dangers of TCPA/palladium

[Jay Sulzberger]

On Mon, 5 Aug 2002, AARG!Anonymous wrote:

< ... />

> Why not give the market a chance?  Company A provides the data with
> Draconian DRM restrictions; company B gives you more flexibility in what
> you do.  All else being equal, people will prefer company B.  So they
> can charge more.  In this way a balance will be reached depending on how
> much people really value this kind of flexibility and how much they are
> willing to pay for it.  You and I don't get to decide, the people who
> are making the decisions about what content to buy will decide.

I am much in sympathy with the "Give the market a chance." slogan.  But
TCPA/Palladium/DRM and Jack Valenti are not.  Nor are you.  Phillips could
make and sell a device, even the sort of trammeled computer that Jack
Valenti wishes to be universally imposed by law, within one year from
today.  Indeed, IBM, Sun, Apple, Dell, Sony, and any number of other
companies could have sold such a device any day they wished over the past
fifteen years.  Yet they have not.  So the market has decided, by your
standard.  The decision is clear: No DRM.

>
> And nobody's got the root key to my computer.  You make this claim in many
> places in the document.  What exactly is this "root key" in TCPA terms?
> The endorsement key?  It's private part is generated on-chip and never
> leaves the chip!

Of course, the minimal demand of the pro-DRM forces is to have root on
every machine in the world, with evasion of their root control a felony.

You support DRM lock stock and barrel, no matter your demonstrably
inaccurate claims that

1. You are all for the market.

2. Well, DRM is not so bad, see, RIAA-MPAA-AAP will give us all root on
their machines, so it is all equal!

3. Why, your computer will be exactly the same under DRM as it is today,
except better!

>
> > 5. Strong enforcement for the software renting model -- the types of
> > software licensing policy enforcement that can be built with the
> > platform will also start to strongly enable the software and object
> > rental ideas.  Again potentially these models have some merit except
> > that they will be sabotaged by API lock out, where the root key owners
> > will be able to charge monopoly rents for access to APIs.
>
> I don't follow this.  What root key owners?  What APIs?  Could you say
> more about how TCPA will help with software rental?

Today Microsoft and its script children have root on many machines, yet
there is no single root password for them.  Rather there is a system, which
includes

1. agreements with Dell, IBM, etc., to only offer for sale hardware with Microsoft OSes loaded

2. hardware that only runs right with a Microsoft OS

3. extortionate forced "license agreements" with end-users

4. hypnotic control of the mass media, which always claim that "After all,
you will have to run only Microsoft OSes forever."

5. hypnotic control of the managers who "decide" which OS to run, which
managers always claim that "After all, we have to run only Microsoft OSes
forever."

Of course, this hypnosis is mainly self-hypnosis, with only trim-tab level
direction by Microsoft, Dell, IBM, Sun, Apple, etc..

oo--JS.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo at wasabisystems.com