On 4/5/06, Austin Ziegler <halostatue / gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/5/06, Gregory Brown <gregory.t.brown / gmail.com> wrote:
> > http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3/torino-rms-transcript.en.html#drm-and-laws
> >
> > Check out the fsf website for loads more.
> >
> > Basically, I see the issue of things like Tivo being something real
> > and scary.  Lock your code away and don't give users the key. That's
> > not free anymore.
>
> It's not the code that's locked away; it's the data. I see no reason
> that TiVo should have to release their DRM code, even if I disagree
> with their DRM and even if I disagree with the DMCA (which I *do*).
> The Linux variant they use? Sure. But the DRM code? No.

If you want to modify the code, it comes back with a different
checksum, thus is useless on your Tivo.

I could claim that the teenage mutant ninja turtles live in my
toaster, but I mean, if I can't see them or play with them in any
meaningful way, what's the point of even telling you that?

Okay, so that was a terrible analogy.

The GPLv3 allows for userland DRM.  It does not allow for external DRM.

> Some of it comes down to the idea of IP ownership, which Stallman
> clearly opposes. But I don't. I think that the rights of ownership are
> *different* with IP vs physical property (of necessity), but I think
> that there are still important and viable rights that may even include
> restricting who is allowed to use the IP involved. (I *do* disagree
> with software and business method patents, even though I will probably
> end up working on stuff that leads to a patent.)

Intellectual property is a confusing term.  So are you talking about
copyright, trade secrets, patents, or what?

To put things in perspective, I barely believe in physical property. 
And yes, this does come down to software patents, copyright, trade
secrets, trademarks, etc... but DRM with respect to GPLed code is
mostly about saying, if you need some key to make this work, you need
to give it to us.

You can't give us a locked safe and promise it has a billion dollars in it.

> But I also believe in the idea of binary drivers while supporting the
> development of open source drivers.

Yes.  I use the ATI drivers on linux.   I also use ndiswrapper to use
windows drivers for my wireless.  Still haven't found a good (and
convenient) free alternative.  But if the drivers were free in the
first place....

But that's nothing to do with DRM.