zealotry

I’ve been getting some emails from angry Mac zealots. Many of them start out similar to this:

Sorry to say this but, unlike with DeCSS where you were allowing Linux users to view DVDs, this time you’ve gone too far.

None of them explain how this is different and why GNU/Linux users should not be allowed to play legally bought music. Instead they go on to rave about how great iTMS is and that the imposed DRM is a good compromise. If they hadn’t been completely clueless about copyright law, they’d know that Fair Use is the compromise.

I have little patience with this kind of hardcore zealotry: one of the problems of getting older is the inability to see black and white or, to put it another way, to see only one side of an issue.

I didn’t realize the iTunes Music Store prevented anyone from “play[ing] legally bought music.” I haven’t bought any of the music on my iPod from the Music Store and have never had any problem playing it. Some came from CDs, some from LPs I converted, some from free downloads at Amazon.com: all work fine. I’m sure I’m missing something, but I’m not all the interested in looking into just what tortuous usage I would need to pursue that would find me in violation of the hated DRM.

As noted here, “there are loopholes you could drive a truck through and I’m pretty Apple knows all about them. So the much-hated DRM is actually pretty weak in this case. And I’m worried that if enough zealots take the hardline view that *all DRM* is evil, regardless of any real nuisance value, that Apple or other providers might be pressured to pull the plug on the service by the RIAA cartel”.

Fair Use may be the compromise: I understand that. And I am reminded of that when I convert old LPs to CD and then to mp3 or AAC files and I am not subject to any DRM at all. Of course, if the RIAA cartel were really interested in making me happy or taking care of the artists they have contracted with, I wouldn’t need to go to that effort.

What if iTMS is shuttered as a result of something like this? What happens next? My guess is that some zealots will find a way to get what they want, under the guise of being moral or ethical crusaders, while the Rest of Us are left with the options of breaking the law or breaking our bank accounts to feed the RIAA cartel.

I think it might be a good rule of thumb to take legal interpretations from hackers with a grain of salt as you would review code written by a lawyer: you may not like the look of it, but you might just have to take it as it is.

I take some comfort in being opposed to both side of this debate, the anti DRM zealots and the RIAA cartel, but they don’t listen to each other or me. Who knows how this will be resolved, if at all?