[ILUG] This just keeps getting stupider by the word.

[Paul Jakma]

On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Brian O'Donoghue wrote:

> Thus no linux for the end luser, because.. you guessed it, without
> your own hard disk, how would you run Linux, 

gosh... i dont know.

no hang on - i do - diskless boot. *nixes have had it for donkey's 
years.

> More than likely that is just paranoia, but the notion of m$ only
> hardware smacks of the winmodem....  [quote] Eventually, as
> Palladium contagion spreads, the home Linux box will need certified
> open-source apps to run DR-managed content. Here goes the GPL again.
> So I've got this certified app. Fine. I've got the sources. Fine.
> What happens if I decide to build my own binaries? They won't be
> certified. They won't work. So what does the GPL mean to me then? It
> means I can build, or modify and build, an application which will
> lack the digital cert which it needs in order to run the content it
> was designed to run. Only the binaries will be certified (as a
> moment's reflection will make obvious). This is a nail in the GPL's
> coffin. Yes, I can improve the app and give away or maybe even sell
> my improved version; but first I have to prove that it qualifies for
> certification, and second I have to pay for the cert.[/quote]

DR seems incompatible with 'open-source' software.

I doubt any govt. is going to ban open-source software - they'd have 
to also make programming a tightly controlled activity.

> I think it's back to the Amiga for me.

no... i think you ought to go talk to/email your MEP and TD.

--paulj