Re: [kFW] All-Inclusivity (DRM and Kendra)

["Scott Pollard, BIBC" <scott.pollard@xxxxxxxx>]

Well said, Pat.

I merely paraphrase my original sentiments into:

"It's any Content Creator's right to define how their Content shall lawfully
be made available.  No one else has the right to take that right away from
them."

Only total mediocrity offends no-one.

Scott

----- Original Message -----
From: "Pat Gratton" <gratton@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Kendra Framework" <k-framework@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 8:52 PM
Subject: [kFW] All-Inclusivity (DRM and Kendra)


I'm breaking my reply to "Kendra Status" (on kGen) into two parts (and
sending this part to kFW, since the RMS thread is there).

I'll start with something that you'll completely disagree with...  One of my
dictums in life is: If you're not pissing someone off, then you're probably
doing something wrong!   Either you're unclearly stating you
opinions/ideas/design, or you're not paying close enough attention to
people's reactions.

While "all-inclusivity" sounds good, the fact is that some people's
viewpoints/desires are diametrically opposed.  So if you take any stance on
the issue that they care about, then you're going to piss off at least one
of them.

So, the good news (according to my dictum) is that you've managed to raise
the hackles of RMS by supporting DRM!  The bad news is that you think that
this is avoidable somehow!  It's not - RMS is diametrically opposed to any
system that allows purveyors of information to limit acccess of users to
information - which is exactly what DRM does.

Some notes on the previous DRM thread...

[... snip ...]