Skip to main content

Historic Social Online Uprising over HD-DVD Decryption Key

Yesterday, the social networking site Digg community vehemently refused a cease and desist / take-down order on a user posting an HD-DVD decryption key (granting a very technical user the ability to copy DRM-protected movies) online.

Interestingly, Digg management/owners pulled the user post down. However, the community revolted and "forced" the post back online (by repeatedly re-posting the decryption key). This event should prove historic because a social / community uprising "won". The "protesters" may not have been right (as in law-abiding) but I think digital freedom is right (as in morally).

This looks a lot like the Boston Tea Party to me. No one likes DRM: it's intrusive and it interferes with my right to use the content. If I paid for Spiderman II on DVD, then it should damn well play on every single DVD player I own--including my laptop. Therefore, these protesters dumped the tea overboard by providing the entire Internet with the keys to the castle.

With the recent legal setbacks to the RIAA campaign of fear, I think the tide has swung toward free content (as in liberty...not as in beer). I don't believe in stealing and I don't believe in giving content to those who haven't paid for it (should it cost). However, the RIAA is incorrectly pursuing a social and marketing problem with a technology and legal solution.

Here's an idea: stop shoving discs full of 9-I'd-rather-poke-a-pencil-in-my-eye songs coupled with one good song. If I like a song, I'll download it onto an MP3 player...and yes, I'll pay for it. And stop releasing crummy movies you know will flop only to up prices to cover these failures. Make better bets! (C'mon, Snakes on a Plane? Please.)

My advice for the RIAA: (1) create better content. [Most] People will pay for great content. Lexus Nexus...The WSJ... (2) drop all forms of DRM--it just ticks off consumers and presents a barrier to your content and (3) drop all legal pursuit of DRM "violations". Ok, yes, Suzie Smith is violating the law by downloading Hannah Montana without paying for the MP3 but your Draconian Gestapo storming her bedroom with flash-bangs isn't the kind of country I want to live in.

Update (5/3/2007): Looks like there could be some scary legal repercussions for Digg...

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Get Your Team Foundation Server Hate On!

[Google ranking skyrockets... ;-)] I'm a big fan of TFS/VSTS. However, there are a good pocket of folks who take issue with the way TFS handles or implements a certain feature. Well this is your chance to vent! I'm planning a presentation around the "Top 10 TFS/VSTS Hates and How to Alleviate Them"...or something along those lines. But I need your help. Post a comment below detailing your dislike. If it's legitimate, I'll highlight it in the presentation and [hopefully] provide an alternative, resolution, or work-around. Thanks in advance! Update 7/19/2008: Version Control and Microsoft

Rollback a Ooops in TFS with TFPT Rollback

Rhut roe, Raggie. You just checked in a merge operation affecting 100's of files in TFS against the wrong branch. Ooops. Well, you can simply roll it back, right? Select the folder in Source Control Explorer and...hey, where's the Rollback? Rollback isn't supported in TFS natively. However, it is supported within the Power Tools leveraging the command-line TFPT.exe utility. It's fairly straightforward to revert back to a previous version--with one caveot. First, download and install the Team Foundation Power Tools 2008 on your workstation. Before proceeding, let's create a workspace dedicated to the rollback. To "true up" the workspace, the rollback operation will peform a Get Latest for every file in your current workspace. This can consume hours (and many GB) with a broad workspace mapping. To work around this, I create a temporary workspace targeted at just the area of source I need to roll back. So let's drill down on our scenario... I'm worki

Installing the .Net Framework 3.0 SP1 on Windows 2003 Server

I'm building an [automated] build server requiring the .Net 2.0 and 3.0 runtime. Unfortunately, at my client, they leverage a proxy server. The standard .Net 3.0 SP1 framework redist is really just a bootstrapper. Logged in as a local admin on the box, I didn't have the opportunity to authenticate the installation EXE with my domain credentials. So, the install kept timing out. Finally, I found this helpful post from Aaron Ruckman on how to download the very elusive, full framework package. It's here , BTW (x86). I finally get the full installation EXE downloaded to a fileshare, re-run the install and wham--" XPSEPSC: XPS must be installed..." Excuse you? This isn't an XPS ...it's a VM. I found a few MSDN posts here and here outlining the problem. I'm still not clear on what XPSEPSC does (Google yielded little) but you can download it here (x86) . After installing XPSEPSC, the framework installed without issue. Update : Somewhat related, there i