Re: Digital Rights Management
>>>>> "ERS" == Ean R Schuessler <ean@brainfood.com> writes:
ERS> It seems to me that our community must create its own digital
ERS> rights management system that is an integral part of the GNU
ERS> operating system. While this may seem odd at first glance I
ERS> think that it is a moral necessity.
Rights management is the first step to censorship. It's an idea that
is fundamentally opposite to principles of information freedom.
The idea of developing software that INHIBITS the owner of the
software from doing things they want to do is just ridiculous. I don't
want software on my computer doing the dirty work of Sony
Entertainment. I don't think I should have to run it, I don't think I
should have to package it, and damn straight I'm not going to write
it.
"Are my leg shackles not large and heavy enough for you, sir? Shall I
put more locks on them? I'll get right on that, sir." Jeez louise.
ERS> We believe in sharing our work but that does not mean that we
ERS> are thieves or that we condone theft.
"Thieves, theft" -- this reminds me of the FSF's pointing out that
sharing software is not "piracy":
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Piracy
...in that pirates do horrible things like cut off people's heads and
pour hot oil down their throats, whereas unlicensed software sharers
do horrible things like (*shiver*) share with their friends.
Hey, actually, it looks like "Theft" has been added, too.
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Theft
Also, don't speak for me. I condone all kinds of things: theft,
robbery, explosions, head-stabbings, tearing the tags off
mattresses. If you don't condone the unauthorized sharing of (say)
music or text files, then say you don't. I don't think you speak for
everyone who is involved in Free Software, though.
In PARTICULAR, I support the distribution and dissemination of
material in a way that is unauthorized by the originator of the
material. Whistleblowers, human rights groups, etc. need to be able to
do this to prevent atrocity and overcome unfair systems.
Building in "rights management" into data at a fundamental level
reduces our ability to do absolutely necessary, but unauthorized,
things.
ERS> Art and music cannot grind to a halt and become
ERS> hobbies. Creative producers of media must have an avenue to
ERS> protect themselves from theft.
Yeah, and Free Software is going to put programmers in the
poorhouse.
First off: the best music and art are done by amateurs. Compare and
contrast "Sunflowers" by pauper Vincent Van Gogh with, say, the
multi-million dollar movie "Dudley Do-Right." If all quality is
market-driven, how could Van Gogh have made something significantly
better without having billions of dollars at his disposal and control
of the marketplace?
Second off: it's not a question of preserving the business of art and
music. That's not my problem and it's not my job. These companies are
working OVERTIME to generate digital rights management pap, and they
don't need our help AT ALL.
Third off: they've been screwing people for years. Need I point out
that record companies have been found guilty of criminal collusion in
price fixing?
http://www.pigdog.org/auto/viva_la_musica/link/1459.html
Why should any consumer feel ANY moral obligation to an essentially
criminal cartel? Seriously?
Fourth off: Musicians and other artists LOVE getting around the
system. The popularity of, say, mp3.com is a great example. Record
companies do SO many things to screw artists it's not even funny. Why
should we side with the big bosses against the people we actually
like?
~ESP
--
Evan Prodromou
evan@debian.org
Reply to: