Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> Free Software Foundation: Free as in "do what I say"
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | But not, apparently, under the new FSF order. In this new worldview, DRM
> | is Wrong. It is verboten. And who knows what other algorithm or subroutine
> | might be cast out next; but who are we to question? By abandoning social
> | and economic arguments in favor of a moral one, the FSF is in effect
> | telling us that God is on its side.
> So, to this columnist, restricting data access to a single platform (i.e.
> product) is perfectly fine. Sounds like a lockin or a route to
> monopolisation to me...
Can't say that I know anything about Neil McAllister. But in this
piece he certainly comes across as an enemy of (software) freedom. He
claims that he admired Stallman and the FSF to begin with, but doesn't
like the way they've become "politicized". Uh, excuse me, but this has
always been political.
<quote>One of the original tenets of the GPL was that users of software
should be free, not just to run the software and make copies of it, but
to examine its code and improve on it. Free software means, among other
things, the freedom of programmers to write code.
But not, apparently, under the new FSF order. In this new worldview,
DRM is Wrong. It is verboten. </quote>
He's trying to make out that the FSF's stance on DRM marks a change in
their position. But this is what Stallman & co have been fighting
against all along. Stallman has always said that the user should be
able to use the software however he wants. That includes copying the
thing, a freedom that DRM takes away.
McAllister also complains about Stallman calling DRM Digital
Restrictions Management. But Stallman's only calling it as he sees it.
DRM is about restrictions a lot more than it is rights.