Anti-DRM efforts in Boston and Cambridge

[jwoo at jwoo.net (Jason Woodward)]

>
> On Jun 7, 2006, at 6:35 AM, Jerry Feldman wrote:
>
>> I received this from Peter Brown of the FSF:
>>
>>
>> What is wrong with Apple and iTunes?
>> We have always been able to buy music and copy it for our personal
>> needs. We've all made mix tapes for our friends, or burned a copy for
>> our car, or for our portable device. Big Media figured that with
>> digital
>> technology they could find a way to stop us from doing these things in
>> the hope that they could make us pay for every use. Apple has
>> introduced
>> DRM into their product lines to please Big Media, and to start to
>> impose
>> restrictions and monitoring. As the largest distributor of DRM
>> technology Apple is setting a new low for the mistreatment of our
>> freedoms.
>
>
> DRM is evil but it is a bit misguided to take aim at Apple's DRM.
> Apple is "reasonable" when it comes to fair use.  You can authorize
> up to FIVE players to listen to your iTunes music and you can even
> burn your music to a plain unprotected audio CD.  I think time would
> be better spent focusing on HDCP (high definition content protection)
> and Microsoft's DRM in the upcoming Windows Vista release which are
> by far more draconian (to use M$ lingo.)
>

I believe the reason they chose Apple is because it is the most popular
music download site.  I think the FSF's stance on the matter is that any
DRM is an attack on your right to use the music or video you legally
purchased in the way you choose.  Apple may be more "reasonable" than
others, but it is still limiting what you can legally do with the copy. 
The fact that most people are willing to accept Apple's DRM makes it the
perfect target, given the goal of no DRM.