On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 12:31 AM, Rudolf Streif <[email protected]> wrote: > Ryan, > Unfortunately, you are missing the point. > An average Hollywood production now costs about $100M. 7 out of 10 of these > productions do not recover their cost at the movie theater box office. > Hence, movie producers must rely on other distribution channels for instance > DVD, BluRay and increasingly delivery over managed and unmanaged > networks. Believe it or not, movie-making is a high-risk business and it > does not really matter if the products are called "intellectual property", > intangible assets, etc.
It's not my job to help prop up their broken business model. If they can't make money, it certainly not due to piracy (whatever their lawyers and lobbyists may try to claim). > I agree that the term "intellectual property" is emotionally loaded but that > must not distract from a rational discussion around a security framework for > MeeGo supporting DRM/CA. Which is just fine and dandy, until that security framework morphs into protecting the copyright of content on the device into enabling licensed hardware (i.e., this security framework prevents you from using unsigned firmwares). I own my device, Nokia/Intel/Samsung/whomever does not. Clearly there's an issue for me as a consumer when MeeGo is targeting OEMs. > For a owner and user of such a device that may indeed mean that during the > period of time when content is received and rendered the user may be > required to surrender some of the rights that otherwise could be covered by > "reasonable fair use" (although that's a rather vague definition). Actually, it was (until movie studios sent of legions of lawyers) a well-defined legal term. :) _______________________________________________ MeeGo-community mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-community
