Quote:
Originally Posted by ottischwenk
No, it's my attempt to make people understand it.
|
But you are only spreading Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. Based on my experiences with Intellectual Property law you have a poor grasp of the subject, of course that's just my opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottischwenk
In my opinion, DRM removal is unethical if it is used to read on an second an unsuitable device.
In this case another license would have to be bought and if not, ...
|
In your opinion. And all experience suggests that no second licence is needed for a single user. Contracts or Terms and Conditions on Websites and in shrinkwrap software have been found to be void or even illegal when they are too restrictive. In any case they are separate from Copyright.
DRM itself is unethical and increasingly when it goes to court found to be actually illegally removing normal rights of the consumer and more restrictive than actual copyright. It only really makes money for the people selling DRM, and damages the reputation of companies using it. See Sony CD DRM fiasco. It has ZERO impact on commercial piracy. DRM is nothing to do with copyright. It's sometimes applied to PD works, it's still there when copyright has expired. It prevents fair use of excerpts for people not expert at IT.
Law is not as binary as you think and Ethics is another word for Morality and is more absolute than most think.