Re: Part 1: Ownership and Contracts

[Pierre THIERRY]

Scribit Marcus Brinkmann dies 04/05/2006 hora 15:34:
> I am not saying that they in fact, do have that control.  I am only
> saying that they are the ones that could have that control.  This
> makes them nominally, the one in control, even if they do not make use
> of that.  Even if they _can not_ make use of it, because they took
> precautions to make it impossible for them to exercise that control.
> The reason is that you have no guarantee that they in fact, took these
> precautions, and in fact, do not exercise that control.

I'm pretty sure your text about DRM is written with the strong
assumption that would use this control. At least that is how I've
understood your text.

But this control is a very very hypothetical one, and I'm not even sure
it is theoretically possible. There you do not take active defense, but
merely paranoid abusive defense, IMHO.

And I should add there are some fields where DRM should, even legally,
be fought. I'm thinking about the fact, for example, that this should be
illegal to send some things DRM-protected. At least everything that
comes from the government, broadly, and everything that could be used in
any case as an evidence. There should be strong punishment, for example,
when orders are sent DRM-protected, because there is a too high risk
that it will be used to harm the one ordered to do something.

But the stuff about TC companies controling your computer are, as I
understand now how it works, a bit too much. Just a bit, note.

Quickly,
Nowhere man
-- 
address@hidden
OpenPGP 0xD9D50D8A

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature