what moral obligation? (Re: DRM technology and policy)

[Jim Choate]

On Mon, 5 May 2003, Bill Frantz wrote:

> At 9:36 AM -0700 4/29/03, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
> >Actually, non-standard CDs sold with the CD logo are fraudulent, since
> >they violate
> >a published standard which the logo implies.  I'm surprised this avenue
> >hasn't been
> >taken legally.
>
> I believe that the Philips, who holds the trademark for compact disks, has
> said that copy protected disks do not follow the standard and may not use
> the trademark.

Which actually misrepresents the facts. The fact is that Philips position
is one of power and authority, of course they will do this simply to
protect their monopoloy (not the consumers rights, which aren't the same
thing).

If you don't think Philips is looking at how to license their TM to others
wanting to add copy protection of various ilks then you are seriously
misunderstanding the dynamics of a 'Capitalist' market.

It's a matter of time & $$$, not ethical protection of consumer rights or
the obligation of inventors/creators to supply the public domain.


 --
    ____________________________________________________________________

      We are all interested in the future for that is where you and I
      are going to spend the rest of our lives.

                              Criswell, "Plan 9 from Outer Space"

      ravage at ssz.com                            jchoate at open-forge.org
      www.ssz.com                               www.open-forge.org
    --------------------------------------------------------------------