[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by markiehill

You say that the content will be encrypted for the user, what with the users PGP key or something is that your idea ? What happens if user A emails the content to user B, is it wrapped in some kind of envelope that sends a request to the server in your theory ?

The idea was to prevent sharing since I want to keep track of how many times a particular work is downloaded - since that's how authors get compensated. If works were allowed to be shared between people, it wouldn't get recorded and authors would miss out on compensation.

I simply used encryption as a method to lock the content to one person in such a way that it would be difficult to casually give it to someone else.

Originally Posted by markiehill

Also in terms of a content tax, to make it fair you would have to allow people to opt out of the content tax, not everybody consumes content. Some people would react strongly to being charged for a content they do not consume.

You can't opt out of paying taxes that fund your library.
You can't opt out of paying the fees that allow you to hear music on the radio.
You can't opt out of paying the feed that allow you to see shows on broadcast TV.

I would argue that everyone enjoys and benefits from artistic works during their normal day. Some people just enjoy those works more than others.

Originally Posted by markiehill

I think what i have been trying to get across is that i am in favour of a fair system, fair to both content creator and content consumer and i don't believe that such a thing exists at present.

That's what everyone wants (except the Content Cartel). But the problem is that DRM is inherently unfair to the consumer. Which hurts the creator because "DRM" means "don't buy it" to many people.