DRM technology and policy

[Jurgen Botz]

C Wegrzyn wrote:
> in a totally different way. It is meant to keep most of the people 
> "honest" but will never stop those that really want at the content. If 
> you look at it this way you will see that you don't need to worry about 
> stopping every instance just make it hard enough that 80% (90%?) of the 
> people can't crack it.

The problem with this is that due to the nature of the Internet, or
more generically the increase in social "connectedness", once the
10% of people who can crack it have done so the will redistribute
"cracked" versions to the 90% who couldn't have done it.  And the
only way to prevent that is to attack the increased social
connectedness itself, which is part of what we're seeing with the
current round of "super-DMCA" state laws.  To make DRM work we
have to not only make them a technical obstacle for 90% of the people,
but also criminalize the other 10% and outlaw freedom of communication
and privacy to prevent that 10% from "corrupting" the 90%.

The issue isn't the viability of specific DRM schemes... it's what
would happen to the whole social framework if DMR schemes are viewed
as a necessary solution to some economic problem.  That social effect
is the creation of a new "digital dark age" as someone (Lessig?) has
put it.

:j



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