"Raul Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On 3/15/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Raul Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Same thing goes for a brick wall -- a brick wall can prevent > > > unauthorized copying, in the sense you're using. > > > > I can see some difficulty in proving they are technological, but > > if a marker pen can be classed as a circumvention device, it seems > > possible that they might be technological measures sometimes, if > > they are doors or walls designed to prevent such copying. > > I don't have a clue what you're saying, here.
Rephrase: I don't agree the same goes for a brick wall because it's not technological, but sillier decisions have been made before. > > > Same thing goes for the atlantic ocean -- the atlantic ocean can prevent > > > unauthorized copying, in the sense you're using. > > > > > > Notice a trend here? None of this has anything to do with preventing > > > someone who has a copy from making unauthorized copies. > > > > That situation isn't my main concern. File permissions clearly > > "obstruct or control the reading or further copying of the copies > > you make or distribute" as well as meet the definition of a > > technological measure. > > Only when file permissions that you control are applied to copies > you distribute to someone else. If you've given someone else a > copy and they can't control the file permissions on a copy, that > would be a problem. Why is distribution important? It's a copyright licence, not a distribution licence: it covers making copies, too, and that's mentioned explicitly in that clause too. > But I don't see why this should be considered a serious issue. It's less generally troublesome than unmodifiable sections, but it seems no less serious to me. > > > Do you seriously believe the GFDL prohibits the atlantic ocean? > > > > It's very hard to argue that the atlantic ocean was designed to prevent > > unauthorised copying, which is part of the legislative definition here. > > That was my point: > > An argument which would treat the atlantic ocean as DRM must > be wrong. And my point was: my argument would not treat the atlantic as DRM. Hope that explains, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]