The anti-DRM stance
Posted Jan 28, 2006 0:13 UTC (Sat) by
jpick (guest, #29470)
Parent article:
Stallman leads the GPL off a cliff (ZDNet)
Can a little action like the GPLv3 stance against DRM actually make a difference?
I think it might actually make a big difference. When the mainstream big companies keep trying to paint their ever-screwed-up DRM schemes as value for the consumer, eventually the consumers are going to get fed up and flee.
In the meantime, there will be a pretty substantial non-DRM ecosystem building up centered around GPLv3 licensed software. People will have somewhere to go when they get fed up with all the DRM crap.
People who choose the non-DRM ecosystem will have a plethora of legal content available to them via the LightNet (Creative Commons, Internet Archive, podcasting, etc.), and they'll also still have the option to bend the rules, rip their CDs, DVDs, and trade via their DarkNets.
The FSF knows what they are doing with CopyLeft. Copyleft works by maximizing the freedom of the end users, by restricting the freedom of the licensors to add additional restrictions. The anti-DRM stance of the GPLv3 is entirely consistent with that approach, and necessary.
I believe that the GPLv3 will succeed as a license for the same reason the GPLv2 succeeded.
(
Log in to post comments)