On 31/10/2007, Ian Forrester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes there is Open source DRM, but if we choose some open > source DRM, honestly would we all be happy? Remember DRM is > DRM in any form.
I'd be happy with DRM licensed under the GPLv3, because of part 3: --- 8< --- 3. Protecting Users' Legal Rights From Anti-Circumvention Law. No covered work shall be deemed part of an effective technological measure under any applicable law fulfilling obligations under article 11 of the WIPO copyright treaty adopted on 20 December 1996, or similar laws prohibiting or restricting circumvention of such measures. When you convey a covered work, you waive any legal power to forbid circumvention of technological measures to the extent such circumvention is effected by exercising rights under this License with respect to the covered work, and you disclaim any intention to limit operation or modification of the work as a means of enforcing, against the work's users, your or third parties' legal rights to forbid circumvention of technological measures. --- 8< --- Which nullifies the most awful aspect of DRM: That is it illegal to write new software that comes without the handcuffs. -- Regards, Dave - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
