I agree that OCR is an important tool for end users, especially those with accessibility needs, and that we shouldn't use something like this lightly, but the context is completely different here. If I want to send you a PDF from my gmail, and want to make it difficult for Google to leverage that data - that's completely different than if I were a giant media company, gatekeeping to ensure a huge portion of culture flows through me, which I then claim as my own and charge exorbitant rents for, enforced by DRM.
The problem with DRM is not that someone is trying to control what happens to a string of bits, it's that it props up an institution which is harmful.
The problem is that people won’t “use it lightly” and not everyone speaks the same language. Being able to copy/paste text into a translation tool (probably Google Translate which is kinda ironic in the case you mentioned) to understand what the document is about is super important when in another country or communicating with someone in another country.
Being able to copy/paste is an important option that empowers users.
Being able to selectively defeat copy paste is an additional option that additionally empowers users.
I don't anticipate this tool being used very widely. If it became the default, I would have a problem with it for the reasons you highlight, among others.
I agree that DRM is bad and that people should be able to exercise the full capabilities of their computer and the data on it. However, this includes controlling access to your computer and your data.
Saying this is tantamount to DRM misunderstands what the problem is and what empowerment means. Actions taken by those in positions of power and those who are not aren't morally equivalent. This sort of thinking is damaging to any effort to empower users.
> I agree that OCR is an important tool for end users, especially those with accessibility needs, and that we shouldn't use something like this lightly, but the context is completely different here. If I want to send you a PDF from my gmail, and want to make it difficult for Google to leverage that data - that's completely different than if I were a giant media company, gatekeeping to ensure a huge portion of culture flows through me, which I then claim as my own and charge exorbitant rents for, enforced by DRM.
There are easier ways to do this, such as encrypting the PDF. It is trivially easy to password protect a PDF as well [0], it is even a part of the PDF spec. It isn't ironclad, but it will defeat Gmail's indexer.
The problem with DRM is not that someone is trying to control what happens to a string of bits, it's that it props up an institution which is harmful.