| |||||||||||
Misunderstanding of embedded system designersMisunderstanding of embedded system designersPosted Jan 17, 2006 14:43 UTC (Tue) by Los__D (subscriber, #15263)In reply to: Misunderstanding of embedded system designers by karim Parent article: GPLv3: a first look
If they make their own software semi-proprietary (By making it impossible to replace it in the system), then they might as well use proprietary tools.
We don't want to bring free software to DRM handicapped platforms, we want DRM handicapped platforms to either go away completely, or keep the hell away from the free software!
(Log in to post comments)
Misunderstanding of embedded system designers Posted Jan 19, 2006 11:51 UTC (Thu) by ohanssen (subscriber, #2761) [Link] There may actually be another reason for restricting replacement of software components, than DRM: Security, and control of our own computers.
I am of course against the spirit of DRM. However, I want freedom to control what software are allowed to be installed an run on *my* computer, and what that software are allowed to do. I dont want Sony CDs to install hidden rootkits. I want to give unsigned and unauthorised applets from the web, only very limited access to my system.
Misunderstanding of embedded system designers Posted Jan 19, 2006 20:50 UTC (Thu) by Los__D (subscriber, #15263) [Link] That doesn't change that the software should be replacable by the user...
We already have standard, and completely open systems for that, i.e. Unix authentication and authorization.
|
|||||||||||