Re: FSF condemns partnership between Mozilla and Adobe to support Digital Restrictions Management
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Gary Dale <garydale@torfree.net> wrote:
>
> A lot of people responding to this post don't seem to understand that
> freedom applies to more than just personal choice. The United States was not
> a free nation while it accepted slavery and Firefox is not free software
> while it accepts digital restrictions management.
>
> Just as no one forced Americans to own slaves, the fact that slavery was
> allowed was an insult to notion of freedom. Arguing that the "freedom" to
> choose whether to own slaves or not made Americans freer would be called
> ridiculous by any sane person, yet the same argument is being bandied about
> in this discussion as if it made any sense.
>
> The Free Software Foundation got this one right.
Drawing a parallel between slavery and DRM is delirious!
A country allowing slavery means allowing some people to restrict the
freedom other people.
Mozilla allowing its users to download a non-free Firefox extension
like flash or the new DRM plugin doesn't restrict anyone's freedom,
especially since you'll only end up with the new DRM plugin if you opt
in to downloading and using it and it looks like you'll be able to
compile Firefox without the non-free plugin's free container.
You seem to have an issue with copyrights, and are venting about DRM
because it enables copyright holders.
"Tilting at windmills" comes to mind...
Reply to: