Placeholder for publishing a version of my dissertation manuscript.

ArsTechnica reports that Sony is at it again. Another DRM system relased to consumers with a security hole. Sony subsequently released a patch which itself had a security vulnerability. Ars suggests that Sony "drop the whole subject" of DRM. While that's unlikely to happen, this is good evidence that DRM should be developed on open standards using open source implementations so that it gets some proper testing instead of letting consumers beta test it.

Copyfight has been discussing Sony's abuse of DRM in their new copyright protection scheme. Well, now the security vulnerabilities in Sony's DRM software are being used to attack the user's computer: Trojan horse exploits Sony DRM copy protection vulnerability.

Given the general negative attitudes toward DRM and the DMCA among many in the IT community, I would suspect that this may indicate a new trend, where hackers will spend less time creating viruses to harass Windows and turn their attention to DRM. It'll be interesting to see whether or not prosecution under the DMCA will act as a deterrent.

Furdlog's post is very thought provoking, but I'm not sure I can buy into the folding chair metaphor. Inherent within that argument is the copyfighter's understanding of IP as essentially a guardianship/public trust with limited use--not ownership--of IP granted to a creator, the real owner being the public.

So while cultural norms do play into how DRM works, the problem is that the public doesn't see IP in this light. It has often been said that the average person does not understand copyright law. Granted, but they do see IP as owned by the original creator and/or publisher, as invested with some rights of ownership based on romantic notions of authorship.

Ernest Miller's post on Copyfight has initiated some interesting discussion on why use DRM if it doesn't work to stop piracy.

I don't want to disagree with the post and the comments, but I think that they ignore some important psychological benefits of using DRM.

• Like the old saying goes, locks keep honest people honest.
• The content industries have to me seemed panicky over the issue of protection. Enabling even easily crackable DRM on their content probably gives them some feeling of security.
• But most of all, ubiquitous use of DRM creates a cultural climate in which, in the long run, most of society will begin to accept the rights of content creators to lock up their property. DRM creates digital boundaries which help to solidify the boundary function of authorship as explained by Foucault. And DRM doesn't have to work well to do this; it acheives this by acting symbolically.

During the last week, it seems that news about Microsoft shows them busy doing the kind of things that we all love them for:

• Janus, MS's new DRM software, was released on Monday. No surprise that the DRM controls will enable expiration of access to content. Big industry players such as Dell, Disney, and AOL are showing interest. Ready for DVD's and CD's which have a very limited use life? Story at CNN and Ars Technica.
• IP News Blog links to this piece from eweek which suggests that Longhorn delays are aimed at making the next version of Windows as Linux/open source unfriendly as possible (although I suspect that delays are more likely attributed to security problems over Paladium). More disturbing to me is the claim that MS is filing ten patents a day during this time in order to protect Longhorn. Ironic, isn't it, since as Lessig points out in Free Culture
  

  As Microsoft chairman Bill Gates wrote in 1991, in a memo criticizing software patents, “established companies have an interest in excluding future competitors.” And relative to a startup, established companies also have the means.

• Finally, if Microsoft's business practices aren't enough, here's a reason to stop using MSN and Hotmail. MS plans to sell membership on a whitelist for "marketers" whose messages/spam will not be blocked from their members' email accounts. Wonder if they'll turn around and offer paid for spam free services without the whitelist spam to their email members? Via Slashdot.
• UPDATE: Almost forgot this one. Microsoft Watch reports on recommended hardware requirements for Longhorn which will outdate all current computers:
  

  Microsoft is expected to recommend that the "average" Longhorn PC feature a dual-core CPU running at 4 to 6GHz; a minimum of 2 gigs of RAM; up to a terabyte of storage; a 1 Gbit, built-in, Ethernet-wired port and an 802.11g wireless link; and a graphics processor that runs three times faster than those on the market today.

  Could this be the reason for Longhorn delays? Are they waiting for the hardware to catch up with the needs of a bloated operating system? Personally, I think this will just push more people to Linux.