Cory Doctorow is in a panic that Apple may add "trusted computing" features to the next generation of Apple OS and hardware. He thinks he'll abandon their platform if this DRM technology is deployed.
I don't agree with this position. It's like arguing that 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine is an evil molecule. It isn't. There aren't evil compounds or techologies; only evil uses and abuses. Outlawing certain molecules, rather than opting for more subtle social regulation, has not had a good record of success. Likewise, entirely avoiding technologies that have potential for abuse just cuts you off from their benefit. And a smaller pool of people enjoying the benefits just increases the strength of the abuser, since their behavior now looks relatively less abhorrent and more normal.
Many of Cory's objections can be managed by a simple OS feaure. At installation time, an application should only have "write" access to DRM-like features if you explicitly say so. And any content you create yourself should always be accessible -- and decryptable -- by you. I would suggest that the freedom fighters campaign for Apple to include user-empowring features.
We probably do need to update retail laws to make it clearer what you are buying in a device or software application. The act of "ownership" becomes rather fuzzy when your actions may be limited by the remote control of a third party. A normal retail sale represents a complete transfer of ownership, and software just isn't conforming well to that model. But if the terms are clear, and the customers buy into it, that's nobody else's business to interfere with.
The potential positive uses of DRM technology are many. I want my content protected just as much as the media company wants to control its content. I want my PC secured from unwanted intrusion. The technology isn't going to go away. It's better to embrace, influence and improve it.
Posted by Martin Geddes at 10:10 AMTrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.telepocalypse.net/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/mgeddes/MT/mt-tb.cgi/528