View Single Post
Old 01-18-2009, 04:04 PM   #28
kovidgoyal
creator of calibre
kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
kovidgoyal's Avatar
 
Posts: 24,769
Karma: 4369667
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Mumbai, India
Device: Various
Quote:
Originally Posted by llasram View Post
Perhaps you're right. My thinking is that the purpose of DRM is to allow rights-holders to control how digital content is used. A particular DRM scheme only achieves that end if every piece of software able to access so-controlled content respects the restrictions the rights-holders place on the content. Truly open DRM necessarily means anyone can produce software which accesses the controlled content without restriction, defeating the whole purpose. If you define the purpose of DRM as something weaker, like "reduce the number of end users copying around content willy-nilly," sure -- then an open DRM scheme could work. My intuition however is that most DRM advocates are thinking of something closer to the former definition.
Any one can produce software to circumvent the restrictions placed by DRM, but it wont be legal to do so. I think that is the principal point of defence for DRM. Any additional security through obscurity is insignificant compared to that.
kovidgoyal is online now   Reply With Quote