On 2014-05-16 15:17, John Foliot wrote:
Bob Ham wrote:
> Brazilian television broadcasters, seeking to purchase
entertainment
> content from outside of the country, may find that no-one is
willing
> to sell them that content
Which would mean they would have to invest their money in producers
of
unencumbered content, in creative people who are more interested in
producing content worthy of being shared than they are in preventing
sharing. This is a good thing, right?
Once again, that depends on your perspective.
Indeed. Do you agree that investing in content producers who do not
encumber their content with DRM, is a good thing?
> I am hard
> pressed to imagine that the Brazilian people and government would
be
> interested in presenting themselves on the world stage as thieves
and
> outlaws
Equating the banning of DRM with thievery and criminality is a real
stretch.
That is not what I said, but it is typical of the kinds of responses
I often
get. What I said was that most rational proponents of premium media
and
content protection on the web understand that if you try to ban the
*majority*
of users from accessing the content legally, that some (many?) will
pursue
illegal means.
I can't see anywhere in your original email where you said that. I can
see you talking about Brazilians ignoring Brazilian law and being seen
as thieves and outlaws.
--
Bob Ham <[email protected]>
for (;;) { ++pancakes; }
