Ubuntu To Investigate Digital Rights Management

[RealNC]

" No one is trying to circuvment Steam "

:/

People who buy stuff on Steam, that is. For example, I often apply cracks on games I actually bought (and my collection is quite extensive, though mostly old titles), simply because I can't be arsed to always pull out the DVD or CD and have it in the drive. With Steam, I've never done that. It doesn't have an annoying copy protection scheme.

Of course people who just want to download and play without paying (warez) will circumvent Steam.

[bwat47]

Im sorry for your ignorance. A few years ago Trolltech owned Qt and they sold Qt licenses to settop box companies. That was as closed source and DRM as it gets. Hell Trolltech even went through the pain of providing ways for binary compability to shit DRM. DRM was some of Qts main business.

I hope you learned something today. Now stop defending one of the WORST DRM offenders out there. And Nokia wasnt much better. http://arstechnica.com/information-t...bile-platform/

Of course then Nokia realized Qt was shit and they dumped it. After that we all know Qt went down the "lets port to shit platforms like iOS and fucking blackberry." So yeah Qt is shit.

You're an idiot, QT has nothing to do with DRM, the "examples" you posted are totally irrelevant.

[dee.]

Oh Ubuntu, no... first Mir and now this?

DRM is the root of all evil and any OS that claims to care about user freedom needs to fight against DRM.

[Serge]

DRM is the root of all evil and any OS that claims to care about user freedom needs to fight against DRM.

Well, that I think is pretty much the FSF position. FSF defines the degree of success of FOSS projects as being tied to the degree of freedom these projects are able to provide their users. The FSF makes it clear that from their point of view market share is not success.

While I can't recall Mark Shuttleworth saying so explicitly (maybe he has, I don't know, I don't follow Ubuntu that closely), I do remember a number of blog posts and press statements from him where he has implied that he consideres Canonical to be good for Linux because Canonical drives Linux adoption (market share). So it's two diametrically opposed points of view. Canonical feels that spreading Ubuntu is worth the price of spreading DRM along with it, while the FSF will probably argue that spreading a compromised system is not worth the cost of perpetuating DRM.

[shmerl]

Sounds sick already. In contrast Sailfish explicitly stated they don't support any DRM. Vendors can add that kind of unethical junk on top of course, but helping them do it? Way to go a slipper slope Canonical.

[bac0n]

... but somehow I welcome DRM, the minute they say "we are protected" they loose all subventions, but as always... the more you have the more you want... therefor the concept of DRM will always fail ...

[jrch2k8]

You're an idiot, QT has nothing to do with DRM, the "examples" you posted are totally irrelevant.

funkstar is a fail of troll and a Qt hater[or GTK zealot] that no matter what you do will always find a more ridicule to embarrass himself or simply to replying to your post and get all vocal. Q will cry blood if he sees how low trolls falled after he left

best solution, plainly ignore him[until at least he get decent trollings]

[funkSTAR]

funkstar is a fail of troll and a Qt hater[or GTK zealot] that no matter what you do will always find a more ridicule to embarrass himself or simply to replying to your post and get all vocal. Q will cry blood if he sees how low trolls falled after he left

best solution, plainly ignore him[until at least he get decent trollings]

LoL. You are in total denial. Qt is used for DRM on set top boxes. Deal with it.

http://www.discretix.com/corporate/pr080211_Mobile_DRM_for_Embedded_Linux.html

http://www.it-observer.com/beep-science-and-trolltech-team.html

http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/GPLd-Linux-stack-supports-touchscreen-phones/

Anyone claiming that Qt is not heavily invovled in the fine art of freedom fucking DRM is in TOTAL DENIAL and need medical attention ASAP.

[Guest]

You can't have everything open when security is at stake.

Why not? Windows is closed and it's probably the most insecure system on the planet. In contrary, Open Source systems are the most secure. EDIT: or perhaps, you meant security in the mean of to not pirate games or services?

[dee.]

One day we'll get rid of artificial scarcity, and we'll never have to deal with DRM or "trusted computing" again. I hope.

When you think about it, DRM is basically just a mild form of "trusted computing" - your computer doesn't do what you wants, only what someone else thinks you should be allowed to do with it. The only difference is that DRM is (usually) confined to one application, while "trusted computing" applies to the entire system.

Linux should be kept free of "trusted computing" schemes, as those are inherently offensive to the fundamental freedoms of people.