From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264667AbTD0OJG (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Apr 2003 10:09:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264668AbTD0OJF (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Apr 2003 10:09:05 -0400 Received: from krusty.dt.E-Technik.Uni-Dortmund.DE ([129.217.163.1]:41234 "EHLO mail.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264667AbTD0OJE (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Apr 2003 10:09:04 -0400 Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 16:21:06 +0200 From: Matthias Andree To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Flame Linus to a crisp! Message-ID: <20030427142106.GA24244@merlin.emma.line.org> Mail-Followup-To: Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <20030424083730.5F79A2127F@dungeon.inka.de> <20030424085913.GH28253@mail.jlokier.co.uk> <3EA804A8.8070608@techsource.com> <1051209350.4004.6.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> <20030424192941.E1425@almesberger.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030424192941.E1425@almesberger.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 24 Apr 2003, Werner Almesberger wrote: > A more important barrier than what the GPL allows might be what the > Linux community accepts. If some DRM extensions are never accepted > by enough of the "mainstream", they will fail to work. > > The main problem I see with accepting DRM functionality is that it > will encourage frivolous uses of DRM, just because it's possible > then. Just like most vendors instinctively default to closed > source. > > It's also worth to keep in mind that such decisions are frequently > taken by people with very different agendas, e.g. if "protected by > DRM" is perceived to appeal to analysts, shareholders or potential > shareholders, it may quickly become policy in many companies, just > like patents did. It seems that the people who form the "market" (and buy shares, write analyses, buy CDs/DVDs) need to be told the implications of buying copy-protected material or material that enforces to boot only particlular kernels or whatever. The problem is that those in favor of (ab)using DRM to fortifying their monopoly don't tell you where the other side of the knife cuts. Those analysts and shareholders are only interested in local, egoistic optima; Microsoft will tell us that DRM brings "security" -- but they won't tell all the details, say, you can only play $MEDIA if $COMPANY allows it. The hard part about this discussion is not the technical one, but the social one, tell those people who just go to a shop what can happen if they buy a copy-protected CD, and what can happen if they tolerate their members of parliament voting in favor of DMCA-like laws (such as the new German copyright act that doesn't allow you to enforce your right to fair use, to a private copy of your CD for your car audio, if the vendor puts protection in place) or voting in favor of big companies rather than companies. The common people need to understand that their rights are being taken away, and that these rights are tied to their money. I haven't seen copy-protected CDs being sold cheaper than unprotected CDs (which would make some sense, because after the companies' logic, this will rise the sales). This is the example that has been established, others are to come. The sharks (see Jamie's WIPO comments) will know how to defend their territory.