Basically it uses copyright laws to ensure that no matter what the code will always be available to copy. It's genius if you ask me. It takes the very problem and turns it into the solution. While DRM is exactly the opposite. It is designed to ensure that content cant be copied, and is nothing at all what the GPL tries to do.
Comparing the GPL to DRM is easily the stupidest thing anybody has ever tried to do.... period...
It's easy and glib to say that this was a party that was going to happen anyway. That's not quite what the real story is. If the media companies weren't so pedantic about worrying about "piracy" (Let's be dead honest about it here... They want "control" and they want to force us into a rental situation instead of a purchase situation- they want all the benefits of Copyright protection, but none of the "disadvantages" they perceive that this has.) that this wouldn't have been a party that would have actually happened in the first place had they been reasonable about all of it in the first place.
Ugh... There's no good reason to resort to foul language here. I certainly didn't say anything to merit bringing up the subject...Of course people can RE things but you won't see me and likely not many others people starting doing RE on windows, i haven't installed one in more than 8 years and i would have to learn many things to know how to RE on that crap.
Last edited by Svartalf; 02-09-2008 at 01:48 PM.
The discussion of the lack of a real need for the support to be combined (For example, Macrovision's dead worthless on video these days- why keep USING it in the first place?) is different from the discussion of why we can't get hardware decode support for unencrypted content. But some people don't get that you're kind of stuck in a mess that didn't really need to have happen to you and it's damned difficult to get back out of it.
Last edited by Svartalf; 02-09-2008 at 02:01 PM.
Intel does the same as was already pointed out, and it's even worse with nvidia...
On those boards Bridgman also said they will look into h.264 decoding after 3d release and if it's possible the doc will be there. Is it that bad that it's just a possibility? Should they drop the 3d now and look into video decoding instead because you want it? .. Your constant nagging doesn't really help and hardware video decoding isn't a key feature of graphic card for most people.
If you want to nag more, please just wait with it until we know the final word on releasing video docs.
Yep that means after the 3d most likely. Although others know better when it will be as I'm not working for AMD
Last edited by val-gaav; 02-09-2008 at 02:19 PM.
for what i know DRM ensures that no copies of the media are made and sold to someone without paying the appropriate fee and that you only make copies of the music under the direct guidance of the copyright owner. and this is to protect the artists rights. i ask for forgiveness if i misunderstood this.
Note that I am not arguing the morality (for profit vs for freedom), but rather that DRM is a technical means of enforcing the media companies view of fair use, and is fundamentally no different than the kernel authors enforcing their view of fair use.
Please don't interpret this as a flameworth response, I am just trying to ensure that you have a clearer understanding of my point.
DRM is technical implementation to support the same thing. It is uses copyright laws (including DMCA) to ensure that no unauthorised copies are made no matter what (the no matter what may be naive, but it is still there).
Again, ignoring the morality nor the intent (for profit vs for freedom), DRM and the GPL_ONLY flag in the kernel is fundamentally the same thing.While DRM is exactly the opposite. It is designed to ensure that content cant be copied, and is nothing at all what the GPL tries to do.
I made no comparison between the GPL and DRM, I made a comparsion between the GPL_ONLY flag in the kernel and DRM as both being Technical measures used by a copyright owner to enforce their interpretation of fair use.Comparing the GPL to DRM is easily the stupidest thing anybody has ever tried to do.... period...
You obviously didn't click the link that was quoted, since both Linus Torvalds and Theodore Tso have both made the exact same comparison.
Quoting from the thread within the link.
Originally Posted by Theodore TsoLet me re-iterate one more time. DRM is not fundamentally any more evil than the GPL_ONLY flag. Users get stung by DRM in the same way that naive changes to the kernel developers sting non-GPL module developers.Originally Posted by Linus Torvalds
For example, GPL_ONLY is intended to support a developers view that their interface is Linux unique, and any modules using that interface is clearly a derivation of the kernel, and consequently must be GPL.
In no way, should a non-GPL module be considered a deriviative work if it uses a standard Unix function such as udelay. But yet, if PARAVIRT is enabled in the kernel, the udelay function gets hidden behind the GPL_ONLY data structure and the compile fails.
As Linus and Theodore indicate, any form of fair use enforcement is fundamentally broken in the same way. Evil is purely a point of view.
As I have said in another post. For 2.6.22, if you enable PARAVIRT in the kernel suddenly udelay - a function that exists in nearly any unix style system in the universe, is reported as a GPL_ONLY function.
Just like DRM, it is a fundamentally broken way
In the same way that DRM [CSS, AACS, etc] (ultimately - invariably it gets cracked) does stop people from using their FAIR USE rights.that is, it doesent stop people from using their FAIR USE rights.
I am always amazed at the number of people who openly flout DRM, but then cry foul about people removing the GPL_ONLY flag. Both are removing technical measures that are intended to guide against copyright violations.
As I told before...
Guys please lets focus on the present problems, which are quite a lot, and then we can melt this DRM issue discussing solutions!!
Most of us cannot even play a HD-BD movie not to tell about copy or so...
We do not even know which media format will finally win in the HD-BD war...
Also we have another parameter now, DisplayPort against HDMI!
Can we have XV, XvMC, Crossfire-CrossfireX, Avivo Crossfire, HD AGP cards working, Better AIGLX and better Xorg 7,3 support by either of the 3 drivers for now??
Then we can break our heads searching for a working DRM solution-workaround...