Re: Danger of DRM technologies stack

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 13-11-24 02:35 PM, JF wrote:
> Duncan, the Director has already stated that Content Protection is
> in scope,

FOR DISCUSSION. If this is not discussion, what is? Or is the outcome
of the discussion pre-determined by his decision that it is in scope
for discussion? The pro-DRM folks keep insisting that TBL's
declaration that content protection is in scope FOR DISCUSSION means
that the decision about whether or not to implement this browser
standard has already been made, and the only permissible discussion is
HOW.

I call BS.

- -- 
B. Ross Ashley
registered Linux user 548111
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSkqvuAAoJEFWSUDbPLxNGuZIIAMEvcDEG8oZqPGRQ4l+H3LVD
4JxH62rMfdBKFSixf6pcQp/tuQXDULIIG+Fq1Z5uv66T6c88wFdnFxctCdzc5308
W0queGKB4Ghj8fv6aFveiXeGONb/8on8nH7S3IkFdY/vRiBGSXb3AAGShHLu4yb9
a9bpbiIh8zAgQb21fHuz3umskuxhB25JY3N7QlXQGlYi6hX2uytfAYydiIMxFUrn
lKXXEIq3+x+jMkht9bleBPk0pFegJP5+d+0jOo+kLyMXkWNIeHQ3m3GEI6RPQgVd
1aWtzCzQvr/Jxd8yF+XxHdpxYZ5XHf1UlkKmoku9Rp7hKaPBJz4/VeSSxhOD6X8=
=Ndc3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Monday, 25 November 2013 01:47:02 UTC