Scribit Marcus Brinkmann dies 01/05/2006 hora 04:21: > Anyway, I did not even talk about ownership of the program. I talked > about ownership of the storage that contains the program. The > peculiar thing is this: Once you run DRM software on your computer, > the computer does not any longer belong to you in full. > > Let's look at embedded devices, for example hard disk video recorders. > If these come with a DRM-restricted software, so that you can not > update the software on the machine, you do not fully own it.
I think you're mixing things abusively. Having a device that will enable me to run DRM software, which in turn is the only one enabled to read DRM-protected data doesn't mean that I'm not able to run another software. This is what Palladium seems to be intended for, and I'm already trying to make all the people I know concerned by this perversion. I agree this would not be anymore owning the computer, and I want to own my computer. And I think it's sound that people in general own their computer in this way. But I want to know where the harm is in a system with the TC chip enabled where non-DRM software can be run, even if it is to replace all the system. WRT DRM IIUC, the only problem is that replacing the certified OS with another one that is not makes the user unable to read DRM-protected data. Unsurely, Nowhere man -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] OpenPGP 0xD9D50D8A
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
