[d at DCC] Editing of 2-TPMs/2-owners petition text...
wgm at telus.net
Mon Jul 3 07:53:44 EDT 2006
On July 3, 2006 02:19 am, Don Kelly wrote:
> "THAT technical protection measures (TPMs) used by copyright
> holders have caused problems ranging from unwarranted access to
> private information, restricting a consumer's choice of playback
> devices, to the high-profile circumvention of security facilities
> on thousands of computers by the Sony-BMG RootKit;"
> Basically, I just don't like the use of the word "invasion". :-)
Well the purpose of the exercise is to be clear. If our language is
too bland our meaning will be muddy and vague. I take your point
though about "invasion" although one does usually talk about
"invasions of privacy". Should we not stick with the idiom? If not
how about violation or intrusion? My computer is definitely my
space and I do not want CHs TPMs inserted where they do not belong.
By "unwarranted access" I think you mean unauthorized access.
We have to make it clear that users have property rights and that
those rights are being abused. Warrant refers to something that
authorizes. Authority refers to actual rights.
Also it's not just "private information" that's accessed or
"playback devices" that are restricted. TPMs also access hardware
and restrict playback software choices as well. As has been stated,
we have to address both the software and hardware sides of the
"Security facilities" sounds like a building used by CSIS. !=:->>
The rootkit didn't just circumvent security it installed itself on
the users system. To me that is at the very least an intrusion if
not a full frontal invasion.
Soooooo Here's another rewrite:
THAT technical protection measures (TPMs), as implemented by
copyright holders, violate end users privacy rights, prevent
consumers from enjoying content on devices and software of their
independent choice, and circumvent and compromise the security of
thousands of computers, as was the case in the high profile
Sony-BMG RootKit fiasco.
More information about the Discuss