From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262220AbTD3QNN (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2003 12:13:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262225AbTD3QNN (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2003 12:13:13 -0400 Received: from siaag2ab.compuserve.com ([149.174.40.132]:51610 "EHLO siaag2ab.compuserve.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262220AbTD3QNM (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2003 12:13:12 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 12:21:49 -0400 From: Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Why DRM exists [was Re: Flame Linus to a crisp!] To: Larry McVoy Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Message-ID: <200304301225_MC3-1-36B6-1BA0@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Larry McVoy wrote: .> Your answer has to be interesting because it seems to me that they are .> doing it to protect their products, their product is sometimes content, .> sometimes programs, sometimes both. An answer which says that open source .> is not part of the cause also says that open source is irrelevant. You are trying to make the case that open source developers are in the same group as those who illegally download copyrighted media, but you are wrong. Taking ideas and concepts from the "daemon book" or "The Design of OS/2" or whatever and putting them in Linux is not a crime, nor is buying a program and trying to clone its functionality. Copying the source or object code is something entirely different. ------- Chuck ------ Chuck