[11394] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: dangers of TCPA/palladium
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (R. Hirschfeld)
Thu Aug 8 13:56:38 2002
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 19:25:31 +0200
From: "R. Hirschfeld" <ray@unipay.nl>
To: remailer@aarg.net
Cc: adam@cypherspace.org, cypherpunks@lne.com,
cryptography@wasabisystems.com
In-reply-to: <09fdc16bc6a040e13686c9150aca01d9@aarg.net> (message from
AARG!Anonymous on Mon, 5 Aug 2002 16:25:26 -0700)
Reply-To: ray@unipay.nl
> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 16:25:26 -0700
> From: AARG!Anonymous <remailer@aarg.net>
> The only way that TCPA will become as popular as you fear is if it really
> solves problems for people. Otherwise nobody will pay the extra $25 to
> put it in their machine.
Although I support the vote-with-your-wallet paradigm, this analysis
seems overly simplistic to me. Macrovision doesn't solve problems for
most VCR purchasers, but they pay for it anyway. They have no choice.
In some cases people are required to buy and use something that they
might not otherwise be inclined to pay for, e.g., catalytic converters
in automobiles (which also use palladium). It doesn't seem reasonable
to similarly require TCPA in computers, but legislators might think
(or be lobbied) otherwise.
If the fears that some people have expressed prove justified and TCPA
becomes primarily a means to enforce draconian copyright restrictions,
then people may well choose to pay for it just to regain pre-TCPA
functionality. In that case, the problems it solves for them are the
same ones it causes!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com
