You lose some, and then you lose some ...

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 22, 2006.

  1. Just saw this report <http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34523>
    about Microsoft Windows Media Player 11, and how its terms and conditions
    are even more restrictive than the ones for earlier versions. Basically,
    you have no more rights to back up anything at all.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 22, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Richard Guest

    Yet another reason to avoid all DRM├ęd music stores
     
    Richard, Sep 22, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Philip Guest

    I don't want to start another round of OS Wars - but this is the kind of
    thing that made me decide earlier in the year that I won't buy any new
    MS products, and I will transfer all our computers to Open Source
    software and OS.

    I'm not hostile to proprietary programs - I have paid for everything I
    have in my two Windows machines. I don't oppose the notion of copyright
    - I do oppopse its misapplication where it has no place, and the
    surreptitious growth of copyright restrictions that are far beyond the
    intention of the Copyright Act, which sets up copyright as a limited
    licence for the copyright holder to exploit a created work.

    I absolutely reject the idea that any organisation has the right to tell
    me how I will use, in my own home and on my computers, products I have
    legitmately bought. I reject the idea of a EULA I have to agree to
    before I can even look at the product.

    I reject the idea that I have only bought a licence to use the software
    and that I don't own the individual copy of that product sitting on the
    disk in front of me.That's contrary to the WIPO treaties, but the
    problem is to find someone with the backing and the clout to take it to
    the WTO.

    I reject the idea that software and hardware suppliers can, without my
    agreement, change aspects of the way I can use their products after I
    have paid for them - which is why I'm staying well away from Apple and
    all its works, however sniny and fashionable they are.

    So far I've done four of six, and it's been less painful than I
    expected. The remaining two run a program (radio station playlist
    creation and playout) that doesn't have an Open Source equivalent yet.

    But it's already being developed...

    Philip
     
    Philip, Sep 22, 2006
    #3
  4. I'd go along with most of what you said, but I'm not sure about this. Even
    the GNU General Public License is still a licence, it doesn't give you
    ownership of the software, that still resides with the copyright holder(s).

    But the GPL does take advantage of that ownership to do good rather than
    evil, by trying to ensure that no-one can take away your freedom to do what
    you wish with that software.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 22, 2006
    #4
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Gordon Guest

    Do you realise that the Open Source movement believes that Copyright is a
    very good thing? The programmes which are written and released under Open
    Source are Copyrighted.

    Yep, the important bit is in the conditions.

    The GPL has conditions attached to it, just like any copyrighted material.
    The difference is one can not restrict others freedom even though you may
    have modified the software.

    So at the end of the day gentle reader, its not about operating system,
    but control freaks who want your wallet contents forever.
     
    Gordon, Sep 22, 2006
    #5
  6. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Gordon Guest

    Exactly, but the GPL, says do with the software what you want, but you
    must give others the source should they ask for it.

    One can take the software and modify to suits ones needs, without giving
    the modifed source away, but no third party can be involved.
     
    Gordon, Sep 22, 2006
    #6
  7. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Steve Guest

    wtf are you talking about? the gpl will *never* cost you a single cent.
    Copyright and drm are different. Have you not yet noticed that?

    Gentle reader, my a*se. FUD's FUD, however you spin it.
     
    Steve, Sep 22, 2006
    #7
  8. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    MaHogany Guest

    Of course the GNU General Public Licence is predicated on the notion that
    the copyright holder has final say on how licencees use their property.

    That is why the GPL has withstood challanges in the court, and that is why
    free software will continue to remain free.


    Ma Hogany
     
    MaHogany, Sep 22, 2006
    #8
  9. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Philip Guest

    I think that's what the man was saying.

    This isn't an argument about copyright, it's an argument about abuse of
    copyright to impose unwanted, and probably illegal, restrictions on people.

    I've made a fair bit of my income over the years producing copyrighted
    material, some of whose value to my employers was precisely because it
    was copyrighted.

    There are people that make a living writing commercial software that
    runs on Unix, Linux, and BDS, and VMS and Commodore Basic for all I
    know. They are free to do so. There is nothing in the GPL that stops
    them doing that. They make their money on service and support. or simply
    by selling the right to use the programs.

    But the Open Source community, and the GPL, are hostile to exactly the
    kind of withdrawal of rights that Apple and Microsoft are imposing on
    their customers.

    I don't ever want to have my computer tell me I can't do something I
    could do yesterday because someone has imposed on me an "upgrade" that
    takes away functions I had before. Step forward iTunes. Step forward
    Microsoft Media Player. Step forward TiVo.

    I prefer the environment offered by Open Source and the GPL. Nothing
    will happen on my computer that I haven't agreed to in advance, and had
    the option to refuse or undo. That's how it has to be.

    Philip
     
    Philip, Sep 23, 2006
    #9
  10. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    steve Guest

    As expected.

    If content is only available in that format, I'd suggest people simply not
    access / use it.

    People who want their content SEEN will soon get the message.

    Other providers who support more open access will do better.

    Look at Google video or YouTube.....why would anyone go to proprietary,
    closed sources of video when they can see it easily on YouTube or via
    Bittorrent or just rent it at the local DVD shop?
     
    steve, Sep 23, 2006
    #10
  11. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    ChrisOD Guest

    I have heard good things about live support from campware
    http://www.campware.org/en/camp/livesupport_news/
    Not sure if it'll meet your needs or not though.
     
    ChrisOD, Sep 23, 2006
    #11
  12. There are some lessons that certain people do not want to learn. If
    their "legitimate" content channels are not doing well, they immediately
    blame it on "piracy", and use it as an excuse to file even more lawsuits
    against their customers.

    Though are some are starting to admit that DRM does absolutely nothing to
    curb piracy (which has been long obvious to all thinking people). But the
    new rationale for continuing with DRM is that it allows for price
    discrimination and platform lock-in, which are certainly good for profits,
    though not necessarily for the customer or for society
    <http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1052>.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 24, 2006
    #12
  13. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    steve Guest

    True...and with any luck will go the way of DVD region coding which appears
    to be unenforceable (so far).
     
    steve, Sep 24, 2006
    #13
  14. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Earl Grey Guest

    The government has not gone far enough to protect us from unfair trade
    practices like region code restrictions
    All software and hardware players sold in this country should be legally
    required to be set to region free playback
    Computers and DVD drives are still supplied with restrictions that will
    stop you playing your legally acquired content.
    This should be specifically acknowledged as a clear violation of your
    consumer rights.
     
    Earl Grey, Sep 24, 2006
    #14
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.