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

Re: Why TPM+Parallel Distribution is non-free

On Oct 16, 2006, at 10:42, Don Armstrong wrote:

If you're seriously interested in discussing how to do copylefted
TPM and DRM properly, I strongly suggest reading my position
statement from committee D on the first discussion draft of the

URL please?

http://svn.donarmstrong.com/don/trunk/projects/gplv3/issues/ drm_allowing_authentication/

I don't see anything in that position statement that would indicate a flaw in CC's 3.0 draft wording. Is there something specific that I missed?

As drafted, the early August wording of CC does not conflict with systems that make it possible for the user to verify the authenticity of a package. (If the authenticity checker is user-configurable in what it approves, it is not TPM that prevents the user from exercising rights granted by the license.)

Measures used for preventing access altogether do not conflict with the anti-TPM clause, because preventing access altogether is allowed (there's no recipient if nothing is received).

Henri Sivonen

Reply to: