[Ecommerce] [Fwd: You Own Nothing: Robertson on DRM, GNU/Linux on XBox]

[Manon Ress]

QUOTE:
Some of you may be wondering why having choice over software is a
"liberty" issue. We are quickly moving to a world where every
communication, document, photo, song and movie is digitized and
living on a PC or PC-like device. Software is the gateway to
access parts of those elements. Without control over the
software, there is no control of the underlying digital item.
Your access can be taken away or modified at anytime. No control
means you do not have ownership. This would be like buying a new
home and then finding out that someone else has the keys to the
front door and they control your access in and out of the home.
You'd hardly feel like a home "owner" in such a situation.

Let me give you a concrete example. The biggest deployment of
software control is Apple Computer's iTunes. Unbeknown to most
users, all the music purchased from iTunes music store is only
accessible from iTunes software because of DRM limitations.
Buyers can't decide to listen to their songs on other software or
even other hardware devices - Apple decides that, and they can
change the rules when it suits them. (Apple states this in their
Terms of Use.)

Unfortunately this is not a theoretical risk; it has already
happened several times. Apple removed the ability to stream music
from your home and office if they are on different networks. They
tightened restrictions on how many CDs you can burn. They further
clamped down on how many computers can stream the music
simultaneously. They've even altered the iTunes software to
limiting interoperability with music from competitor Real
Networks. The problem is that this change all take place after
you purchase the music and will continue to happen whenever it
suits Apple. Music buyers are forced to use the new software
because of bug fixes, security issues and new music needs they
have, forcing users to meekly swallow the arbitrary changes Apple
makes, which affects their music purchases. This is analogous to
a rental agreement where the landlord can raise the rent, ban
pets, or change other rules on a moment's notice. Now imagine
this same corporate control over every document, photo, video as
well as music file. This is what Microsoft will have and more if
they can dictate what software can be run on your PC with their
upcoming operating system.
END of QUOTE

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: You Own Nothing: Robertson on DRM, GNU/Linux on XBox
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 01:33:54 -0400
From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org>
Organization: Real Measures
> http://www.linspire.com/lindows_michaelsminutes_archives.php?id=168

You Own Nothing
Date Published: Apr 28, 2005

About a year ago, it was revealed that I was the benefactor for
the $200,000 Linux on Xbox project
(http://news.com.com/Squeeze+Linux+into+Xbox%2C+win+200%2C000/2100-1040_3-941298.html?tag=nl).
The goal was to get Linux running on an Xbox without making any
hardware changes. Many people perceived the project as a jab at
Microsoft. It wasn't. Others thought it was an attempt to get
publicity for Linspire. It wasn't (they used another Linux
product). In fact, I did it in secret so the focus would be on
the technical challenge and the implications of closed hardware.
Only after the project leaders begged me to disclose my name
because it would bring more attention to the effort did I allow
them to tell the press. Though the project did not achieve its
full technical goal, still $150,000 was distributed. To me it was
money well spent because it raised awareness of the biggest
threat to personal ownership in the digital age - DRM (Digital
Restrictions Management).

In spite of sharing the insides with a traditional PC, the Xbox
has a dramatic and dangerous difference. A PC buyer can install
any software or hardware that they wish. They own the machine and
can change it to suit their needs - true ownership. There are no
limitations. This open architecture is largely responsible for
the two-decade personal computer revolution. With an Xbox, the
user is merely renting the box. Microsoft decides what software
(games) users can load and even how they can use it. When it
connects to the net, Microsoft can and has instructed the machine
to change its behavior to block certain users, functionality or
software that it does not agree with. They are changing the rules
after you purchase it to suit their needs and not your needs.

The Xbox served as the training wheels for Microsoft's new
Longhorn operating system, which is slipping to a 2007 launch.
Like the Xbox, Longhorn will limit what software you can load. In
the guise of "security", Microsoft is trying to dramatically
change the way PCs work. Instead of the owner deciding what
software they want to install and run, Microsoft is seizing that
power from them. Under the smokescreen of security, they are
pronouncing that it is good for Microsoft to decide what software
you can use.

It's the ultimate marketing challenge to explain to the world
that turning over more control to Microsoft is an improvement
that computer users should desire and pay money for. Microsoft
has floated a series of hyper-technical sounding initiatives like
Palladium and Next-Generation Secure Computing Base (NGSCB), each
time explaining why it's a good thing for Microsoft to decide
what software users should use. Earlier this week, Bill Gates
talked about how it was like a "black box flight recorder," a
not-so-subtle reference to 9/11 designed to tug on emotions. I
leave it to others to comment on whether Microsoft has the
security track record to decide what software is secure enough
for me to be running. I'm more interested in the liberty and cost
issues.

Some of you may be wondering why having choice over software is a
"liberty" issue. We are quickly moving to a world where every
communication, document, photo, song and movie is digitized and
living on a PC or PC-like device. Software is the gateway to
access parts of those elements. Without control over the
software, there is no control of the underlying digital item.
Your access can be taken away or modified at anytime. No control
means you do not have ownership. This would be like buying a new
home and then finding out that someone else has the keys to the
front door and they control your access in and out of the home.
You'd hardly feel like a home "owner" in such a situation.

Let me give you a concrete example. The biggest deployment of
software control is Apple Computer's iTunes. Unbeknown to most
users, all the music purchased from iTunes music store is only
accessible from iTunes software because of DRM limitations.
Buyers can't decide to listen to their songs on other software or
even other hardware devices - Apple decides that, and they can
change the rules when it suits them. (Apple states this in their
Terms of Use.)

Unfortunately this is not a theoretical risk; it has already
happened several times. Apple removed the ability to stream music
from your home and office if they are on different networks. They
tightened restrictions on how many CDs you can burn. They further
clamped down on how many computers can stream the music
simultaneously. They've even altered the iTunes software to
limiting interoperability with music from competitor Real
Networks. The problem is that this change all take place after
you purchase the music and will continue to happen whenever it
suits Apple. Music buyers are forced to use the new software
because of bug fixes, security issues and new music needs they
have, forcing users to meekly swallow the arbitrary changes Apple
makes, which affects their music purchases. This is analogous to
a rental agreement where the landlord can raise the rent, ban
pets, or change other rules on a moment's notice. Now imagine
this same corporate control over every document, photo, video as
well as music file. This is what Microsoft will have and more if
they can dictate what software can be run on your PC with their
upcoming operating system.

Learn more about Lsongs

I want to own my property. I want the liberty to decide what
software I use. I want the freedom to listen to music and movies
that I pay for on whatever device I want. I might like iTunes
today, Windows Media tomorrow and  Lsongs next year. I want that
choice. The world needs consumers to have that choice so they
will always be treated fairly. If consumers lose the choice they
become locked into one vendor and lose control over the digital
products they had purchased and assumed they "owned."

I don't think Apple or Microsoft are intentionally evil. I just
think that corporations cannot resist the urge to block
competitors and squeeze customers at every turn. If Microsoft
controls what software I can run, they will charge a lot of money
for that software because I will be locked in. If Apple has
control, they will make it only work on their hardware, which
won't be cheap. I don't want any company - even Linspire -
controlling my digital world. If a corporation controls my PC, my
software or how I use my digital property, then I really don't
own it. Historian Lord Acton said it best:

"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern.
Every class is unfit to govern... Power tends to corrupt, and
absolute power corrupts absolutely."


Linspire, MP3.com, SIPphone, MP3tunes, and all the other
companies I am or have been involved with have steadfastly stood
for open standards.  I will continue to champion choice for
consumers so each of us truly can own and control our property,
including the portfolio of digital property consumers are
acquiring in today's ever-expanding digital world.


-- Michael




--
Manon Anne Ress
manon.ress@cptech.org,
www.cptech.org

Consumer Project on Technology in Washington, DC PO Box 19367,
Washington, DC 20036, USA Tel.:  +1.202.387.8030, fax: +1.202.234.5176

Consumer Project on Technology in Geneva, 1 Route des  Morillons, CP
2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland. Tel: +41 22 791 6727

Consumer Project on Technology in London, 24 Highbury Crescent, London,
N5 1RX, UK. Tel:+44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252. Mob:+44(0)790 386 4642. Fax:
+44(0)207 354 0607