Re: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- From: cs_posting@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 23 Jan 2006 19:55:53 -0800
John Larkin wrote:
> They'll never make it mandatory for general-purpose sar adc chips to
> search for watermarks. And you can always make an audio-quality [1]
> delta-sigma in an FPGA. But why do you think it important to be able
> to bootleg someone else's intellectual property? If you don't like the
> product, don't buy it.
The obvious answer is that there is a huge difference between what the
courts have decided you can do in terms of legitimately using your
legitimately aquired instance of someone's intellectual property, and
what their DRM controls are likely to permit you to do. If DRM systems
literally implemented copyright law and no more, that would be one
thing - but they far over-reach the law with technical means, and
legislation like this would prevent the consumer from using technical
means to rematch what is possible to what is legal.
Further, some of the implementations may have a negative effect on the
ability to use consumer-market gear to create original intellectual
property.
But I'm sure you already knew that, which raises the interesting
question of why you chose to ignore it.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- References:
- Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- From: Winfield Hill
- Re: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- From: John Larkin
- Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- Prev by Date: Re: Favorite electronics movies
- Next by Date: Re: Precision gas volume delivery
- Previous by thread: Re: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- Next by thread: Re: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
