Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 26th Apr 2007 01:19 UTC, submitted by muszek
Permalink for comment 234102
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
I suggest that you read that article.
DRM damaging culture? Blame authors, not distributors. No-one is forcing your favourite author to distribute using DRM. He could just distribute in other ways. Of course, if he/she wants good money, he will bow to distributors but yet he/she's the one to blame. That's the part so-called community refuses to accept.
Shuttleworth's analysis is very clever since he warns distributors that they're the weak ring in this chain. Authors will survive, customers will survive as well, but if someone finds a better business model, distributors will be kicked out of their business. Seems ODD to say that but to a better analysis, that's what's happening.
P.S. If your favourite author was really interested in "culture", he would give you his work to you. Beware of blaming the wrong ring in the chain, though majors ARE bad, greedy and so on.