The FSF opposes it because it takes a hammer instead of a scalpel to deal with a problem. In order to kill off piracy they could forbid all bittorrents and this is used to share bandwidth and distribute free software which is something that could mean the end of small distributions and ultimately choice. It favours those who can afford to distribute in retail stores or maintain servers. There is no built in protection for the little guy. It could also kill off usenet and other things that are used to distribute things illegally.
Then there is the issue of media and codecs. DRMing will become the norm and using open source codecs could become illegal. ACTA proposes that anything that defeats protection is illegal. Open source formats like ogg and flac could disappear in favour of DRMed formats. Media players that support free formats could be illegal if everything is locked down. This is a worst case scenario, but it is within the realm of possibility. Finally there is the issue that this was done without any input by an industry that has been hostile to open source. Do you think that Microsoft or Adobe will look after our interests? If you can make the rules, you can also stack the deck. I am not saying that this is the case, but they have given us no reason to trust them. While it may seem that life will continue as usual for most of us, that may not be the case. We just don't know unless some light is shed on the process and the substance is released. If they are doing nothing wrong then why all of the secrecy? Roy Using Kubuntu 10.10, 64-bit Location: Canada On 13 February 2011 15:48, Paul <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > --- In [email protected], Roy <linuxcanuck@...> wrote: > > > > First let me apologize for cross-posting, not something that I usually > do. > > > > The FSF is organizing a campaign in the US to protest ACTA > > Roy > > > > Using Kubuntu 10.10, 64-bit > > Location: Canada > > > > I've read the link and I do not see how this affects Linux users in any > significant way. No one using Linux is breaking any kind of copyright or > trademark laws I am aware of. The kernel is still governed by GPLv2 right? > I'm good with it. > > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html > > But thanks for the heads up Roy. Gives me a chuckle thinking about all > those warez running commercial software users out there. Turn the screws on > them I say! ha-ha > > In other news: > > > http://www.fsf.org/news/debian-squeeze-makes-key-progress-toward-being-a-fully-free-distribution > > Always ahead of the curve. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ To unsubscribe from this list, please email [email protected] & you will be removed.Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LINUX_Newbies/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LINUX_Newbies/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
