Re: Xpdf fuckware
On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 01:34:12AM -0800, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> > >>>>> "DCL" == Dwayne C Litzenberger <dlitz@dlitz.net> writes:
> >
> > DCL> Remember: the computer is the tool of its owner. Programs
> > DCL> must invariably serve their users.
> >
> > What about the copyright owner? Are they supposed to be cast out into
> > the gutter to eat dirt and trash while heartless and greedy users --
> > dare I say "PIRATES"? -- evade the copy controls on their rightful
> > intellectical poopery?
>
> You're damned right I do!
>
> I would direct your attention to a transcript if I could find it of US
> Senator Orrin Hatch speaking with officials from the RIAA as a very good
> example. Essentially, he listed several things and asked which of these
> the RIAA considered illegal. They included things such as making a copy
> of a CD to a cassette for use in the car, taking a copy to work, and both
> you and your wife having copies.
>
> He was answered - sortof. The beginning of an obviously carefully worded
> reply that none of those things he asked about were good (in the eyes of
> the RIAA naturally) was cut short when Senator Hatch interrupted, AFAICR
> almost shouting that not one of the things he asked about was illegal. I
> had a link to the transcript at one point, but cannot find it. Too bad,
> it makes for good bedtime reading. ;)
>
> All of this is significant because Senator Hatch is responsible for the
> DMCA in the first place and seems to be regretting it (send him a "we told
> you so" if you would, eh?) He realizes that people are trying to use the
> DMCA to keep you from doing things you are legally entitled to do so they
> can try and get more money out of you and artificially maintain controls
> as with traditional media in the face of new technology which would force
> them to give up much of the stranglehold they've had on the industry for
> so long.
>
>
> That's great for digital music and all, but the same thing applies to the
> controls in a pdf file. Why do I want warning dialogs in xpdf? So I know
> who is trying to impose these restrictions and who isn't. I don't intend
> to be stopped by them if I choose not to be, but I do want to know when
> they are there so I know where to direct my complaints (and in a futile
> attempt to try not to reward their stupidity with my money..)
>
I agree with everything you say, with one exception. Why should xpdf be a
tool for filtering objectionable authors? Apply the original patch.
Joseph, if you want to know who is attempting to violate your copyrights
(Yes, people other than the copyright holder have rights under the
copyright law!) then write a little script that surveys your doc files and
makes a list of authors/creators who would wish to restrict your rights.
Let's don't get our morals confused with technical usefulness. There is no
moral obligation on the part of xpdf to tell you anything about the
author's wishes WRT these bits. It's only obligation is to satisfy the
design, presenting the contents to the screen and to the printer at the
user's choice. There is nothing in the (non-existant) design spec that
says this product is supposed to act on anyone elses desires, not even
those of the author.
Luck,
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_- Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide" _-_-_-_-_-_-
aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769
Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
e-mail: dwarf@polaris.net Tallahassee, FL 32308
_-_-_-_-_-_- See www.linuxpress.com for more details _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Reply to: