On Thu, 30 Sep 2010, David Dorward wrote:
The alternative would be aggravating the people who they have license agreements with that let them put the content on the Internet in the first place… which goes somewhat beyond foot shooting.
Those people, who make much use of free software themselves (e.g. because their online distribution systems depend on it), but who refuse to allow free software systems to view it? I know I'm trying my best to convince people that next generation of free software licences need some kind of non-discrimination clause. So we'll have to wait and see exactly who is shooting themselves in the foot in the long-run.
More immediately, the problem is with the rights-holders thinking that "content protection" is achievable, and in not realising that its implementation simply encourages the piracy. When will the rights-holders learn that deliberately making your product *less* useful than freely available alternatives *harms* their ability to extract value from your product?
regards, -- Paul Jakma p...@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A Fortune: Suddenly, Professor Liebowitz realizes he has come to the seminar without his duck ...
