Personally I enjoyed that post immensely. Especially I liked and agreed with this:
> What does this mean for Open Source Flash? business as usual. Exactly, I don't need permission to go to the bathroom either. There isn't much that a corporation can do about people giving away their work -- there are downsides to living on the frontier, but a clear upside is you once in a while you can tell a corporation to 'go fuck itself' when it tries to trample over your land. Cheers, Robin -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 1:51 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [osflash] osflash - Adobe uses DMCA on RTMP folks, hi, my apologies if anyone felt offended by my deliberate use of swearwords to describe adobe. i use them because it makes _me_ feel better, being able to clearly and unequivocably express things publicly in this way. some people find the use of swearwords to be funny. much of what i've said is specifically directed to adobe employees on this list. aware that you'll be unable to respond, i have to fill in the conversation for you. i've been made aware of the possibility that you, adobe, may have been pressurised by your dmca-loving customers to enact that DMCA take-down notice. if that's the case, you can now call a meeting with them, at which, may i take the liberty of suggesting a few choice words (which you _may_ have to rephrase somewhat) that you might like to use: "well, that was a complete failure, and has resulted in us looking like fools. thanks a bunch. we'll not be pursuing any further action against free software projects: you'll have to do your dirty work yourselves from now on, mr customer". "thanks for nothing, mr customer. we added DRM measures that we _told_ you would be ineffective in the first place, after you pressurised us to, and we even sold them with the full support of our marketing team, to whom we had to lie about their effectiveness by the usual judicious use of technical oversimplification. we now have a situation where a well-known security researcher and reverse-engineer, who is known not to be afraid of large corporations, could come after us, like he did microsoft in 1997 to 1999, and make us look like even bigger fools than we've already been made to look. and because of the provisions in the DMCA that exempt security and anti-virus researchers, there would be _nothing_ we could do about it. thanks for placing us in the middle of _that_ one, mr customer. do let us know where we can send you an invoice." "thank you, mr customer. thanks to you, we now have a whole bunch of free software projects that have _increased_ the level of RTMP interoperability of their products, rather than decreased it. thanks to your pressurising us to issue that DMCA takedown notice, our bottom line and market share have both _decreased_ not increased. where can we send you our invoice to make up the difference?" so if in fact, adobe, you _have_ been pressurised by your customers to issue DMCA takedown notices, it might be in fact in your interests to tell them in no uncertain terms where to go, and it _might_ just be in your interests to publicise that fact, to get yourselves out of being the one in the middle of an unwinnable situation. or, perhaps to very quietly get the DMCA takedown notice against sourceforge revoked. at the very least, adobe, continued silence, and no further action against free software developers and projects on your part, adobe, would be the smart move right now. l. _______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org _______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
