Re: Why DRM exists [was Re: Flame Linus to a crisp!]

[Larry McVoy]

On Sun, Apr 27, 2003 at 01:35:53PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
[rant, missed the point, thought it was about BK]

Sorry to pick on Chris, but his is the best example of what most of the
replies have been saying.

I should have never brought BK into the conversation, it was just an example.
Remove all references to BK and what you are left with is:

    1) Corporations are threatened when people copy their content and/or
       products.
    2) Corporations have a lot of money which they use to get the government
       to create laws to protect the corporate interests.
    3) Corporations have a lot of money which they use to create technology
       which will remove threats to the corporation.
    4) The more you inist that you are doing nothing wrong the more motivated
       the corporation becomes to stop you.

This isn't a BK thing, we don't have lobbyists in Washington get laws
passed on our behalf.  This is my private opinion based on observing
what's happened in the last five years or so.  The world is moving more
and more towards a place where IP is the significant source of revenue.
Microsoft successfully made the case that if they were broken up it would
damage world economy.  So thinking and laws will evolve to accomodate
this new world wherein IP is a critical factor.  What I'm trying to
say is that I think that the organizations which *create* the IP will
vigorously defend that.  The more you try and circumvent that the more
draconian they will get.

If you want to win, you win by being a creator, not a copier.  That's the
point.  In my opinion, chasing the leader and copying them is a losing
strategy and always has been.  The successes have been when someone
creates something new.  So for both historical reasons and current reasons,
copying as a strategy looks flawed.  And depressing if I'm right that the
corporations will just encrypt all the data so that copying the program 
is pointless.