Re: What is the "open web" ?

>> I'm a FOSS programer and I consider my work some kind of art (not
kidding), and with that point of view, I'm more that rewarded if my code is
used by others, in the same way a musician should be of others listen their
music.
>
>
> And you are free to choose the manner of your reward. If you wanted to be
paid, you should be free to choose that path.
>
Touchée.

>> Of course, always that another is not getting some profit of my work
(specially without my authorization), if that's the case, I want my
percentage.
>
>
> And you are free to attach that as a licensing condition to your work.
>
Well, I'm more inclined to CreativeCommons licenses and allow anyone to
non-proffit free use and distribution of material, but I can understand
others don't like this... what I don't understand by they force their
freedom toward some basic rights like personal copy (that should be allowed
wherever license it's being used).

>> That's why I think there should be more work towards unlicensed copies
that about what are doing users at their home.
>
>
> Please, propose something.
>>
For the sake of FSM!!! Nobody on the majors has though yet on AES
certificates, like SSH or banking unipersonal certificates???

Oh, wait, that requires one certificate per user, and cypher the content in
a per user basis, and wouldn't allow piracy... That doesn't interest, it's
better a faulty DRM scheme...

>> > There is tension between these things, that is obvious. The issue is a
subject of widespread debate. The question before us is whether technical
standards for the web should take sides in that debate, or whether web
standards should be provided that support the different approaches
currently widely practiced (on the web and elsewhere).
>> >
>> Intelligent argument. IMHO, standards should be at margin of debates,
and if required to take part, being always on the final users side.
>
> But the whole debate is about a balance of public interests, that is,
users interests. The "final users" have an interest in both sides. So, to
"stay on the magins" here, standards should provide technical support for
all approaches, and then let people/users/markets decide.
>
On this topic, I understand that "stay on the margins" would be do nothing
and left things as they currently are. Any other thing (W3C define EME or
reject it, and I prefer this last obe) would means taking part on one of
the sides.