What's Wrong With Content Protection
Misc.
1/22/2001; 1:20:03 PM 'There is nothing wrong with allowing people to optionally choose to buy copy-protection products that they like.

'What is wrong is when people who would like products that simply record bits, or audio, or video, without any copy protection, can't find any, because they have been driven off the market.  By restrictive laws like the Audio Home Recording Act, which killed the DAT market.  By "anti-circumvention" laws like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which EFF is now litigating.  By Federal agency actions, like the FCC deciding a month ago that it will be illegal to offer citizens the capability to record HDTV programs, even if the citizens have the legal right to.  By private agreements among major companies, such as SDMI and CPRM (that later end up being "submitted" as fait accompli to accredited standards committees, requiring an effort by the affected public to derail them).  By private agreements behind the laws and standards, such as the unwritten agreement that DAT and MiniDisc recorders will treat analog inputs as if they contained copyrighted materials which the user has no rights in.  (My recording of my brother's wedding is uncopyable, because my MiniDisc decks act as if I and my brother don't own the copyright on it.)'