Hi Jonathan, thanks for this summary, it contains many good points. I will only add a very few.
I am not sure how fair it is to attribute any of this to the FSF per se, or the FSF community. The FSF has articulated a position on DRM in the context of systems incorporating free software, trying to implement rules in the GPL v3 that make sure that the spirit of the GPL license as a "copyleft" license is not violated via technical restriction measures. In this context, what matters most is what constitutes "distribution" of a work. DRM is challenging the GPL because it enables modes of distribution where use of a software is separated from control (such modes already exist, but they have not been a practical concern so far to justify action). I have heard RMS in the past to argue broadly that distribution of information which is of benefit to the general public should not be in control of a few. However, it is not clear to me that there is a general consensus about what such generally useful information includes specifically (for every possible type of information). In fact, it seems to me that there is a wide range of opinions on that matter. Thus, I recognize the position you are describing in some aspects, but I am not sure that there is a single label under which supporters of this position group and march. Maybe the EFF? At Sat, 04 Nov 2006 12:07:43 -0500, "Jonathan S. Shapiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Some specific rights of ownership that DRM advocates are trying to take > away: (1) right to transfer content from one device to another, (2) > right to re-record/RIP for personal use. Quickly extended by (3) Fair use, (4) Competition (compatibility), (5) Right to sale (cf First-sale doctrine) Thanks, Marcus _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
