From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030202AbWA0CCA (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:02:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030204AbWA0CCA (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:02:00 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:41952 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030202AbWA0CCA (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:02:00 -0500 Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:01:51 -0500 (EST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: riel@cuia.boston.redhat.com To: Ian Kester-Haney cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: GPL V3 and Linux In-Reply-To: <441e43c90601241721o8b4a9e5rd3a237f70aa46dbb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <43D65211.20006@wolfmountaingroup.com> <441e43c90601241721o8b4a9e5rd3a237f70aa46dbb@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Ian Kester-Haney wrote: > I think that subverting the efforts of companies and artists to protect > their works is unnaceptable. That all depends on what they are protecting their works against. If they were protecting their works against illegal copying, that protection should indeed not be circumvented. On the other hand, if all they are "protecting against" is lawful and legitimate behaviour by joe six-pack consumers, I do not see why those efforts should be protected or helped... > It should be noted that DRM is not inherently bad, It should also be noted that DRM does not protect works against copying - the one thing that DRM was supposed to achieve. -- All Rights Reversed