Two things: I disagree with your assessment of just how many people avoid doing bad things solely due to fear of punishment. Perhaps its my naivety which makes me think most people apply a sense of ethics before considering the law. (And if enough people find their ethics to be in conflict with the law, does that not mean that the law should be reconsidered? A law serving the interests of a few to the detriment of the many is surely not just.)
Secondly, while we don't live in a world in which "everyone is perfectly honest", I think there are enough people who are mostly honest that to assume dishonesty everywhere is wrongheaded. That's what DRM and copy-protection are based on. Consider this: if 90% of people are honest and 10% not, using DRM will inconvenience the 90% while perhaps stopping some of the 10% (assuming it's uncrackable, which I don't accept to be true); not using DRM will keep the 90% happy, while the 10% copy as they like. So the question is whether the dent in that 10% is worth the inconvenience and lost goodwill of the 90%. I don't think it is. (Hey, record companies still charge a fee for estimated losses due to broken discs -- even on digital distribution contracts. That covers some dishonesty right there, and it's karma too!) -- smst ------------------------------------------------------------------------ smst's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=752 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=34928 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
