[fjtorres]

The three examples cited are poor excuses for the law:

1- Netflix streaming videos are accessible on-demand at any time so there is no legal use that gets "solved" by letting the user make local copies of the content. They are no more in the business of providing permanent copies of digital content than they are of disk-based content; they sell nothing. They merely rent content. That does not give anybody any ownership rights.

2- Merging ebook collections into one device is already doable via legal means that don't require breaking existing law. More, few people actually need to do it anyway. Better excuses exist for breaking ebook DRM.

3- Samsung passing private info to third parties? No technical solution needed: don't buy from them. Or lobby for a law forbidding it. Sue them if you're bought one without doing your homework and reading the TOS. There might be a class action suit there.

If this is the best the anti-DRM evangelists can come up with, the IP lobbyists have nothing to fear; they can get the project canned on merit. It's a baby-with-the-bath-water proposal that kills legitimate business uses of DRM (digital rental, for starters) for no demonstrable common-good reason.

If they proponents don't come up with better justifications the lobbyists won't even have to call in favors or spend money on bribes.