Re: [kFW] Richard Stallman on DRM/Kendra - dilemma...

["Scott Pollard, BIBC" <scott.pollard@xxxxxxxx>]

I don't see the problem Daniel.

Richard Stallman's wording is perhaps a bit emotive, but basically as a
Rights owner, he is correctly asserting his right to give his own software
away.  A different Rights owner has an equal right to choose to charge for
the software, or song, or video that they themselves have created.

No one else has the "right" to usurp or alter that freedom for either
entity.  They may wish they had, but that's another debate, and not one I
wish to enter into.

Giving stuff away is just a subset of DRM -- with a code of zero.  Or, in a
pseudo-meta language:

  user := anyone
  charge:= nil
  expires:= never
  plays:= multiple
  onward-distribution:= welcomed; must-be-the-same
  key:= none

I believe content distribution will always be a hybrid environment with some
content free and some charged for.  Users alone will decide whether content
is worth paying for, and market forces will inevitably prevail.  Already I
am seeing a willingness from users to pay for quality video delivery.

There's no physical or technical difficulty in running a mix of distribution
servers since "paid for" content is just another stream -- to be decoded at
the client end much as is a zip file or Real stream today.

To be a meaningful force in CDN, Kendra must, to my mind, therefore
encompass DRM delivery.

Just my personal tuppence worth to the debate

Scott Pollard

----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Harris" <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <k-framework@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 7:32 PM
Subject: [kFW] Richard Stallman on DRM/Kendra - dilemma...


Hi there All,

I need some help on this one. Richard Stallman (founder of the GNU Project)
receives kNews and sent me this (he's given me permission to reproduce for
purposes of formulating a response)...

 >Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 11:21:43 -0600 (MDT)
 >From: Richard Stallman <rms@xxxxxxx>
 >
 >For those of us who work on free software, Digital Restrictions
 >Management is the enemy.  Its goal is an evil one, the subjugation of
 >the general public by the owners of information.  And in addition, it
 >has the effect of prohibiting free software outright.  For instance, a
 >free program to read a DVD was censored in the US under the DMCA.
 >
 >If support for Digital Restrictions Management is an important part of
 >Kendra, you will exclude our community from supporting Kendra.

And herein lies the dilemma... Regardless of our personal feelings towards
DRM we are building an open platform for content delivery facilitating
revenue generation. The Kendra system has to be all inclusive if we are to
get all content owners and other content related industries on board. Some
of these content owners may want to use DRM. As I have said before we
should not stand in between the consumer and the content owner. If the
restrictions placed on the consumer are too great they will find ways of
getting around it and, most likely, the content owner will loose out
altogether. The content owner will then have to rethink their ways.

If the Kendra system were to ignore DRM completely then we would probably
not be able to gain involvement from many parts of the content industry.

This is not to say that we have to choose between one or the other: between
the free software community or the DRM community. I refuse to choose! I
want both to support Kendra! We have to reconcile. We have to do this to
enable convergence.

How do we reconcile? Or how do we enable DRM without supporting it? We've
got to use our brains on this one. So, thoughts please.

Cheers Daniel