Re: [Fsuk-manchester] social control by " Digital rights management "

[Andy Halsall]

On Monday 10 March 2008 00:22:04 Peter Colton wrote:
>       Hello all,
>
> From what I can see so far in the posting titled "iPlayer, DRM, Free
> Software and the iPhone" is that some of the BBC content by iplayer is
> now DRM free but all this content is via the iplayer and iplayer can
> only work if DRM is in operation the said computer. 

Not true, The new streamed MP4's do not require any DRM support on the client.

> iplayer is a Government digital torsion horse in the UK...
> The BBC the, mouth peace of the UK government...
> In the near future I bet we hear that a Microsoft user saying that they can 
> not install some software because of DRM but there will not be any concern 
> that they have a spy in there computer.... Where the home computer user
> could be access at any time via the internet by the UK government in their
> war on Terror.   
> DRM could be a tool used by the UK government to control its populist to a
> deeper degree. 

I think that this collection of suppositions are rather unlikely and 
potentially unhelpful.  Quite simply there are three issues here, each one 
that needs to be addressed in a different manner:

Firstly, the BBC's independence, independent media is hard to come by at this 
point in time, I would suggest that the BBC is the closest thing we have.  
Ensuring that the BBC is able to maintain its independence is critical, but 
divorced from wider DRM or Political considerations.  Areas of concern here 
are probably corporate entanglement and software/hardware lock ins, but these 
are both areas where there is oversight and apparently (going on the latest 
iPhone iPlayer beta,) some movement.

Democracy relies on a free and diverse media, without it a population would be 
unable to make any decision when it comes to voting, for that reason we need 
to ensure that the BBC does remain independent and free from outside 
obligations (other than those to its viewers, listeners and readers.).

Secondly, the UK government's security legislation and apparatus.  As it 
stands the UK government seems to be (with ID cards, the new passport, ID 
databases, Detention times, foreign policy, domestic surveillance etc..) 
sliding somewhat to the right.  There are three things that should act as 
barriers to the all out police state you describe.  The first is that we do 
live in a democracy, we can vote for change.  The second is that we have an 
independent judiciary, judges and magistrates are in a position to dampen the 
enthusiasm and intensity of any overly intrusive action or legislation. 
Lastly, the upper house should act as a barrier to populist or extreme 
legislation*.

We need to be pushing the Free software side of this debate forward and, with 
any luck, instigating positive change.  Some of us are already involved in 
other areas such as the no2id campaign and other action groups, this is how 
we effect change.  Scare mongering, is a tactic that is used by the police 
state, it is not a tool, regardless of how effective, that should be adopted 
by those acting against it. 


*Saying that, we are moving in a dangerous direction, an elected house of 
Lords would be a disaster, the Parliament Act already is and the use of 
statutory instruments in the place of proper legislation is also something 
that should cause concern.






-- 
Andy Halsall

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.