This may be an extreme view, but have you ever wondered why DRM exists?
It exists because highly intelligent people designed it, developed it, and encoded it as software, in exchange for money. Period.
Ok - that's a simplification, but it isn't too far from the truth. These people (short of some kind of compartmentalized R&D model where nobody knew the complete picture - which I doubt happened in this case) each were intelligent enough to think to themselves, and even discuss among themselves, where this all could end up. Where it could lead, what the ultimate goal could happen.
In short - had they given it some thought, they would've been able to see the arguments against and for DRM, and how it could potentially affect consumers, users, and everything else...what we are arguing about today, and have been for a long while now.
So - if they could do this - why did they take the next step, then the next, and so on?
Sure - they needed to eat and pay bills, but we're not talking about had they not implemented it, that they would be instantly unemployed in the industry. They could have each said "I will not do this", and foregone the money.
Of course, the industry could have countered with larger and larger payouts; but if you were in the hot seat, and you had an idea where things would lead, and you didn't like that idea - what amount of money would've made you change your mind to sell out the future?
At what point does the money outweigh your values?
If you are someone in one of these positions, where you know or have an idea of what might come down the pipe in the future (or you know someone in such a position), if you honestly disagree with all of that, you need to make a choice, or speak to others, or whatever. You need to say to yourself, to your colleagues and/or friends in the business that "yes - I will compromise my values for this money" (or if not money, whatever compensation is being offered or procured). You need to be honest about that to yourself and others - no excuses.
Or you must resist, and say "no amount of money will make me change my values; my name and reputation are worth much more than that".
Here's a thought - would you shake the hand of the developer(s) of DVD/CSS, or would you look at them quizzically, and ask them scornfully "why?". Would you shake Jack Valenti's hand and tell him "Nice job!"? (yes I know he's dead)
Ultimately - what I'm trying to get at - it isn't an "us vs. them" situation. It really is "us" and "us" only. We continue to support this, as we continue to rail against it.
I'm not saying if we did anything differently things would have changed. Most humans on the planet honestly don't give a crap about others, about future others, about the political and social consequences of their actions, thoughts and deeds in the now. They barely care about themselves. But if -you- do care about this issue (and a myriad of others), you need to ask yourself whether you support it or not, and if not, what it would take to buy you off - and whether you could live with that.
I think it's a mistake to put such things on those who implement. For any given bad idea, there will always be people willing to take money to implement it.
It exists because highly intelligent people designed it, developed it, and encoded it as software, in exchange for money. Period.
Ok - that's a simplification, but it isn't too far from the truth. These people (short of some kind of compartmentalized R&D model where nobody knew the complete picture - which I doubt happened in this case) each were intelligent enough to think to themselves, and even discuss among themselves, where this all could end up. Where it could lead, what the ultimate goal could happen.
In short - had they given it some thought, they would've been able to see the arguments against and for DRM, and how it could potentially affect consumers, users, and everything else...what we are arguing about today, and have been for a long while now.
So - if they could do this - why did they take the next step, then the next, and so on?
Sure - they needed to eat and pay bills, but we're not talking about had they not implemented it, that they would be instantly unemployed in the industry. They could have each said "I will not do this", and foregone the money.
Of course, the industry could have countered with larger and larger payouts; but if you were in the hot seat, and you had an idea where things would lead, and you didn't like that idea - what amount of money would've made you change your mind to sell out the future?
At what point does the money outweigh your values?
If you are someone in one of these positions, where you know or have an idea of what might come down the pipe in the future (or you know someone in such a position), if you honestly disagree with all of that, you need to make a choice, or speak to others, or whatever. You need to say to yourself, to your colleagues and/or friends in the business that "yes - I will compromise my values for this money" (or if not money, whatever compensation is being offered or procured). You need to be honest about that to yourself and others - no excuses.
Or you must resist, and say "no amount of money will make me change my values; my name and reputation are worth much more than that".
Here's a thought - would you shake the hand of the developer(s) of DVD/CSS, or would you look at them quizzically, and ask them scornfully "why?". Would you shake Jack Valenti's hand and tell him "Nice job!"? (yes I know he's dead)
Ultimately - what I'm trying to get at - it isn't an "us vs. them" situation. It really is "us" and "us" only. We continue to support this, as we continue to rail against it.
I'm not saying if we did anything differently things would have changed. Most humans on the planet honestly don't give a crap about others, about future others, about the political and social consequences of their actions, thoughts and deeds in the now. They barely care about themselves. But if -you- do care about this issue (and a myriad of others), you need to ask yourself whether you support it or not, and if not, what it would take to buy you off - and whether you could live with that.