3 ms·
I'd suggest you research the topic of negative and positive liberty. I'm all for a free and open source experience but what about the liberties of content creat
by 0134340 9y ago
I'd suggest you research the topic of negative and positive liberty. I'm all for a free and open source experience but what about the liberties of content creators? What about my right to as a user to be offered content with the knowledge that I won't and don't want to know its inner workings as long as it's passive non-malicious code?
- gbuk2013 9y agoI will be happy to do so, once consumers and content creators (and specifically the companies they sell rights to) are on a level playing field in terms of legal protections and lobbying powers.
- 0134340 9y agoThis isn't about the money or power you or I have. This is about freedom to distribute content and the agreement between the user and the creator while you're asking the browser to be the ideological arbiter of this transaction. If you're all for freedom, you should logically see that not including the DRM option is inhibitive of both the user's and the creator's freedoms. As a browser, it should be ideologically agnostic to my downloading of an executable or zip file that goes against freedom, privacy and all that we hold dear and it should still be my right and freedom to download and view as I legally please. The Richard Stallman approach does have its limits.
- gbuk2013 9y agoI don't buy that argument, sorry. Because it requires something as anti-freedom as DRM to exist in the first place.