Universal Content Control

[Seth Johnson]

And *this* is *exactly* what's wrong with Palladium and
TCPA.

They want you to talk about how "consumers will benefit,"
while you overlook what they really mean:

*Universal content control* -- the social engineering of an
abject obliviousness to the plain fact that *information is
free.*  It's not that it *wants* to be; it *is* and it
always has been.

Exclusive rights only cover expression, not the elements
thereof.  Nobody has exclusive rights to facts and ideas.

There is simply no reasonable argument anyone is ever going
to be able to concoct to support the ludicrous notion that
constraining our right to use the information we receive,
meets even the most basic of principles of a free society.

Seth Johnson


"John S. Denker" wrote:
> 
> bear wrote:
> >
> > ... I have one box with all the protection I want:
> > it's never connected to the net at all.  I have another box
> > with all the protection that I consider practical for email
> > and web use.  Both run only and exactly the software I have
> > put on them,
> ....
> > That is trusted computing sir, and TCPA/Palladium is a huge
> > step *backward* from it.
> 
> Brother Bear belabors one obvious point while missing a
> more-important obvious point.  What some people want
> is not what other people want.
> 
> The TCPA/Pd designers don't much care whether the
> person who has custody of the machine trusts it.  They've
> been shipping untrustworthy software for years.  The
> thing they care about, probably the only thing they deeply
> care about, is whether _they_ can trust the machine while
> it is in _somebody else's_ custody.
> 
> To a first approximation, TCPA/Pd is for !!their!! direct
> benefit, not for yours.  But to a second approximation,
> they are not entirely wrong when they say consumers will
> benefit, because there are indirect benefits of having
> some sort of system whereby authors, performers, and
> inventors get paid for their work.  Things that are
> simply not available now would become available if there
> were a way people could get paid for creating them.
> 
> You can wish for some Land of Cockaigne where you get
> paid but nobody has to do any paying, but that's a
> long way from reality.

-- 

[CC] Counter-copyright:
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cc/cc.html

I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or
distribution of this incidentally recorded communication. 
Original authorship should be attributed reasonably, but
only so far as such an expectation might hold for usual
practice in ordinary social discourse to which one holds no
claim of exclusive rights.


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