Re: TPM unusable for DRM

[Tom Bachmann]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

>      FSF probably would agree with my tariff argument but would argue
>      that it isn't the essential point. The essential point is that
>      (in their view) ownership of bits is simply wrong.

This is not correct (at least neither to my understanding of the FSF
standpoint nor to my personal one): it is completely ok to have
non-disclosed bits on ones computer, which then do fulfill the
characterization of "owning" used here.
The point is actually, that if one hands away a copy of these bits, one
should not be able to control what happens to this copy.
- --
- -ness-
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFTPJXvD/ijq9JWhsRAgSSAJ4x5ci35stoMRbWWRbAShFtSu63oQCeL8t3
Dy9Pqdhq0thD+hoLwyGLX00=
=ykIq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----