Re: FSF condemns partnership between Mozilla and Adobe to support Digital Restrictions Management
On 20140518_2131-0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> On 5/18/2014 6:39 PM, The Wanderer wrote:
> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >Hash: SHA512
> >
> >On 05/18/2014 05:49 PM, Tom H wrote:
> >
> >>You seem to have an issue with copyrights, and are venting about DRM
> >>because it enables copyright holders.
> >
> >DRM doesn't just "enable copyright holders".
> >
> >Copyright law restricts what people are allowed to do.
> >
> >DRM restricts what people are *able* to do.
> >
> >When the copyright on something expires (not that that ever happens
> >nowadays), it enters the public domain, and people are allowed to copy
> >and redistribute it as much as they care to. This is, in fact, the goal
> >and the purpose of copyright, at least in USA law.
> >
>
> Copyrights last a long time, depending on the laws of the country
> under which the item is copyrighted. But typically it is either 75
> years from the original copyright, or 75 years after the death of the
> owner (author) of the copyrighted material. Both are much longer
> than the Internet has existed.
>
> >If the copyright on something restricted by DRM were to expire, and the
> >DRM were still effective (or if breaking it were forbidden, e.g. by
> >anti-circumvention laws), then although people would be *allowed* to
> >copy and redistribute it at will, they would still not be *able* to do
> >so, without permission from whoever controls the DRM - which would,
> >likely, be the former holder of the copyright.
> >
> >There's more, but that should do as a first point. Objections to DRM go
> >far beyond just objections to copyright.
> >
>
> Please show an example where that has occurred.
Please show an example of a digital recording that was copyrighted 75 yrs
ago. It is a silly request, I know. But no less silly than yours.
>
> Jerry
--
Paul E Condon
pecondon@mesanetworks.net
Reply to: