Re:Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook
by beagle3 on Monday June 27, 2016 @02:24AM
(#11984469)
> Copy protection protects CDs from being copied
For 99.999% of the users, it restricts the user from copying the CD. And actually, the CD itself doesn't really care if it's copied, so the cd itself is not "protected" in any way. It provides some minimal protection to the rights owner from unauthorized copies (which are usually, but not necessarily illegal - c.f fair use).
Now, which terminology is more appropriate - that which describes the situation for essentially everyone involved (e.g. a billion people) or the rights holder (essentially less than 10 "people" if you count corporations as people)?
> Digital rights management manages the rights of the IP owner. These are just as valid.
Again, they are valid from the narrow point of view of 0.001% of the population, but INVALID and IRRELEVANT from the point of view of the rest.
"Copy Restriction" and "Digital Restriction Management" are factual and actually neutral. It is what these systems do. Whether this is good or bad depends on your point of view.
Similarly, it wasn't mentioned here, but stallman likes to refer to "Intellectual Property" as "Imaginary Property", which is also factual. I have yet to adopt this one, but I will only really accept "Intellectual Property" as property when it is taxed like property.
For 99.999% of the users, it restricts the user from copying the CD. And actually, the CD itself doesn't really care if it's copied, so the cd itself is not "protected" in any way. It provides some minimal protection to the rights owner from unauthorized copies (which are usually, but not necessarily illegal - c.f fair use).
Now, which terminology is more appropriate - that which describes the situation for essentially everyone involved (e.g. a billion people) or the rights holder (essentially less than 10 "people" if you count corporations as people)?
> Digital rights management manages the rights of the IP owner. These are just as valid.
Again, they are valid from the narrow point of view of 0.001% of the population, but INVALID and IRRELEVANT from the point of view of the rest.
"Copy Restriction" and "Digital Restriction Management" are factual and actually neutral. It is what these systems do. Whether this is good or bad depends on your point of view.
Similarly, it wasn't mentioned here, but stallman likes to refer to "Intellectual Property" as "Imaginary Property", which is also factual. I have yet to adopt this one, but I will only really accept "Intellectual Property" as property when it is taxed like property.