[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

www/philosophy misinterpreting-copyright.html

From: Richard M. Stallman
Subject: www/philosophy misinterpreting-copyright.html
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2015 11:13:01 +0000

CVSROOT:        /web/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Richard M. Stallman <rms>       15/09/02 11:13:01

Modified files:
        philosophy     : misinterpreting-copyright.html 

Log message:
        Add link for "protect".
        Use the term "DRM", and explain "copy protection" as an older name.


Index: misinterpreting-copyright.html
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/misinterpreting-copyright.html,v
retrieving revision 1.47
retrieving revision 1.48
diff -u -b -r1.47 -r1.48
--- misinterpreting-copyright.html      12 Apr 2014 12:40:27 -0000      1.47
+++ misinterpreting-copyright.html      2 Sep 2015 11:12:59 -0000       1.48
@@ -309,7 +309,9 @@
 possible benefit to the public, since there is no way to retroactively
 increase now the number of books published back then.  Yet it cost the
 public a freedom that is meaningful today&mdash;the freedom to
-redistribute books from that era.</p>
+redistribute books from that era.  Note the use of the propaganda
+term, &ldquo;<a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Protect"
+>protect</a>,&rdquo; which embodies the second of the three errors.</p>
 The bill also extended the copyrights of works yet to be written.  For
 works made for hire, copyright would last 95 years instead of the
@@ -347,9 +349,12 @@
 to be nice.  Previously this was not a crime in the US at all.</p>
 An even worse law, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), was
-designed to bring back copy protection (which computer users detest)
-by making it a crime to break copy protection, or even publish
-information about how to break it.  This law ought to be called the
+designed to bring back what was then called &ldquo;copy
+protection&rdquo; &mdash; now known
+as <a href="/proprietary/proprietary-drm.html">DRM</a> (Digital
+Restrictions Management) &mdash; which users already detested,
+by making it a crime to defeat the restrictions, or even publish
+information about how to defeat them.  This law ought to be called the
 &ldquo;Domination by Media Corporations Act&rdquo; because it
 effectively offers publishers the chance to write their own copyright
 law.  It says they can impose any restrictions whatsoever on the use
@@ -661,7 +666,7 @@
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2014/04/12 12:40:27 $
+$Date: 2015/09/02 11:12:59 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]