On 5/20/14, Gary Dale <[email protected]> wrote: > On 20/05/14 09:07 AM, Celejar wrote: >> On Tue, 20 May 2014 21:47:57 +1000 >> Zenaan Harkness <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 5/20/14, Celejar <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Sat, 17 May 2014 21:40:56 +1000 >>>> Zenaan Harkness <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On 5/17/14, Slavko <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> ... >>>>>> Don't forget, that justice is not when all criminals are imprisoned >>>>>> and/or punished, but when no one blameless is persecuted. >>>>> Very eloquent and beautiful words. >>>>> Thank you Slavko. >>>> But this is precisely the problem with some of the dogmatic idealists >>>> here - by this logic, we should abolish criminal justice entirely, as >>>> it's virtually impossible to guarantee that "no one blameless" will >>>> ever be "persecuted": >>>> http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/guilty.htm >>> I don't remember reading the words Slavko posted before, but the way I >>> read it is as: >>> "we must make our best efforts to not persecute blameless people" and >>> "if blameless people are being persecuted, we must make more efforts >>> [eg with our criminal justice system - to fix this problem]". >>> >>> So not abolish criminal justice, but make more efforts in this system >>> to reduce/minimize persecution/punishment of people who should not be >>> punished. >>> >>> Of course perfection cannot be achieved in reality, I agree. >> Of course. But while it's certainly not a zero-sum game, there's >> generally going to be a trade-off: increasing protections for >> defendants will save some innocents, at the expense of letting some >> guilty go free. The same goes for IP regulation: many of us at least >> believe that the law should balance the rights of the IP holders with >> the rights of the consumer, and insisting on absolute freedom for the >> consumer at the expense of the rights of the rights-holders is wrong. >> >> Celejar > > DRM removes all rights from the consumer and places them entirely with > the IP holder. That's not balance in any traditional sense of the word.
DRM is technology. Tech which facilitates so-called 'rights-holders' to enforce their so-called 'rights' by technologically restricting what a 'content consumer' can actually do with that content. Some so-called 'rights' I may actually agree with, some I certainly don't. Regards Zenaan _______________________________________________ D-community-offtopic mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
