[d at DCC] another example of why DRM is unpleasant

[Russell McOrmond]

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Scott Elcomb <psema4 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I for one am not looking forward to the next ~3.85 years.

  While I share your frustration about the inevitability of the attack
on our property rights (non-owner locks on our hardware,
anti-interoperability locks on content that drive people to non-owner
locked hardware), I have to add my commentary on the "3.85 years"
part.

  While we continue to have an ally with Charlie Angus, I'm not even
convinced we can continue to believe we have allies with the NDP as a
whole.   I suspect some people will be surprised what is said by other
NDP MPs who will be in whatever committee "studies" the bill.

  We no longer have to worry about the Bloc, and our worst opposition
in the past parliament such as Dan McTeague (Liberal) no longer have
seats.


  This is an issue where we have a lot of work to educate the public
and politicians.  I still disagree that it is a partisan issue.   When
the Conservatives formed government in 2006 I started to focus on "IT
property rights".   I still believe that if enough Conservatives
understood that there were 4 owners implicated by these bills, not
only one, that their own historical respect for property rights would
lead them to oppose non-owner locks as much as we do.


  Yes, Wikileaks documented how the current government is blindly
listening to US lobbiests (including those in the US government) more
than is healthy, but I don't really believe this is a radical change
from what the Chretien or Martin Liberals were doing.  It was a great
day for technology owners when Sheila Copps wasn't allowed by the
Martin Liberals to run in her historical riding after a boundary
redraw, and then again when her apprentice Sam Bulte lost her seat in
an election.

  We need to remember that this misunderstanding of the nature of
software and digital locks is a problem that goes back to the early
1990's, and is not a "Harper Government" issue.


  I for one will not just be waiting patiently until the next
election, believing that a change in government would change
directions on this policy.  This is something that requires ongoing
education if we are to fix how governments regulate technology.  This
fix may turn out to be easier to accomplish under a Conservative
government...



BTW: Not to be partisan, but I blame political organizations like
Apple and Adobe for these policies far more than I do the
Conservative, Liberal or other such organizations.  We can't get
technical people to stop "voting" for Apple by buying their
policy+hardware, so how can we expect less technologically literate
Canadians to understand these issues?

-- 
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property
rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition!
http://creform.ca/petition/ict/

"The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware
 manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or
 portable media player from my cold dead hands!"