- From: Bob Ham <rah@settrans.net>
- Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 15:37:17 +0000
- To: <public-restrictedmedia@w3.org>
On 2014-05-16 15:17, John Foliot wrote: > Bob Ham wrote: >> > Brazilian television broadcasters, seeking to purchase >> entertainment >> > content from outside of the country, may find that no-one is >> willing >> > to sell them that content >> >> Which would mean they would have to invest their money in producers >> of >> unencumbered content, in creative people who are more interested in >> producing content worthy of being shared than they are in preventing >> sharing. This is a good thing, right? > > Once again, that depends on your perspective. Indeed. Do you agree that investing in content producers who do not encumber their content with DRM, is a good thing? >> > I am hard >> > pressed to imagine that the Brazilian people and government would >> be >> > interested in presenting themselves on the world stage as thieves >> and >> > outlaws >> >> Equating the banning of DRM with thievery and criminality is a real >> stretch. > > That is not what I said, but it is typical of the kinds of responses > I often > get. What I said was that most rational proponents of premium media > and > content protection on the web understand that if you try to ban the > *majority* > of users from accessing the content legally, that some (many?) will > pursue > illegal means. I can't see anywhere in your original email where you said that. I can see you talking about Brazilians ignoring Brazilian law and being seen as thieves and outlaws. -- Bob Ham <rah@settrans.net> for (;;) { ++pancakes; }
Received on Friday, 16 May 2014 15:37:41 UTC