I'll not reply to all of that, but one thing is worthwhile saying...
On 3/19/07, David Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The iPlayer will have crap on it, in part because of this: the content
providers do not want their content to be visible where you shouldn't
get it; so you should only
On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 16:44 +0100, James Cridland wrote:
I think we both agree. IP restrictions (generally) work, and they are
forms of DRM, however you look at it (it's a rights management tool).
However, this only works for streaming media; not for downloadable
files.
I'm not entirely sure
On Sat, 2007-03-10 at 17:46 +, James Cridland wrote:
I think I was trying to say (I'm sometimes not very lucid) that home
piracy in the 1980s didn't have a vast effect, mainly because of the
physical effort required in buying video cassettes, copying cassettes
onto other cassettes and
While I know we've done this to death, and that life may be moving on from a
DRM discussion on here, could I just clarify the comments attributed to me?
On 3/5/07, David Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was particularly concerned to see that someone (I believe it was
James) was allowed to
I've just watched the DRM podcast and I have to admit I was very
disappointed. It seemed to digress into a pie-in-the-sky discussion
about changing the licensing model and even changing the law, rather
than concentrating on how ineffective the proposed use of DRM would
actually be.
I was
PLEASE TAKE ME OFF THIS LIST
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've filled in the unsubscribe form four time
On 3/5/07, David Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've just watched the DRM podcast and I have to admit I was very
disappointed. It seemed to digress into a pie-in-the-sky discussion
about
6 matches
Mail list logo
