Comments on: Richard Stallman interview

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 08 Feb 2006 07:49:09 +0000

I didn’t know the software of an iPod could be changed.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 21:14:16 +0000

I have been surpized that the Patti button hasn’t leaked over to any Linux / Free Software sites yet.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 16:20:46 +0000

I’m no expert, but I think that if the software has DRM, it simply cannot use the GPL3.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 15:28:02 +0000

RMS: “That is somewhat of a misunderstanding–we cannot “ban DRM”. What we can do is prevent GPL-covered software from being corrupted into an instrument for implementing DRM. The way we do this is not by restricting which technical jobs the program can do. Instead, we make sure that users retain the effective freedom to change the software and run their changed versions.”
Question by Bernard Lang : But what if the law prohibits changing the program to remove the DRM? A license has no precedence over the law.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 15:24:55 +0000

Actually, if you install Linux onto an iPod, it can play Ogg too.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 15:01:05 +0000

I noticed that and I think he was referring to iPod instead of iTunes. Not too many digital players play ogg, but I’ve seen one by Samsung.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 14:42:22 +0000

An afterthough

See this page to undestand how music publishers get their songs:

THE BIG PEERMUSIC LIE
http://rafa_venegas.web.prdigital.com/1997_peer_assignment_request.htm

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 14:16:03 +0000

“Anyone who uses the term “intellectual property” is either trying to confuse the public, or confused himself. Those who wish to encourage clear thinking would do better to avoid it.”

Here in Puerto Rico we speak spanish. By tradition we used the term “derechos de autor” wich translated means “author rights” to describe the rights of authors to have a monopoly on the use of his/her artistic works.

The legal system has very cunningly renamed “author rights” with the term “copyright” or “intellectual property”. The reason is clear… push the idea that these are rights that can be owned by other than the authors, the creators. As Richard Stallman says. “to confuse the public” and to legitimize the abuse of authors by those that promise the authors wealth in exchange for giving up the rights. In the case of songwriter, the promises are made by the music publishers who in the end make all the money and convince the authors and friendly judges that the author gave up all their rights when he/she signed the phony contracts, or better put, when their creations were literally stolen through fraudulent songwriter contracts.

I have seen many songwriter contracts and have yet to see one that is not fraudulent or good for the author.

Too bad authors, songwriters and artists are no longer the right holders. Surely if authors, songwriters and artists were the right holders, and not businesses, we would not be talking about DRM, lawsuits against music fans and kids, and the criminilizing of an entire population for sharing.

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 08:05:42 +0000

Yea he’s definetly one of the good guys. A 5 star General in the war of semantics.

Alex Jones had him on for an interesting interview a few weeks ago.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 06:00:26 +0000

Nicely done DaBlade. Stallman’s attention to detail when it came to certain industry buzzwords made this all the more interesting to read. I like Rich already, gotta admire someone as determined to stick to their ground as he is.

Respec’

Tom Nsian AKA The Bananen Penguin

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 04:34:55 +0000

The man makes some good points. He’s wrong about one detail though – iTunes does not offer mp3 files for download, but rather DRMed AAC files. I don’t believe mp3 can be DRMed – at least I’ve never heard of a “protected” mp3 file…

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 04:32:56 +0000

Good work. I liked Stallman’s criticism of the terms “content” and “producers”.