Subject: Re: Thought crimes
From: Bernard Lang <Bernard.Lang@inria.fr>
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 15:30:59 +0100


On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 08:37:48AM -0500, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> My apologies to everyone for starting this thread of discussion. I should
> have known better.
> 
> My original purpose was simply to make the FSB list aware of a new copy
> protection scheme, and it got out of hand.
> 
> 
> Jonathan


Apologies accepted ... even more because I am guilty too.  But I
enjoyed the discussion, of a much better quality than on other forums.

Coming back to the original topic, I do not understand well the new
scheme.  The article in the Register did not help me much.  I do not
see either why a company like IBM should put its finger in such a
touchy business.

  But for what I understood, this should be transparent for
unprotected files.  Then, what prevent me from grabing files as they
come in my computer, and reencoding them so that the disk does not see
they are protected files.  Then all I need is to add a software
decoder to my disk access software.

   I am sure I am naive, but can someone explain.

Another point is that, at least in some countries, there is a right to
interoperability, and one can retro-engineer products to be able to
make compatible ones.  So that should help free software ... and
possibly defeat the whole scheme (but I do not understand it).

Cheers

Bernard



-- 
         Non aux Brevets Logiciels  -  No to Software Patents
           SIGNEZ    http://petition.eurolinux.org/    SIGN

Bernard.Lang@inria.fr             ,_  /\o    \o/    Tel  +33 1 3963 5644
http://pauillac.inria.fr/~lang/  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  Fax  +33 1 3963 5469
            INRIA / B.P. 105 / 78153 Le Chesnay CEDEX / France
         Je n'exprime que mon opinion - I express only my opinion
                 CAGED BEHIND WINDOWS or FREE WITH LINUX