By now there's quite the debate (aseigo, tsdgeos) regarding the implementation of DRM in KPDF.
Rather then getting a Blogger account (ahem), I'll post here, where I already have an account.
I feel we have a moral obligation to not implement copy-protection in our software. It is not our job to police our users. Sparing the technical debate ("it won't work anyway because it's open source"), the fact of the matter is that just because the proprietary software does it doesn't mean we should.
Those who design or implement DRM are wrong.
It's that simple.
The wishes of the producers of content are inferior to the moral right to fair use. Not necessarily legal right, as that has been more or less destroyed in the US and EU.
Syndicate Blogs
Just don't care it.
I think of the DRM on KPDF like the libdvdcss which isn't distributed withing xine, vlc or mplayer: Legal stuff.
Just take a look to Suse which doesn't ship with mp3 or xvid codecs.
I think the better thing is to be relaxed and add the DRM in the mainstream...
Then a patch could provide a way to remove it, and other distributions which are more legal-trouble safe, such as Gentoo or Debian, could apply it to enforce the user rights.
As I already said on TSDgeos' blog, I'm not going to apply such a patch.. at least if I'll not go against a misused DRM which I *need* to bypass.
We should be relaxed about that, as Aaron already said, in OSS world a DRM is not useful for lame "rights" enforcements, as quite anyone could remove it
But for formal "appearence" I think it's better to offer it.
I like the idea of...
I like the idea of asking the user on application startup if their locals laws allow them to circumvent DRM, and act accordingly.
That way you show those living in unlibre (yes, making up words) lands like the US that their government is stupid. You indicate that the whole concept is stupid. And furthermore, you still effectively support DRM...
...Even if it's a simple matter of lying about your locality.
Of course, if it were up to me, DRM would be illegal.
And I get good feeling every time I commit the crime of playing a DVD from another region. Moral rightness is a lot more important to me than the laws bought and paid for by corporations.
I freely admit I break those laws.
Regional settings
That idea is not bad at all!
Maybe we should simply take a look to the regional settings, adding in the next KDE (3.5? 4?) a database of regions where DRM are legal and were not.
Actually there're a lot of different DRMs which are only to bother users -_-;
I bought the two DVD sets of ther first season of CSI here in italy... the DRM doesn't allow me to:
- skip to another scene
- move forward or backward in the current scene
- change the subtitles/languages during the playing (I usually watch DVDs in english-sub-english... in those DVD there wasn't english subtitles, and the only option you can find in the hardcoded menu is english-sub-italian... and the italian subtitles just sucked)
The problem is that when you need to sell something, or at least to offer support for something, you must adhere to the crazy laws of the governments.
F/OSS is quite a common solution for who is going to write something that breaks DRMs or other things like that, because in this way the sources will continue to be distributed also if they are not legal in some states.
The problem is to define something that separes fair use from piracy. I actually don't love projects which are there only to offer way to break true good copyrights or try to avoid procedures which doesn't harm.
Not all DRM is evil.
>Those who design or implement DRM are wrong. It’s that simple.
the KPDF DRM is, in its most basic form, just software that can always be tricked if you have access to all the sources. All that stuff means you can break it if you are smart enough. (dvd players come to mind).
I hate those.
The other side is DRM with hardware support that allow very good encryption and access control nobody can ever break. (besides the fact that you can't prove the absence of bugs, that is).
In that case there are a lot of very good usages; the kwallet can use it to protect your passwords, for example.
Or you can sent me a file that can only be opened and used on my computer, with my password. All sorts of usefull stuff comes to mind.
In the end, its just a tool and if you ignore the evil schemes some companies try to use it for, and actually think about it. Then its pretty cool stuff.
Note that the kpdf stuff really is nothing like the 'cool stuff'.
a simple rule
Here's a simple rule to check if what you call DRM is "evil:"
If it's circumventable, it shouldn't be done.
In the case of PGP or ssh, it's not circumventable, in the case of DVD-CSS, or PDF, it is.
See? Reality makes these things impossible -- how nice of it.
His right, not your right
>Those who design or implement DRM are wrong. It’s that simple.
I got a little question for you: Why on earth would you like to print a document that was "protected" against such use if not to break the copyright of the author? There's no good use for such a misfeature, so I'd rather see it out of any kde app. You're also asking for trouble for the whole kde project in front of the law, and that's nothing anyone wants.
This got NOTHING to do with the _Digital_ RM laws in US or your rights to do something with a digital doc. It's got to do rather with the author's right to protect the work he has spent doing for a whole year or maybe several years, just to see you photocopying the book, printing the pdf or whatever else.
After all, others respect your GPL license. Why wouldn't you respect his license? Do you also disagree with methods like those in kernel that protect gpl parts being used on non-gpl programs? It's all to protect the authors from others' misuse.
copying copyrighted work is legal
there is nothing illegal about printing a copyrighted PDF file, even one that says that unauthorised reproduction is prohibited.
And there's also nothing immoral about it.
Why should KPDF have bloat that prevents me from doing something that is well within my rights?
Others respect my GPLed software because I trust them to, and I have the legal backing of copyright law. I don't enforce my copyright, and in the meantime end up infringing on their rights of fair use.