Re: European Commission considers mandatory digital rights management

On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 03:14:50PM -0500, Dr Mark R Baker wrote:
> Hi,
> With all due respect I think that you should carefully re-read what I said -
> i.e. *that material goods are fundamentally stealable just as digital
> content if fundamentally copyable* - which is not the same as saying copying
> is theft. An argument is often made that as it is not possible to completely
> copy protect bits then to try is going against some fundamental law of
> nature. Even so I think there is a new redefinition of the word stealing
> going on - analogous to the old Marxist one that we are all so familar with!
I can "feel" the common-law vs. civil-law clash that happened here ;)

This goes into the same range as the fact, that I refuse to speak of
"property" when talking about copyrights and patents. For me, those are
rights, not property in the legal sense, which makes a lot of difference
with regard to conclusions....

Anyway, the webster-definition makes "steal" anything, that is done
without consent. So web-bugs and cookies would serve to "steal"
information from individuals? If the industry is neglecting users rights
on fair use and private copy, is this "stealing"?

We already see, that in the discussion about DRM, we have to clear and
define our terms to avoid misunderstanding. This will also help to keep
the emotions out of the discussion. 


P.S. Subject adjusted

Received on Monday, 11 March 2002 06:41:30 UTC