bad. 

Ask me to choose the lesser of two evils and I will try to avoid them both. 

Best wishes, 
Arne


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]