I feel the whole premise of the DRM debacule is that the MPAA and RIAA believe that everyone (their customers) is a thief; they add DRM to inhibit 'pirates' and to make 'potential pirate' customers be required to purchase replacement DVDs/HD-DVDs (at full retail price) if a disc is damaged/destroyed.
There is no 'uncrackable' DRM/code; if you have a company of 1000 people building a DRM scheme, you have 10x (or more) as many people working on breaking the scheme: anything engineered can be reverse-engineered. The question is will it be legal to use this for fair use or not?
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I feel the whole premise of the DRM debacule is that the MPAA and RIAA believe that everyone (their customers) is a thief; they add DRM to inhibit 'pirates' and to make 'potential pirate' customers be required to purchase replacement DVDs/HD-DVDs (at full retail price) if a disc is damaged/destroyed.
Hopefully the DMCA Fair Use ammendment will work its way through (everyone should write their local Represenative about this one): http://blog.washingtonpost.com/posttech/2007/02/digital_fair_use_bill_introduc.html?nav=rss_blog
There is no 'uncrackable' DRM/code; if you have a company of 1000 people building a DRM scheme, you have 10x (or more) as many people working on breaking the scheme: anything engineered can be reverse-engineered. The question is will it be legal to use this for fair use or not?