I hesitate to weigh in on this subject because a lot of the smartest people
on this list are involved and I don't want to seem to be criticizing them
personally.  So independent of who wrote what:

The idea that one (dvd creators/distributors for example) can do anything
they want is total crap!  The libertarian interpretation of the "free
market" concept is ridiculous.  The market is a system which must serve the
population.  Because of it's design all the players are free to attempt to
manipulate it to their advantage, and they do.  This is NOT inherently a
valuable characteristic!  The only thing that makes the system tolerable AT
ALL is the population's various means of coercing fundamentally evil
mechanisms into _generally_ acceptable behavior.

I'm not going to develop here a lengthy diatribe on capitalism but the idea
that it's perfectly OK for someone to create a superior media format and
decide that only blacks or americans or poodles can use it is grim; and the
idea of condoning that practice in order to protect general intellectual
property rights is pathetic, as is saying "If you don't like it, don't buy
it!  Isn't it great how the market works that way!".  The idea that one can
'vote' with their pocketbook is a duplicitous fiction perpetrated solely for
the advantage of its creators.

Lastly, comparing someone living in the UK who orders a film from the US and
watches it, to someone who hacks copy protection for immoral gain is
spurious and clearly designed to deflect serious consideration of the real
arguments about the rights of consumers in the market, and shouldn't be
allowed to suck any bandwidth at all.

And yes, that means that I draw a very clear distinction between 'legal' and
'moral', and disagreement with that will have to become another (long, long)
topic (one which I would reluctantly enter into with free-market
extremists).

Bruce Cannon
Style Management Systems
http://siliconcrucible.com
(510) 787-6870
1228 Ceres ST Crockett CA 94525

Remember: electronics is changing your world...for good!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pic microcontroller discussion list
> [mailto:PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU]On Behalf Of M. Adam Davis
> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 10:13 AM
> To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Re: [OT]: Will pay cash for pic programming
>
>
> If I understand you correctly, you are saying that the
> person/entity who created
> the work does not have the right to determine how the work is used (as in,
> where, when, and to whom)?
>
> Or are you contending that they only have that right if they use it
> 'responsibly'?
>
> So if I decided that my wildly popular creation could be viewed
> in the US at
> great quality, but those in another country were limited to a
> lower quality, or
> perhaps not the whole creation, then you believe that I do not
> have that right?
> Does it really matter *why* I choose to do so?  Isn't it my right
> regardless of
> my reasons?
>
> -Adam
>
> Bond Peter S-petbond1 wrote:
>
> > Adam's tirade hinges on one point, and only one point where we
> disagree -
> > that is that I do not believe I am breaching the copyright on
> the work by
> > watching it over here, whilst he does.  All of the rest follows
> from that
> > primary assumption.
>
> tirade: a protracted speech usually marked by intemperate,
> vituperative, or
> harshly censorious language.
>
> I can understand the 'protracted' part, but intemperate, vituperative, or
> harshly censorious?  I certianly did not mean to be abusive in my
> posting, I'm
> sorry if it seemed that way.  Probably arises from language cues that are
> different between our continents?
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
> mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu
>
>
>
>
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu