Re: [PLUG] An interesting story with good points...

[Andrew Brennan <aab@drexel.edu>]

On Tue, 1 Feb 2000, Michael W. Ryan wrote:

> You know, I'm getting tired of the argument "it's too impractical to copy
> DVDs".  The same thing was said about about CDs, and now look.  I can't
> believe people are using this as an argument.

   ... but it's not the impracticality.  You needn't decrypt ANYTHING to 
   duplicate a DVD.  You need a DVD burner and DVDs that weren't made to 
   be used on a home burner ... that's all (right?)

   Decrypting it allows you to potentially repackage the data in another
   format, say a higher compression VCD form ... but now you've changed
   the format from a popular one to one that is easily identified and in
   less popular use.

> And to put a Linux spin on this:  I think this lawsuit, win or lose, is
> damaging to Linux and Open Source.  The attitude taken by the defendents
> does nothing to engender any kind of goodwill in the business community.
> Oh, and before anyone says that Linux doesn't need them, look at your
> history of the microcomputer -- it didn't become widely accepted until it
> became a viable business platform.

   While Linux has definitely benefited from the corporate acceptance, a
   point might be made that the two institutions that are fighting users
   of open source are the MPAA and RIAA ... and both provide content to
   the end users.  Their problem is that they are heavily invested in an
   old technology and distribution scheme and haven't embraced the truth
   that their content *WILL* be distributed electronically, whether they
   like it or not.

   The RIAA is hurting because people already had MP3 players before any
   SDMI compliant devices were on the market.  Since anyone can easily 
   make a MP3 file and use it in a multitude of players, what reason is
   there for us to give up that freedom and use their endorsed crutch ??

   The MPAA backed the CSS encryption scheme -- but apparently neglected
   to have the encryption scheme 'proven' by any current standards (gee,
   one might think they didn't use open source?!).  Now, the industry we
   know for wanting high visibility is doing it's best to make you look
   the other way ... oh you bad little boys, the emperor is NOT naked!

   I agree that corporations are necessary to further the acceptance of 
   open source standards, but these two (RIAA & MPAA) are publicly doing
   their best to cover their assets.  Their neglect to have any *vision*
   in digital distribution of their content is what has them now in the
   limelight, not Linux, Unix, open source, GNU licensing or any of the
   other icons we hold dear.

   ... although I wonder what evil the penguin does in the dark of night.


   andrew.


______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group       -       http://plug.nothinbut.net
Announcements - http://lists.nothinbut.net/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion   -   http://lists.nothinbut.net/mail/listinfo/plug