|
I agree that original authors should be credited for their work. But I can also see problems in trying to provide that credit for a product that has no license or usage requirements that I can find, is not copyrighted or patented as far as I can find, and was written by someone known only by their pseudonym/alias. I think it is a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that those who wrote DeDRM knew from the start that they would never be widely known for what they did. I also think it is reasonable to believe that this was intentional. Giving credit to a phantom who wants to remain a phantom is (1) not an easy task, (2) probably an inappropriate thing to attempt in the first place, given the authors apparent desire to remain a phantom. There is a bit of a moral dilemma in all this - you want to give credit where credit is due, but you don't want to drag someone into something that they did their best not to be dragged into. So which side do you cheer for? The side that says "Give them credit, even if it may harm them" or the side that says "Facilitate their anonymity, by not publicly acknowledging what they did". I'm don't think the choice is as clear-cut as some might make it out to be.
|