l4-hurd
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: DRM


From: Michal Suchanek
Subject: Re: DRM
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 18:18:59 +0100

On 11/6/05, Alfred M. Szmidt <address@hidden> wrote:
>    > Read www.gnu.org, it is clearly stated why users should have the
>    > freedom to share digital information like software, and songs,
>    > and why someone who wrote something shouldn't be able to dictate
>    > how you use it.  A company doesn't dictate how you should use
>    > your hammer, right?
>
>    Because there is nothing special about hammers.
>
> There is nothing special about software.
>
>    But there is a company that says you should return the used printer
>    colour and transfer films to them.
>
> Should is not the same as `you are required by law to return this'.
> You shouldn't do many things, like running around in a room with
> scissors, but you can still do it if it turns you on.
>
>    Plus the example with hammers fails in one way: you get actual
>    physical hammer but you only get the right to use the software,
>    which would be more like borrowing a hammer.
>
> The example hammer actually only fails in one place, but not the on
> you state: you can't duplicate them infinitly.  This is why it should
> never be illegal to share digital information.
>
> If I borrow your hammer, you can't dictate how I use it, if it is to
> hammer a nail, a screw, or my foot to the wall.  If I destroy your
> hammer, then I might be required to replace it.  But you can't destroy
> software (unless you are _really_ _really_ persitant)
>
>    On the other hand, the companies selling software should be bound
>    by some rules that force them to make the software usable under
>    sane conditions.
>
> If you sell software, you give the party you sell the software to the
> right to do anything you please, just if you'd sell a hammer.

Yes, that's one of the problems. You cannot sell a non-duplicable copy
of software.
There is nothing like "standard one user copy of software" defined
that you could buy or sell knowing what you get yet there is much
effort going on ensuring the non-duplication.

Thanks

Michal

--
             Support the freedom of music!
Maybe it's a weird genre  ..  but weird is *not* illegal.
Maybe next time they will send a special forces commando
to your picnic .. because they think you are weird.
 www.music-versus-guns.org  http://en.policejnistat.cz

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]