On 13-03-14 11:06 PM, Karl Dubost wrote:
> * The question is will it be done inside W3C (Royalty Free Patent
> Policy) or outside of W3C (patent mine field).
I suspect you realize that this bullet is nonsensical.
DRM requires restrictions on software implementations that far exceed
patent mine fields, so also having patent encumbrances in addition is a
non-issue. There really is no benefit here to W3C, with royalty
bearing or royalty-free being entirely irrelevant.
> Now… I dislike DRMs, but I dislike more copyright policies (which are
> the real source of the issue). Though I'm pretty sure most of the
> entertainment industry, and publishing industry would not love my
> stance on the topic. :)
Please read Cory's article -- DRM isn't a copyright issue -- copyright
is just the "boogy man" policy hook being abused to allow non-owner
control over computing. Copy-control doesn't exist -- what you have
is computer control, and most of the consequences of non-owner
computer-control have nothing at all to do with copyright.
--
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <
http://www.flora.ca/>
Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property
rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition!
http://l.c11.ca/ict "The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware
manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or
portable media player from my cold dead hands!"
_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss
Locked
