Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 2nd Jan 2012 19:12 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source Late last year, president Obama signed a law that makes it possible to indefinitely detain terrorist suspects without any form of trial or due process. Peaceful protesters in Occupy movements all over the world have been labelled as terrorists by the authorities. Initiatives like SOPA promote diligent monitoring of communication channels. Thirty years ago, when Richard Stallman launched the GNU project, and during the three decades that followed, his sometimes extreme views and peculiar antics were ridiculed and disregarded as paranoia - but here we are, 2012, and his once paranoid what-ifs have become reality.
Permalink for comment 502229
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by kurkosdr
by kurkosdr on Thu 5th Jan 2012 12:59 UTC
kurkosdr
Member since:
2011-04-11

Guys, i never said DRM is good (it's bad). What i am saying is that "free software" can get infected with DRM by tivo-ization, so Stallman pretending "free software" can't have DRM is a bit dumb. "Free software" can get infected by DRM just as proprietary can. The last thing we need is companies "whitewashing" their DRM mechanisms by open sourcing them (tivo-ized open source obviously) and claim that "it's free software it can't have DRM/be bad for you". IMO, the anti-DRM and "free software" are two seperate campaigns.

Anti-DRM campain: Stop violating my fair use rights like ability to make parodies, backups etc (reasonable demand).

"Free software" campaign: "Free" your software or else i will bad mouth you whenever given the chance (unreasonable demand)

This is why i hate the FSF , because it lumps together reasonable demands (anti-DRM) with unreasonable ones (all software should be "free")

PS: It's not the authors that decide what you can do when you purchase a copy of their works, it's the laws. And the laws grant you a right to make short parodies, make personal backups and do format shifting. So the main argument of the DRM supporters that "the author doesn't want you to do that" is moot.

Edited 2012-01-05 13:16 UTC

Reply Score: 0