[aklug] Re: !~

On 10/30/2013 12:41 AM, Arthur Corliss wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Oct 2013, Nathan Templeton wrote:
>
>> I can see both sides of this one here. Multimedia support with linux
>> has really been a "hotbed" issue for years as one of the cataylsts to
>> get it to be a main stream OS. Albiet, something it was never really
>> created to do. But that is neither here nor there. I agree that DCMA
>> (?), I was speed reading, so I might have the letters wrong; is truly
>> nothing more than a way for those with the power to make more money.
>>
>> Good for them, that might get me flamed a bit, but here is the thing.
>> If you are hooked onto a cashcow that is paying for your house in the
>> Hamptons and a new Range Rover in your driveway each year, would you
>> not find a way to "lock it down" and make it viable income? This has
>> nothing to do with whether it is right or not. That is up to a moral
>> debate that has little to do with any OS and more with the moral
>> compass of a given group of people. It was posted a bit back in this
>> thread that there are now commercial entities selling software to
>> play dvd's on linux. It is a link in the money trail that exploits
>> the grey area that most live in when it comes to using the "renegade
>> os" :).
>
> I have no problem with maximizing profits, but from an ethical
> perspective
> it should be because you've added something of value. The DMCA is simply
> legislation whose sole purpose is to undermine fair use doctrines,
> however..
> Companies that leverage that aren't adding anything of value, they're
> undermining your right to view content you've already paid for in any
> manner
> more convenient for you. In short, they'd rather you have to pay to
> access
> their content on a per-device basis, even though the reality is that
> all of
> the content is pragmatically the same.
>
> In any event, I'm not making any judgments on anyone here, either.
> Everyone
> needs to follow their own conscience and creed. If legislation like the
> DMCA sticks in your craw, flout it at will, we all simply must be
> responsible enough to accept the assumption of risk that comes with that.
> And know that we have a government that's no longer operating in the best
> interest of its people.
>
> --Arthur Corliss
> Live Free or Die

So when was the last time our government operated in the "best interest
of its people?"

It's ironic, and interesting - in a sick sort of way, how Disney and the
Hollywood moguls have garnered their monopoly over "creative content."
DMCA is just the most recent manifestation. Donald Duck and Mickey
Mouse, based on the laws under which they were created, were supposed to
have moved into the "public domain" and become public property decades
ago. Whaaa?

It's also ironic that until just after the turn of the 20th Century US
publishers profited by publishing works that were granted a monopoly in
the United Kingdom - laws which didn't apply here. So, at least
historically, the publishing business in the US (now owned primarily by
Germans) established itself and profited immensely by printing works
"pirated" from Europe. Sound familiar? Isn't that what all the movie
folks here are now complaining that folks in Asia are doing to us?

Hehe.

--greg
---------
To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
Received on Wed Oct 30 01:30:25 2013