Subject: Re: DRM-incompatible licenses
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 17:57:57 +0900

>>>>> "Jamie" == Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org> writes:

    Jamie> Hence the FSF variation, "treacherous computing", to
    Jamie> clarify what is really meant when people use the term.

The FSF's term is just as much FUD as the original is euphemism.

A moderately accurate version would be "trusted-by-content-vendors
computing".

This makes it clear what the incentives for abuse are, and that the
interests of users are considered, but only indirectly.  In the same
way that all intellectual property law is indirectly intended for the
benefit of the the users.  (Don't flame me, I'm paraphrasing the
U.S. Constitution.  You're welcome to express your opinion on how
(in)accurately that describes the behavior of the U.S. Congress,
though. :)

-- 
Graduate School of Systems and Information Engineering   University of Tsukuba
http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp/        Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
        Economics of Information Communication and Computation Systems
          Experimental Economics, Microeconomic Theory, Game Theory