[A2k] DRM is the wrong term

[Hervé Le Crosnier]

	Hello,

	I fear that the discussion will be hard. I've seen
	this on other lists.

	The problem is using the term DRM (or even TPM). Because
	wathever the content we put into the words, there's already
	some content in the acronym, and it's not our.

	For now, DRM schemes, whatever their tehcnical side are :
	- private contracts embeded into any digital document
	- that need a key to open the document
	- that don't free the user of the burden of transfer and
	  copy of any document he or she owns (with regular rights)
	  on another computer/player...
	- that don't guarantee fullfilling of legal rights (because
	  as private contracts they are above law)

	Some of you are talking about counting for access. It means
	counting when dowloading (any tech method)... And I think it's
	allright (i have to write a paper on this this week..). But DRM
	schemes are control over any use of a document. Not downloading,
	but every time you listen, see or read a "protected" work.

	So the copyright is not anymore an industrial right
	(reproduction and representation), but a direct control from
	owner over the user. It's really a dramatic change on the place
	of copyright.

	DRM is not a scheme where the content industry (and the authors)
	have something to win. It's a trojan horse for the "control
	industries" that want to embed into any digital action for
	tracing, logging, filtering, profiling,...

	I think we musn't use that term in any of our declaration.
	DRM is a coded word for "control".

Hervé Le Crosnier