3 ms·
The fact that "technological protection measures" have any bearing on legality is stupid. Implementation details shouldn't affect if something is legal or not.
by kevincox 4y ago
The fact that "technological protection measures" have any bearing on legality is stupid. Implementation details shouldn't affect if something is legal or not. It seems like this is adding an rule that is easier to watch people with because the media conglomerates couldn't sure people for doing other things they didn't like.
- mindslight 4y agoIMO "technological protection measures" should be legally significant in that they should prevent the ability to claim copyright. One should either get a government-granted limited monopoly on reproduction in exchange for it entering the public domain after that period, xor law of the information jungle when you attempt to keep society from using the work for all time - not the intersection of both. Alternatively copyright could just require the original creative work being put in escrow, so that it's available after the limited monopoly period.
- xkcd1963 4y agoYes, youtube makes money by people watching their stuff. They shouldn't discriminate then who (or how) they are watching it.