Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 30 2013 @ 09:32 AM EDT |
If Netflix's DRM is effective/functional, then you have just handed over control
of your entire computer, not just your "media path" (whatever that
means).
And that's permenant, not just while you have Netflix running.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: PolR on Thursday, May 30 2013 @ 10:22 AM EDT |
> My second comment from the top conceded this point.
I did not see it before I posted my reply. Otherwise I would have written very
differently.
And yes we are not far apart. I don't object to the Netflix scenario. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 31 2013 @ 02:10 AM EDT |
Your car analogy is precisely the reason not to allow DRM into
open standards:
They have rented you something (in this case a car, but it
could be access to media) and have given you full control over
it.
With DRM it would be like they rent you the car but to prevent
you doing anything illegal with it they have an employee sit
in it at all times with dual controls and as soon as the
employee /thinks/ you are going to do something illegal
(regardless of whether you actually are going to do so) the
employee takes control of the car.
Oh, and you have the privilege of paying for board and
lodgings for the employee - the power used by the DRM code -
on top of your rental agreement payment.
cm[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|