[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [DotGNU]DCMA devils - not under the OSD.
From: |
Barry Fitzgerald |
Subject: |
Re: [DotGNU]DCMA devils - not under the OSD. |
Date: |
Sat, 28 Jul 2001 14:28:27 -0400 |
John wrote:
>
> Barry Fitzgerald wrote:
> > > Encrypting our data stream or programs would run counter to a different
> > > clause of the OSD dealing with obvuscation of property. If obscured, not
> > > Open Source.
> > >
> >
> > I think that, from the privacy perspective, most people wouldn't want
> > their data open source in the first place.
>
> I should have been clearer when I wrote the above. Of course we have to
> encrypt the data, but we also publish the scheme of that data. "Keeping
> the scheme unpublished would run counter to the OSD" would have been
> closer to my intended warning.
>
> I should have been clearer on the first iteration.
>
> John
Ahh, OK - that makes some more sense. Absolutely! :)
I agree entirely. If the program is open, but the format is not, what
good is the program?
-Barry
- [DotGNU]DCMA devils, Ron Burk, 2001/07/27
- Re: [DotGNU]DCMA devils, Jeremy Petzold, 2001/07/27
- Re: [DotGNU]DCMA devils, Barry Fitzgerald, 2001/07/27
- Re: [DotGNU]DCMA devils - not under the OSD., John, 2001/07/27
- Re: [DotGNU]DCMA devils - not under the OSD., Norbert Bollow, 2001/07/28
- Re: [DotGNU]DCMA devils - not under the OSD., Barry Fitzgerald, 2001/07/28
- [DotGNU]login service slamming, Ron Burk, 2001/07/28
- Re: [DotGNU]login service slamming, Barry Fitzgerald, 2001/07/29
- Re: [DotGNU]login service slamming, Jeremy Petzold, 2001/07/30
- Re: [DotGNU]login service slamming, Norbert Bollow, 2001/07/30
- Re: [DotGNU]login service slamming, Rich Hilliard, 2001/07/31
- [DotGNU]Encryption orthogonal to slamming, Ron Burk, 2001/07/31
- Re: [DotGNU]login service slamming, Rich Hilliard, 2001/07/31