From: Mustafa Akgul (akgul@Bilkent.EDU.TR)
Date: Sat 04 Feb 2006 - 20:47:02 EET
Merhabalar,
UZun sure kolay bir cozumunu bulamiyaciyagimiz sayisal urunlerin fikri
haklari konsunda ingilterden bir gorus.
Baslik guzel bir kelime oyunu iceriyor
Saygilar
Mustafa Akgul
----------
his story was printed from ZDNet UK, located at
http://comment.zdnet.co.uk/
Story URL: http://comment.zdnet.co.uk/other/0,39020682,39250242,00.htm
Digital rights and digital wrongs
Leader
ZDNet UK
February 03, 2006, 14:05 GMT
DRM crystallises the relationship companies would wish to have with
their customers. In the case of Sony, that's a relationship that would
probably break anti-slavery laws were it to be enacted on a personal
level. Microsoft says that it's deliberately pricing its DRM to exclude
small developers, which underlines both the company's attitude to its
customers and its intentions for the technology as a lock-in guarantee
for big firms. Respect for consumers is nowhere to be seen: we Don't
Really Matter.
Fortunately, the UK has a tradition of hearing all sides of the
argument. The All Party Parliamentary Internet Group has been listening
to those to whom DRM causes actual harm ? people such as the British
Library, which has a legal obligation to keep records of all
publications in the UK, and the Royal National Institute for the Blind.
For fully able people, DRM is a major nuisance: for those who depend on
machines to bypass a broken sense, it is a new darkness.
Do the pro-DRM arguments make sense? In the US, the record industry is
fighting hard to make DRM an integral part of digital radio, and has
already forced the withdrawal of devices that can record from the
satellite services already available. This hasn't been in response to
actual harm shown, more in expectation of a digital dystopia. Yet in
the UK we have huge numbers of digital radio stations broadcasting to
millions of radios, many that can record directly to memory cards,
without so much as a sniff of DRM. Has this really caused more harm
than a rootkit?
If a company wants to use DRM to control its product, it must of course
be free to do so ? but that mustn't be a licence to control its
customers. DRM restricts the rights of consumers; it must itself be
restricted. Copyright law already has the concept of reasonable time,
so DRM that works for a limited period ? say five years maximum ? and
then leaves the content in clear would both guard the period of maximum
revenue for a product and ensure society's access to its own creations.
Companies that are tempted to abuse DRM may be brought back to the path
of righteousness by a rule that says unreasonable behaviour will result
in the annulment of copyright protection.
APIG has the chance to act in the best traditions of Parliament and
create a proper balance of power and responsibilities between all
parties. We too have our digital rights; we are not just here to be
managed.
Copyright © 2006 CNET Networks, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
ZDNET is a registered service mark of CNET Networks, Inc. ZDNET Logo is
a service mark of CNET NETWORKS, Inc.
_______________________________________________
Linux-sohbet mailing list
Linux-sohbet@liste.linux.org.tr
http://liste.linux.org.tr/mailman/listinfo/linux-sohbet