You don't understand how DRM works. It does not prevent deleting or copying.
It only prevents unauthorized copies from being decrypted.

It's the same as when you receive an encrypted e-mail in Outlook from a
friend. You can still delete or copy the file if you want. However, it cannot
be read by unauthorized parties that intercept it.

What you are asking for is an operating system that would convert all
encrypted content to clear-text format....that's a bad idea.

"David Schwartz" wrote:

Ed wrote:

And you have never had DRM technology screw up on you seemingly.

DRM, depending on the terms of use for the specific media, is meant to
limit or stop these exact things. Have you ever read the iTunes terms
of use for music purchased there? It specifically states that you are
limited in the number of times you can burn each song to a cd or copy it.

DRM in WinXP, Product activation doesn't work the way it is supposed to
way too often. Many times activation over the internet should work, but
does not. See the below link.

http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/wpa.html

Technologies like this DO NOT prevent pirating of media and software, it
just treats consumers like criminals.

--
capitan

Or unauthorised monitors playing the video. Your current computer will refuse to play DRM videos

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goodbye Web Diary
http://margokingston.typepad.com/har....html#comments
=================================================
"capitan" <c@pi.tan> wrote in message news:usqu88zJGHA.1676@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...

My biggest concern with all "DRM" is it's longevity and reliability.

So far it has been a Create New process, somebody breaks it
and then it all starts over again. Most PC users cannot keep up
with simple things like Product Keys and Passwords. Image a few
years from now when you need Version 1.2a7 and encryption
package 2.a to play your iTunes 1-27 and another version to get
songs 27-51 to play.

I deal with customers all the time who have these extensive libraries
of DRM music and no inkling how or why to back it up. I'm not
against DRM per-say, but to me it's a make-it-up as you go kind
of technology. One thing today, a new one tomorrow.

"David Candy" <.> wrote in message
news:ekFecA0JGHA.2320@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
Or unauthorised monitors playing the video. Your current computer will
refuse to play DRM videos

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goodbye Web Diary
http://margokingston.typepad.com/har....html#comments
=================================================
"capitan" <c@pi.tan> wrote in message
news:usqu88zJGHA.1676@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...

I'm a fan of normal CDs. Lucky I don't listen to anything newer than 1990.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goodbye Web Diary
http://margokingston.typepad.com/har....html#comments
=================================================
"R. McCarty" <PcEngWork-NoSpam_@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:etgj%23H0JGHA.1032@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

Actually, I've "Digitized" all my music and have it in a pure form.

Unless somebody figures out how to encrypt air molecules I'm
set.

I would say my collection probably stops at around 1977-78.
(Disco came on the scene around then, "Saturday Night Fever"..)

Our neighborhood Record shop does almost all it's business now
in Used CDs.


"David Candy" <.> wrote in message
news:OFX21J0JGHA.3164@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
I'm a fan of normal CDs. Lucky I don't listen to anything newer than 1990.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goodbye Web Diary
http://margokingston.typepad.com/har....html#comments
=================================================
"R. McCarty" <PcEngWork-NoSpam_@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:etgj%23H0JGHA.1032@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

I only have CDs from Enigma (one of theirs is the 1990 one), Led Zepp, Pink Floyd, Dire Straits, and Kate Bush.

These are the ones that have withstood the test of time.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goodbye Web Diary
http://margokingston.typepad.com/har....html#comments
=================================================
"R. McCarty" <PcEngWork-NoSpam_@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:O0OtPY0JGHA.916@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

Yes, I'm aware that there is a limit on the number of copies you can make.
That's the whole point of DRM. You can make legitimate copies (for example on
MSN Music, you can make 7 copies)...If you need more copies, you can always
purchase another license.

There may be occasional glitches with the technology, but that's the case
with all complex software...it's not a reason to abandon technology
altogether.

DRM is no different than any secure method of communication.

If I have private content on a server, I can limit the users to just those
that I authorize using VPN.

If I have a private e-mail, I can encrypt it so that only my designated
recipient can open it.

If I have music or video content, I can encrypt it so that only authorized
purchasers can view or listen.

If you are in favor of eliminating protection on content, then you lose not
only the ability to secure music an movies, but also lose all secure
communications, including secure e-mail.

"capitan" wrote:

Most likely there would be no blocking of analog output.

The idea would be to prevent an unencrypted digital output from being
captured and illegally copied.

"David Candy" wrote: