En Linux Journal nos explican en una lectura de 5 minutos por que el DRM es malo para los usuarios finales.
Consumer Rights: The most basic argument against DRM is highlighted in the name of the Defective by Design campaign — namely that DRM technologies result in inferior products with deliberately disabled features. Just as importantly, even if DRM were effective in protecting manufacturers against illegal copying — which seems questionable, considering how quickly DeCSS appeared once the demand for it existed — it does so at the cost of existing consumer rights. Users can borrow books from each other, but may not be able to borrow ebooks or mp3 files where DRM is implemented. Similarly, they may not be able to play DVDs from some distributors or install free software, because their hardware only allows registered products from a particular manufacturer to be used or installed. They may not be able to make a backup copy, even in jurisdictions where doing so is legal. From this perspective, DRM continues the trend begun by software end-user license agreements and subscription services, both of which promote the idea that users buy only the right to use the software they buy and do not own it outright. In all these cases, the general tendency is to reduce consumers’ rights while reducing the obligations of manufacturers.
Vía: Menéame
—–
