Research Paper on DRM

[zachtib]

I'm writing a research paper on DRM and Open Source Software, and am currently doing the research. If anyone could link me to any good articles (not neccessarily JUST anti-DRM, im willing to read what the other side has to say, even if i dont agree with them) or any other relevant articles, I'd appreciate it.

I'll also need the text of the GPL (preferably v2 and v3) but i assume i can grab that from gnu.org, right?

[Bragador]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Rights_Management

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software

[zachtib]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Rights_Management

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software
well, yeah, those are the obvious ones :)

[jasay]

Can you use wikipedia as a resource in formal papers/presentations?

[zachtib]

Can you use wikipedia as a resource in formal papers/presentations?

I'm not sure, but I intend to. On a topic like DRM, there's not going to be much in the way of "official articles"

I'm looking at a lot of opinion pieces on this paper.

[Bragador]

If you can't use wikipedia, explore wikipedia's references for the links I provided. It's always a good start.

[DrFunkenstein]

http://www.worldbank.org/knowledge/chiefecon/articles/undpk2/w2wtoc.htm

Great read on knowledge as a global public good.

[nocturn]

Stallman wrote some good stuff about this.

He also consistently calls DRM Digital Restrictions Management because the term Rights is ambigious here (they are talking about the rights of the copyright owners and/or the software producer, not your rights as the owner of the computer). As such, DRM only implements restrictions on your use.

An interesting suggestion, you know the recent Sony debacle with their DRM rootkit? They also stole GPL code to make their player, maybe it is worthwhile including.

[BoyOfDestiny]

I'm not sure, but I intend to. On a topic like DRM, there's not going to be much in the way of "official articles"

I'm looking at a lot of opinion pieces on this paper.

I'm a fan of wikipedia, but not sure if all the articles qualify as official...

Anyway, here are some articles to help you along (as I hate DRM, and it encouraged me to jump ship to the haven of Linux ;) )

http://lwn.net/Articles/161148/
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004145.php
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=2200
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.html

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060214-6177.html

this one qualifies as propaganda, just in case you need to quote official documentation:
http://www.digital-cp.com/home

Google for hdcp, you'll find plenty about it, it's going to be a big mess I think. :)

[DrFunkenstein]

Just stumbled on a pretty good article about DRM:
http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/390

[Brunellus]

Can you use wikipedia as a resource in formal papers/presentations?
I wouldn't. Wikipedia is good as background material and a starting point, but I wouldn't rely on it as an *authority* on anything.

[Bragador]

I wouldn't. Wikipedia is good as background material and a starting point, but I wouldn't rely on it as an *authority* on anything.

And yet...

http://npg.nature.com/news/2005/051212/full/438900a.html


The exercise revealed numerous errors in both encyclopaedias, but among 42 entries tested, the difference in accuracy was not particularly great: the average science entry in Wikipedia contained around four inaccuracies; Britannica, about three.

[Brunellus]

encyclopedias are not meant to be cited as definitive sources for *formal* papers. They are summaries and guides to further reading.

So as a part of the research process, yes, I'm all for using encyclopedias and wikipedia, as a means of getting a sense of the contours of any one topic. But would I go before the examiners relying on Wikipedia alone? nope. To do so would broadcast an utter lack of diligence on my part.

[Bragador]

encyclopedias are not meant to be cited as definitive sources for *formal* papers. They are summaries and guides to further reading.

So as a part of the research process, yes, I'm all for using encyclopedias and wikipedia, as a means of getting a sense of the contours of any one topic. But would I go before the examiners relying on Wikipedia alone? nope. To do so would broadcast an utter lack of diligence on my part.

It depends on what you are doing. I would never do a scientific research based on encyclopedic claims but for a journalistic report I don't see the problem.

[Brunellus]

It depends on what you are doing. I would never do a scientific research based on encyclopedic claims but for a journalistic report I don't see the problem.
OP is writing a research paper, not merely a journalistic report.

[zachtib]

I'm in class now, my professor has no problem with wikipedia as a source as long as its now the *only* source

[Kernel Sanders]

DRM's bad mm'kay....... :evil:

[zachtib]

DRM's bad mm'kay....... :evil:
I know that, you know that, but the general public needs some convincing, which is what I'm trying to accomplish

[nalmeth]

Will we be able to read your paper? Interested

[Kernel Sanders]

I know that, you know that, but the general public needs some convincing, which is what I'm trying to accomplish

A worthy aim *thumbs up* \\:D/

[zachtib]

Will we be able to read your paper? Interested

I've been posting all my writing on my website, I'll be sure to post a link when I finish