DRM Helmet

prostoalex writes "In his weblog on O'Reilly Network Gordon Mohr suggests the ultimate solution for the music and movie industry to plug that analog hole. The solution, of course, is a helmet with built-in Digital Rights Management system that would automatically "fog up" any time you lay your eyes on something that you haven't bought license for."

Joke though it may seem

[jskarzin]

This is a group of people that are as fundamental about digital rights and copyright as those terrorists are about destroying modern America. This is a solution they could take very seriously.

It's too late

[YahoKa]

It's too late to plug the analog hole. The technology is there, there are many manufacturers, and it isn't going away. They can't even protect digital media, how would they do it for an analog medium?

Wrong Approach

[Anonymous Coward]

More efficient would be a helmet for Hollings that fogged on the approach of Disney lobbyists.

An even better solution...

[Skweetis]

If we take this piracy/drm/et al mess to its logical conclusion, the only foolproof solution is for the distributors to stop distributing content altogether.

Re:An even better solution...

[konstant]

If we take this piracy/drm/et al mess to its logical conclusion, the only foolproof solution is for the distributors to stop distributing content altogether.

That's an excellent idea. The global populace can simply pay them a daily retainer levied as a tax. In return the "content" companies will ensure that our musical and literary heritage is well protected in a vault beneath the hills of Hollywood, far from the prying ears and eyes of those who would remember this precious intellectual property and be inspired by it to create "derivative works" without a license.

After all, the functioning work in "intellectual property" is "property". And a property holder is certain within its rights to hoard its belongings.

The fact that this scenario is so ludicrous demonstrates that even if all music and literature can be the "property" of a single corporate entity or trust which I doubt then society has every right to claim access to that "property" as a central part of its culture.

A clear case of eminent domain!

You'll take one WITH commercials -- and like it.

[nullard]

I think that it would be more likely that anything you aren't licensed to see would be replaced by commercials. You go to your friend's house to watch a movie on her big screen TV and all you see is a series of Pepsi commercials.

In version 2.0 it selects the advertisements based on your thought patterns. If you think about sex a lot, you see lots of ads featuring Trojan Man.

Version 3 would take a different approach. It would alter your thought patterns to fit the available commercials. You don't think about homeowner's insurance? Now you do.

I would be in favor of this system. It would be so costly to develop that the ??AA would go bankrupt before realizing that there is no technical solution for "DRM."

I use "DRM" in quotes because it is more like DRI: Digital Rights Infringement. All of this DRM crap infringes on my digital rights.

Actually, it is a better idea.

[Lord Bitman]

I'd rather have a helmet stuck on me than be prevented from developing software which doesnt have a helmet in it. It would be much simpler, and despite any protests, you /would/ get used to it. And a lot faster than you'd be able to get used to the idea of someone controlling what you can do.
Someone controlling what you can do vs Someone controlling what others can do to you. Isnt that what we have the constitution for?
I'm all for it.

Re:Joke though it may seem

[jskarzin]

I'm going to tell you this once, and I'm going to make this brief. I am completely honest when I say that I would never purchase the CDs I am downloading music from. They aren't losing a penny from me downloading an MP3 because, to be honest; I wouldn't buy the CD even if I did like the music. Thanks, you presented some valid points but they do not apply in my situation; which is probably the same situation for several (hundred?)thousand people.

Islam did it first...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is just an observation, not a knock on any culture due to current events- isn't this part of the purpose of the burka (Islamic female headgear)? A man can't see the woman, so isn't making decisions with his scrotum, and can presumably remove it (or at least, sneak a peek in the bedroom and repent later) after the dowry's been paid?