I'm sorry, Richard, but I can't pass up pointing out inconsistent philosophy. the GNU GPL is exactly Digital Restrictions Management. The only difference is that you believe that the restrictions it enforces are good, and that some other set of restrictions -- poorly specified by the phrase Digital Restrictions Management -- are bad. So perhaps what you mean to say is that some kinds of DRM are good, and others are bad -- not that "DRM is wrong"? This kind of inconsistent speech is what produces politics :-).
I myself have seen a number of bad DRM schemes (and I doubt this is the place to start discussing them), but I believe that case-by-case judgements should be applied. And not just to schemes, but to tuples consisting of (SCHEME, ITEM, PRODUCER, CONSUMER). Let's move this discussion elsewhere. Incidentally, and completely off the topic, belated congratulations on Emacs 21! I've just shifted over to it on Mac OS X, and I'm impressed by the improvements over 20. Bill > Digital Restrictions Management is wrong because it tries to deny the > public the freedom it should have. It restricts the public. > Enforcing such restrictions is wrong. > > The GPL does the opposite--it protects the public's freedom. Its > requirements stop you from restricting the public, trampling their > freedom. Enforcing this is protecting freedom too. _______________________________________________ plucker-dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.rubberchicken.org/mailman/listinfo/plucker-dev
