Re: Protection vs. sharing (was: 52?North publishes first quality controlled stable release!)

On Mar 2, 2006, at 1:21 PM, Jo Walsh wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 03:20:35PM +0000, J.J. Green wrote:
>> DRM is the enemy not just of open source, not just of
>> our society, but of our very species! Man without control
>> of his tools is no more than a rat in a cage.
>
> thank you for such elevating rhetoric!
>
> This is from the GPL3 draft, http://gplv3.fsf.org/draft
> [[ DRM is fundamentally incompatible with the purpose of the GPL,  
> which
> is to protect users' freedom; therefore, the GPL ensures that the
> software it covers will neither be subject to, nor subject other works
> to, digital restrictions from which escape is forbidden. ]]
>
> I listened to some conversation about this at the discussion draft
> launch event a few weeks ago. It definitely filled my mind with
> dystopian anti-fantasies; regarding "digital rights" enforcement
> acting against our potential rights to re-use and redistribute public
> geodata; also about location sensing technologies being used to
> reinforce DRM regimes in new and disturbing ways ("DRM... spatial
> data... tripwires... geofences... oh dear.")
>
> http://www.opengeospatial.org/groups/?iid=129 <- GeoDRM
> http://mappinghacks.com/index.cgi/2006/01/17#spatial_drm <- paranoia
> http://publicgeodata.org/Analysis_Of_INSPIRE_Text <- "intellectual
> property rights" over state-collected spatial data in Europe.
>
> I'd like to find a new, more honest phrase to replace 'DRM' with, like
> where 'monopoly pricing' makes a good substitute for 'cost recovery'.

How about Digital Restrictions Management?

cheers,
Sean

---
Sean Gillies
sgillies   frii com
http://zcologia.com