FSF condemns partnership between Mozilla and Adobe to support Digital Restrictions Management

[Zenaan Harkness]

On 5/20/14, Gary Dale <garydale at torfree.net> wrote:
> On 20/05/14 09:07 AM, Celejar wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 May 2014 21:47:57 +1000
>> Zenaan Harkness <zen at freedbms.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/20/14, Celejar <celejar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 17 May 2014 21:40:56 +1000
>>>> Zenaan Harkness <zen at freedbms.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 5/17/14, Slavko <linux at slavino.sk> wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>>> Don't forget, that justice is not when all criminals are imprisoned
>>>>>> and/or punished, but when no one blameless is persecuted.
>>>>> Very eloquent and beautiful words.
>>>>> Thank you Slavko.
>>>> But this is precisely the problem with some of the dogmatic idealists
>>>> here - by this logic, we should abolish criminal justice entirely, as
>>>> it's virtually impossible to guarantee that "no one blameless" will
>>>> ever be "persecuted":
>>>> http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/guilty.htm
>>> I don't remember reading the words Slavko posted before, but the way I
>>> read it is as:
>>> "we must make our best efforts to not persecute blameless people" and
>>> "if blameless people are being persecuted, we must make more efforts
>>> [eg with our criminal justice system - to fix this problem]".
>>>
>>> So not abolish criminal justice, but make more efforts in this system
>>> to reduce/minimize persecution/punishment of people who should not be
>>> punished.
>>>
>>> Of course perfection cannot be achieved in reality, I agree.
>> Of course. But while it's certainly not a zero-sum game, there's
>> generally going to be a trade-off: increasing protections for
>> defendants will save some innocents, at the expense of letting some
>> guilty go free. The same goes for IP regulation: many of us at least
>> believe that the law should balance the rights of the IP holders with
>> the rights of the consumer, and insisting on absolute freedom for the
>> consumer at the expense of the rights of the rights-holders is wrong.
>>
>> Celejar
>
> DRM removes all rights from the consumer and places them entirely with
> the IP holder. That's not balance in any traditional sense of the word.

DRM is technology. Tech which facilitates so-called 'rights-holders'
to enforce their so-called 'rights' by technologically restricting
what a 'content consumer' can actually do with that content.

Some so-called 'rights' I may actually agree with, some I certainly don't.

Regards
Zenaan