EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

07.26.20

Defective By Design is Defective By License

Posted in DRM, Free/Libre Software, FSF at 11:21 pm by Guest Editorial Team

Article by figosdev

Laptop with CD

Summary: “…”Safety” is a euphemism conflating what is “safe” with what is completely harmonious, as if everything in the world needs to be in complete harmony.”

Poor DBD. Although I hear about the FSF often, the FSF actually provides materials you can work with freely. Defective By Design provides materials you can do nothing with except regurgitate wholesale. I NEVER hear about Defective By Design unless the FSF mentions it. Let’s compare various “branches” of the FSF on this…

GNU Website: At the bottom, it says that pages are under a CC BY-ND 4.0 license.

“Unfortunately, the FSF continues to discourage freely-licensed works, maybe even on every page of its website.”FSF Website: Same license, along with a link to a little blurb about why NoDerivs (ND, verbatim-only) licenses or similar restrictions are recommended for “works of opinion”. This is an rms thing, and it’s anti-Free-Culture. I would be happy enough if they did like the GNU website, and simply used ND without promoting it for an imaginary/invented category of works.

The problem is that NoDerivs restrictions provide little benefit to the author, while preserving completely needless restrictions for the audience / remixers / other advocates. They won’t prevent misquotes, or in the instance of rms, complete character assassination — rms didn’t use any license on his emails that I’m aware of, but his words were still used to oust him from the FSF — so what good does ND on “works of opinion” really protect? (I made this point before he was ousted, and it is just as true now.)

RMS himself refutes the notion that copyright “protects” the integrity of works in the first place — as a response to people concerned about misusing or misattributing poorly-written or otherwise bad software to the wrong author. So what good is it for “works of opinion?” The answer is that it only reinforces a permission culture — which reinforces the perceived need for “protections” like DRM itself.

“…”Safety” is a euphemism conflating what is “safe” with what is completely harmonious, as if everything in the world needs to be in complete harmony.”Free culture advocates (many of whom were inspired by the work of Lawrence Lessig or Karl Fogel, both of whom have either worked with the GNU Project or FSF board — Fogel also served as part of OSI) know better than this. Unfortunately, the FSF continues to discourage freely-licensed works, maybe even on every page of its website.

To show just how ridiculous this is, recently the FSF created this blog post.

The main feature of the post is a freely-licensed infographic, specifically the CC BY 4.0 license. At the bottom of the page of course, you have the usual ND 3.0 or later license, and the usual link to why works of opinion only need verbatim copying.

This is largely out of sync with the community doing the most to create promotional materials. Of course Sacha Chua’s work is a “work of opinion” — it’s called “Why I Love Free Software.” Is it software? Only depending how you look at it; is it a scholarly dissertation? It’s her opinions about Free software. It’s both personal (which is alright) and political (which is also alright, of course.)

“Merely the founder of the entire movement, he was required to use his position to justify speaking once or twice out of turn.”You could make similar infographics from other works if they were freely-licensed, and many people look for freely-remixable works because (as with Free software) they like to promote things with all 4 freedoms — not only software.

For years, I have promoted this as a way of engaging more people with Free software and the Four Freedoms. I am hardly alone in this.

LibrePlanet: Just as DBD divides potential supporters over Social Justice Hooey and has even worked to divide the FSF guillotine-like, from its own head.

“Safety” is a euphemism conflating what is “safe” with what is completely harmonious, as if everything in the world needs to be in complete harmony. Let’s apply this ridiculous notion to recent activism, shall we? Here’s the title, and a line from the LibrePlanet petition:

Is LibrePlanet Safe?

“In a number of cases, RMS has taken over sessions through loud disruptions, including those of other FSF board members. Signatories are also aware of additional instances of RMS violating the Safe Space Rules.”

“The Civil Rights protests in the 1960s were extremely disruptive, and it’s good that they were.”Note that the outstanding crime here is that while a bunch of people have worked to reduce LibrePlanet talks to a sterile, tightly-managed, funeral-like affair, rms is outspoken, brash and actually interrupted a couple of times. Merely the founder of the entire movement, he was required to use his position to justify speaking once or twice out of turn.

This only requires a petition if LibrePlanet really needs to be controlled that tightly, that the president of the organisation isn’t allowed to say anything before some pimple-faced fascist hands him the “talking stick.” I find the whole thing similarly pompous to Jono Bacon’s “OpenRespect” — which I often think of as the prototype for all this rubbish.

To show how ridiculous it is to thought-police Free software activism to the point of total sterility, let’s compare LibrePlanet to another effort to make people more free, Black Lives Matter:

Is Black Lives Matter Safe?

“In a number of cases, Garza has taken over sessions through loud disruptions, including those of other BLM board members. Signatories are also aware of additional instances where Garza participated in attempts to stop traffic, including the passage of a Bay Area Rapid Transit train for four and a half hours.”

Black Lives Matter: This movement occasionally torches cars and buildings.

“Sometimes, freedom needs to be disruptive.”LibrePlanet: This movement will not tolerate an occasional question or comment from its own founder, unless explicitly permitted.

I may have my facts about BLM wrong, because I really don’t know exactly who is torching cars and buildings — nor am I trying to imply that BLM is directly responsible for destruction caused in related protests. Whether they are more “disruptive” than rms on the other hand, is hardly possible to dispute. The Civil Rights protests in the 1960s were extremely disruptive, and it’s good that they were. Sometimes, freedom needs to be disruptive. Go figure, while the tech industry routinely applauds its own technology for being disruptive, FSFE applauds people for stopping rms from doing the same thing.

The point I AM trying to make is that while people are in the streets causing real disruption (and a lot of this is probably necessary at this point — we are talking about a country that started a full-fledged revolution over tea taxes) rms was being removed from an activist meeting (or what used to be an activist meeting) from an organisation he himself created — over a couple of comments or questions.

Talk about a victimless crime. It was nothing but opportunism and mutiny from people such as the Executive Director of GNOME, an organisation that has time and time again betrayed rms, Free Software, and users alike. The same person would go on to use the GNOME blog as a platform for continuing to push the false narrative about rms the same week that he was ousted.

But while LibrePlanet has its own way of dividing and reducing support, the licensing they use allows you to step outside of their petty bullshit and still promote Free software with clips from videos and speeches — if you want to.

Are LibrePlanet speeches works of opinion? As much as any ND-clause or Verbatim-copying-only “licensed” work on the FSF website, absolutely.

“It’s these international trade agreements created by the American copyright cartels, plus American laws like the DMCA that turn breaking DRM into an actual crime.”Defective By Design: We replace technical locks with legal restrictions.

The funny thing about that is, DRM itself is really a legal restriction. While Half-President Oliva claims DRM has NOTHING to do with copyright, copyright is the only thing that gives DRM any real teeth.

It’s these international trade agreements created by the American copyright cartels, plus American laws like the DMCA that turn breaking DRM into an actual crime. Without these extensions to copyright law, DRM would simply fail and fail and fail again. DRM would be almost perpetually broken, and that would be that. It’s arguably more work to port the kernel to another platform — so do we call new CPU architectures DRM?

People practically always break DRM, because (I think Cory Doctorow pointed this out, or perhaps Michael Geist, or both) it contains the algorithm, the encrypted data, as well as the key — on the same machine! Alice and Bob and the whole gang are here! I’m afraid Oliva couldn’t be more wrong — The real way that DRM hurts your freedom is almost ENTIRELY about copyright.

Yes, it is implemented with technical means and puts chains on the user — and we should break those chains both on the technical and the legal level. But the technical means are really the weakest link in the chain. They are often (and I’m not the first to say this either) just an excuse to say you broke something, so that it can trigger anti-circumvention clauses. I not only withdrew my membership from the FSF over this (licensing) issue, It’s also the reason Oliva and I never talk anymore. I’d simply had enough.

“If you want a summary of the FSF for the past few years, and especially the next few years — it’s an organisation that in the name of being more inclusive, continues to harangue, assassinate and Shoo away its most passionate supporters.”So the FSF doesn’t even “Get” DRM — they don’t get the connection with Free Culture, and they have never gotten (no matter how many times people have pleaded with them) the idea that using free licenses for creative works would strengthen their connection with the people who are both more passionate (and more informed) about the problems of DRM and unnecessary restrictions on works — the Free Culture movement.

The result is an FSF that campaigns against Free Culture on every page of one website, while following (but not giving) the same advice on others — while discouraging free license for “works of opinion” — even on pages centred around a freely-licensed work of opinion! (Note that no licenses were violated in doing so, and I am not implying a license violation took place.)

ShoeTool is also freely licensed and I think this was a good choice. It’s a terrible shame that this comes about only months after the rms ousting, because it certainly didn’t feel like Christmas (or Grav-mass) that year. I sent rms a Grav-mass card all the same.

When the FSF says: “If we are to win the battle against DRM, it is important to have larger numbers on our side…”

And those larger numbers already exist, the problem is that the FSF (through DBD license choices, through draconian LibrePlanet poliices that kept me from wanting to attend — I never though rms would be too outspoken for LibrePlanet, but I thought I possibly would be) continues to “shoo” away these larger numbers.

If you want a summary of the FSF for the past few years, and especially the next few years — it’s an organisation that in the name of being more inclusive, continues to harangue, assassinate and Shoo away its most passionate supporters. Was all this division along increasingly arbitrary lines really necessary? Or is the FSF just a bunch of ShooTools?

One thing you do have to be careful of though, is the entire “larger numbers” argument in the first place. Of course we want more advocates — we want all software to be free. The danger is in what you’re willing to sacrifice (as with certain GNU maintainers moving to GitHub) just to get more people.

Monopolies care about marketshare, because if you don’t have it — you’re not a monopoly. When you have freedom, people often go their own way — that reduces the likelihood that everybody does (or uses) the same thing.

“Please do not confuse my criticism of the FSF as a criticism for those individuals who already “get” what the FSF is missing.”If you try to corral everyone under exactly the same solutions, you can say that people are free because the license is free, but you’re still trying to corral them — you’re trying to get them to do what YOU want, rather than what they want. How much does a free license enable people to do what they want, while you try to find ways around it to get them to all do the same things, without any choices available?

The new monopoly move is to use the license and find other ways of restricting the use. It happened with Tivo, it happened with the anti-GPL3 lobbying, it will happen with these political mutinies and political manipulations. The question is whether it really has anything to do with freedom — Or if the FSF is just singing its own praises from a better day, when it was a real thing.

I invite people who care about Free Culture to replace Defective By Design, with something of their own that is Effective By Design.

DBD meanwhile has the same restrictions that DRM has — you can’t remix it, and it’s (mostly) illegal if you break it. RMS cites “fair use” but that isn’t a right — it’s a defense. And it varies wildly, while Free Culture licensing is much more universal. I am not the first person to encourage DBD or the FSF to get wise about this — they would probably rather be right, than in touch with the reality of the situation. I guess that’s what “safe” means these days anyway — unchallenged, and as a result, unaware.

None of these comments are for Sacha Chua, who has not only done an excellent job and created an excellent example of a Free Culture work of opinion around the idea of Free Software (yes, I have my qualms about it, but they’re really not her fault — it’s the FSF that refuses to offer what she is correct in stating as advantages of true software freedom) but who responds to critique in a way that is more thoughtful, sincere and even cheerful than most of us could hope to manage. I only mention it now as the reply to her comment on my article which I intended to make, never posted.

Please do not confuse my criticism of the FSF as a criticism for those individuals who already “get” what the FSF is missing. I do not even suspect the real problems of the FSF are caused by the majority of staff — but by a select number of people at the Leadership, Membership and Intermediary levels, creating enough trouble (and misinformation) for everybody else.

“The difference is that rms does care about freedom (Trump does not) and the new FSF is more like Trump, in its painstaking and draconian control of anyone who speaks up from the audience.”I never expect to find allies from the “new” FSF, but that doesn’t mean we don’t have any. There are still lots of people who care about Free software. But there are also plenty who care about the cause that the new FSF turns its nose up at — even their own founder, what a terrible, self-defeating and foolish shame.

The new FSF considers itself good at speaking for us, but it has long been criticised for its inability to hear. The censorship, lies and other forms of bullshit coming from the new guard, prove that rms was never the (sole) reason that the organisation was deaf to its members. The FSF simply doesn’t care to learn or ever be in touch with its community. We aren’t good enough for them, to speak for our own freedom. It’s fortunate then that we don’t need their permission — unless we are silly enough to attend LibrePlanet, and pay to be told that a stray comment is a “danger” of some kind.

That’s about as out-of-touch as you can get. I suspect that sooner or later, someone will compare rms to Trump for being outspoken and brash. The difference is that rms does care about freedom (Trump does not) and the new FSF is more like Trump, in its painstaking and draconian control of anyone who speaks up from the audience. RMS didn’t deploy secret police to remove protesters, Trump did. RMS didn’t petition to have stray commenters removed from an activist event — LibrePlanet attendees did.

If you’re truly concerned about freedom, consider that — before you redefine “safety” to mean “Everybody shuts the fuck up when WE tell them to.” It has nothing to do with what was actually being said, it was simply about crowd control.

“If you’re truly concerned about freedom, consider that — before you redefine “safety” to mean “Everybody shuts the fuck up when WE tell them to.” It has nothing to do with what was actually being said, it was simply about crowd control.”No thanks, “Libre” planet. But at least we can add our comments to your videos, which remains an option even for your ousted leader. To me, that proves how liberating free culture licensing really is.

If someone is looking for a way to re-invent, recreate or reboot the thing that the DBD website is SUPPOSED to be, starting with LibrePlanet videos about DRM might not be a bad start. Of course there are other freely-licensed materials you can use for that too, no thanks to the FSF’s often backwards policy.

You could even go further and make your own freely-licensed website for Free software itself — starting with Chua’s freely-licensed image. After all, all it takes for Free software to start being about freedom again (and for her graphic to be realistic again) is enough users and developers (and authors and artists) who really want freedom.

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” –Benjamin Franklin

Licence: Creative Commons CC0 1.0 (public domain)

07.06.20

They Tell the Free Software Community That It is Racist While Saying Nothing at All About Trump’s Racism (Because He Gives Them Government and Military Contracts)

Posted in DRM, Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, Kernel at 10:23 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

If they were genuinely against racism, they would have put up a statement condemning their president in their Web sites (but they don’t)

Star Trek Rand Sulu: Your software community is racist! But they say nothing about Trump saying 'kung flu' and 'Chinese virus'

Summary: While their president compares ‘foreign’ people to a virus (using innuendo, dog whistles and racist rhetoric reminiscent of the Nazi era) the big US corporations (American surveillance giants) turn their attention to rather innocuous words inside people’s code (which almost nobody sees anyway)

WITH over 3 million cases of COVID-19 confirmed in the US the virus is now a lot more “American” than “Chinese”. Notice how the GAFAM cabal, which shames the community over the presumption of racism, never issues a statement to condemn Trump. Funny that, eh?

Who is for racism (for personal gain) and who is against it?

“A day ago we checked who in Intel is pushing to remove allegedly ‘racist’ words from Linux. It’s the person who puts TPM inside it.”The answer should be almost self-evident.

Don’t let companies like Intel or Microsoft or Google tell you who’s racist. Also don’t forget Red Hat’s (IBM) past and present. They have no moral authority/high ground to stand on.

A day ago we checked who in Intel is pushing to remove allegedly 'racist' words from Linux (no, not “slave”; it goes way beyond that). It’s the person who puts TPM inside it (we leave out names and links; it’s in IRC logs). Oh, so much for freedom and goodwill. Maybe guilt. Over one’s controversial technical ‘contributions’… (Intel also puts DRM inside the kernel!)

Readers can decide what offends them more, DRM in Linux or some curse words (which the compiler rubs off anyway).

Talk about priorities, sir. Maybe it’s more urgent to learn from the past and deal with ongoing, naked and blatant racism. Not some parameter names which someone can (mis)interpret as ‘racist’.

04.03.20

Clear Linux is to GNU/Linux What Clearly Defined is to Open Source

Posted in DRM, GNU/Linux, Hardware at 6:51 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Clearly proprietary and clearly vague and ambiguous terms (clearing GNU and freedom off the map)

Intel: criminal inside

Summary: The idea that we need Intel to take GNU/Linux ‘mainstream’ is ludicrous; as OSDL co-founder (now succeeded in the flesh of the Corporate Linux Foundation), Intel is more about Linux (with DRM, “secure boot” and everything that lets it be remotely controlled) than about GNU and it’s not too keen on GPL (copyleft), either

“FREE as in Freedom” is the motto or slogan imprinted upon the father of Free software in a famous biography. GNU wasn’t supposed to be just “another system” or “another UNIX” but a free system. It’s a paradigm change, not a branding change. There’s substance to it rather than mere identity. If geeks and nerds wanted to just advocate “not Windows,” then they’d be able to join the millions of gullible fools who voluntarily shill for Apple with its infinite moral deficit. People who look past false choices, buzzwords and ‘lifestyle’-themed marketing stunts understand the unprecedented importance if not urgency of GNU. The COVID-19 crisis shows us how marvelously fast the “security state” can advance with no proper safeguards just because “there’s no time” or whatever. Technical means, not just legal means, become necessary for guarding one’s human rights.

“The COVID-19 crisis shows us how marvelously fast the “security state” can advance with no proper safeguard just because “there’s no time” or whatever.”This morning Phoronix said that “[t]here has been plumbing within [Clear Linux] swupd package/bundle management system to support third-party repositories to expand the [proprietary] ecosystem [sic] and now we’re finally seeing that happen.”

Speaking of Phoronix, please support the site and support Michael Larabel. They really need it right now because they got a baby a few months ago (first-born) and the wife (mother) has just lost her job. Phoronix is a very important site which investigates, benchmarks and digs things no other site does. Michael treated us well over the years; we owe or ought to look after him, too.

Now, back to Intel…

“There’s nothing inherently special about it and Intel likely uses it for optimisations that help sell more of its deeply defective, back-doored chips.”As a reminder, Intel is the foremost pusher of DRM inside Linux (we did analysis of commits last year), with AMD coming not too far behind, working with the likes of Google.

Phoronix has been one of the main pushers or proponents of Clear Linux — a distro which otherwise nobody would bother with or care about. There’s nothing inherently special about it and Intel likely uses it for optimisations that help sell more of its deeply defective, back-doored chips.

The word “Clear” is close to “Pure” (like Purism and PureOS) and maybe even transparency if not freedom. But Clear Linux has nothing to do with any of those things. Like Microsoft’s “Clearly Defined” push, it’s mostly about imposing proprietary software (such as GitHub) on people. It’s not too far from the bogus concept of “ethical” software, wherein “ethics” refer to a reduction in freedom.

“It’s not too far from the bogus concept of “ethical” software, wherein “ethics” refer to a reduction in freedom.”A better term or name for Clear Linux would be “Intel Linux”; but that would not ‘sell’ too well (if they tried it). It’s made by Intel, for Intel, and users of it are controlled by Intel. In the same way that people who choose to host a Git repo in GitHub are controlled by Microsoft.

Nice try, Intel. Take your DRM and shove it somewhere else. The BSD world would likely be even less receptive than the GNU and Linux worlds. As de Raadt put it before he blasted Intel for its defects and security flaws, “Intel [is] Only ‘Open’ for Business”. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with business, Intel’s business practices if not crimes make it clear that Intel is clearly allergic to ethics.

Disclosure: My sister and my brother-in-law worked for Intel, but that never had an effect on my position regarding Intel, based on its ethical and technical behaviour alone.

02.19.20

DRM (Proprietary Software) Already Makes Mozilla Firefox Broken, Unreliable, Undependable (Dependent on Binary Blobs)

Posted in DRM at 2:06 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

So Brendan Eich was right about DRM? (2014): New Claims That Brendan Eich Got Abused and Pushed Out for Opposing DRM, Not for Opposing Gay Marriage Some Time in the Past

Binary
Scrambled bits aren’t the way the Web is supposed to function (except for security)

Summary: More people are beginning to realise that Mozilla resorted to self-harming DRM and self-inflicted damage that impacts Firefox; can Mozilla (re)join the anti-DRM coalitions?

THE FAMOUS fork of Firefox, Waterfox, days ago turned out to have sold out to a surveillance company, just like Startpage (they admitted this only after they had been exposed; it was mentioned here in passing and people start noticing) and I distanced myself from the *Foxes and the Chrom* of the world. I trust neither ‘camp’. I use Konqueror as my main browser on one computer and Qupzilla on the other (they’re KDE browsers that don’t ‘phone home’). There’s much to be said about privacy violations, not just DRM and other aspects.

As reported earlier this week [1,2] (already in our Daily Links), Firefox is breaking because of DRM/EME and this hardly surprises us. It was foretold and foreseen. It was a terrible idea all along and it might get yet worse.

Related/contextual items from the news:

  1. Firefox 73.0.1 Fixes Linux Crashes When Playing Encrypted Content

    Firefox 73.0.1 arrives a week after the launch of Firefox 73.0 to address a few issues reported by users. These include fixes for a bug that made Firefox to crash on some Linux users when playing encrypted content and an issue which forced Firefox to close unexpectedly when the user exits the Print Preview mode.

    Some users also reported intermittent blank page issues when attempting to log in to the RBC Royal Bank website, so this is now fixed as well in the Firefox 73.0.1 release. Also addressed are a couple of issues reported by users on Windows systems, which shouldn’t affect Linux users.

  2. Firefox 73.0.1 Released With Fixes for Linux, Windows Crashes

    Mozilla has released Firefox 73.0.1 today, February 18th, 2020, to the Stable desktop channel for Windows, macOS, and Linux with crash fixes for users of Windows and Linux devices.

    This release also fixes a loss of browser functionality in certain circumstances and RBC Royal Bank website connectivity problems.

    Windows, Mac, and Linux desktop users can upgrade to Firefox 73.0.1 by going to Options -> Help -> About Firefox and the browser will automatically check for the new update and install it when available.

01.25.20

The Linux Kernel is No Longer Free Software?

Posted in DRM, Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, Kernel at 8:36 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

[Direct link YouTube | Direct link lbry.tv]

Summary: Gardiner Bryant, the creator of The Linux Gamer as well as The Off Topical Podcast, reacts to our articles about DRM in Linux (he even pronounced my name correctly)

01.09.20

Unintended Effect of DRM in GNU/Linux

Posted in DRM, GNU/Linux, Google at 11:54 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Recent: Can We Quit Celebrating DRM in GNU/Linux?

We need Disney+ to support Linux!!!! Okay, move to Chrome now

Summary: Browser monopolies are being cemented due to DRM, which the DRM giants nowadays label ‘cross-platform’

12.08.19

Can We Quit Celebrating DRM in GNU/Linux?

Posted in DRM, GNU/Linux, Videos at 6:24 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Or do we want the system to become another Vista?

Ballmer on DRM

Summary: Over the past couple of days various news sites and “Linux” sites expressed great satisfaction [1-5] over the passive embrace of Disney’s DRM ploy (Disney+), even when Disney itself rejects DRM, seeing the harms practically caused by it [6,7]

References:

  1. Disney+ Now Works on Linux, No Workarounds Required

    Disney launched its new video streaming service in the USA and Canada last month to much hype and attention (it scores 10 million subscribers in the first day alone).

    But many Linux users in those countries who’d been hoping to tune in to watch shows like The Mandalorian and High School Musical: The Musical: The Series were left disappointed.

    For although rival streaming services like Netflix and Amazon Prime work “out of the box” on Linux in web browsers like Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox, Disney+ didn’t.

  2. Disney+ Now Works in Linux After DRM Tweak

    Linux users can now stream shows and movies from the Disney+ streaming service after Disney lowering the level of their DRM requirements.

    When Disney+ was first launched, Linux users who attempted to watch shows and movies were shown an error stating “Something went wrong. Please try again. If the problem persists, visit the Disney+ Help Center (Error Code 83).”

  3. Disney+ finally works on Linux!

    A little more than three weeks after the new Disney+ movie streaming service went officially live, the Disney company has added Linux support to their Widevine DRM protection. No more “Error 83”. No more need to install the Windows version of Chrome in Wine. Watching your favorite movies is now possible in the native Linux browsers – both Mozilla and Google based. Firefox will download the Widevine CDM (content delivery module) automatically, Chrome has the support built-in and for my Chromium package and other Chromium-based browsers you;ll have to install my chromium-widevine-plugin package.

  4. Disney+ finally works on Linux!

    A little more than three weeks after the new Disney+ movie streaming service went officially live, the Disney company has added Linux support to their Widevine DRM protection. No more “Error 83”. No more need to install the Windows version of Chrome in Wine. Watching your favorite movies is now possible in the native Linux browsers – both Mozilla and Google based. Firefox will download the Widevine CDM (content delivery module) automatically, Chrome has the support built-in and for my Chromium package and other Chromium-based browsers you;ll have to install my chromium-widevine-plugin package.

  5. You Can Now Stream Disney+ On Linux Computers

    With Disney+ now lowering the DRM requirements, Linux users should be able to watch their favorite shows like The Mandalorian and High School Musical: The Musical: The Series.

    In order to stream the Disney+ service on Linux devices, users need to ensure that DRM is enabled in their browser.

  6. Disney’s Decision Not To Renew SecuROM License Bricks ‘Tron: Evolution’

    Show of hands: who remembers SecuROM? Alright, put your hands down, we can’t see each other anyway. So, SecuROM was a really bad DRM used by several publishers to “protect” video games, by which I mean it mostly just annoyed legitimate buyers, got some of those publishers sued, and ultimately made the game unplayable on modern operating systems. The track record is enough to make you wonder why anyone would use DRM at all after this whole debacle.

  7. The Curse of Outdated DRM Claims Another Victim, ‘Tron: Evolution’

    As of this week, players who owned a legitimate copy of Tron: Evolution they paid for but never played it, no longer can. Tron: Evolution, a tie-in game for the 2010 Tron: Legacy film , used SecurRom, a form of digital rights management (DRM), and publisher Disney hasn’t paid its bill. This means Disney can no longer authenticate purchases and “unlock” copies of the game that people bought but haven’t used yet.

    Players first noticed they couldn’t play the game after purchasing it in October, but a thread on Reddit today brought more attention to the issue.

    “I often buy games on sales, but don’t play them immediately,” user Renusek said on Reddit. “Yesterday I decided to play Tron: Evolution, maybe even practice speedrunning it, so I install the game, try to activate it (game still uses SecuROM DRM) and… the serial key has expired (?!).”

10.15.19

[ES] El Kernel de Linux está introduciendo Open Source Privative Software

Posted in DRM, GNU/Linux, Kernel at 12:08 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

By Pedro Fco. (maslinux.es)

This is a Spanish translation of: Software Freedom Eroding in Linux and Nobody Seems to Care or Oppose This and mirrored over at El Kernel de Linux está introduciendo Open Source Privative Software (Artículo de opinión de Roy Schestowitz)

Free Software and Open Source Proprietary Software (OSPS)

Summary: Linux, el kernel, continúa su trayectoria o el camino hacia convertirse en software propietario de código abierto (OSPS).

La importancia de la Libertad del Software será entendida más y más (o mejor) con el tiempo. He aquí un nuevo ejemplo de las noticias. Cuando la gente no controla el software, es el software el que los controla a ellos – un punto que Richard Stallman ha estado enfatizando durante décadas.

El jefe de la Fundación Linux y el único editor de Linux.com son usuarios de Mac (este último alardeó ayer de sus múltiples “Macs”), así que no esperes que se preocupen por la Libertad de Software. No lo hacen. No hemos estado hablando mucho (o con frecuencia) sobre ellos últimamente porque son una causa perdida. Nos rendimos. Se apoyan en historias antiestallmánicas. Linux.com se siente como un sitio de Openwashing y Microsoft (nuevos ejemplos a tal efecto).

Mientras tanto, se ha puesto de manifiesto, una vez más, que AMD sigue adelante con la DRM. Como dijo Michael Larabel:

“Soporte inicial de HDCP. Sí, protección de contenido digital de alto ancho de banda. Este soporte para HDCP Linux en el lado de Radeon viene para Raven Ridge y más nuevo. Como se explica en el artículo anterior, es probable que se deba a que los APUs de AMD están llegando a más Chromebooks y, por lo tanto, todo puede ser visto como algo bueno. Para aquellos que no desean soporte para HDCP, la implementación de AMDGPU DC permite desactivarlo como una opción de Kconfig“.

“Más cambios en la AMDGPU para Linux 5.5 seguirán en las próximas semanas“, añadió Larabel. “El ciclo Linux 5.5 comenzará formalmente a finales de noviembre y se estabilizará a principios de 2020. La lista de cambios para esta AMDGPU DRM-Next-5.5 pull inicial a través de esta lista de correo.”

Ese segundo DRM no es el mismo DRM (sólo el mismo acrónimo) y no es algo a lo que se opondría ni siquiera Stallman. Lo preocupante, sin embargo, es que se ha vuelto ‘normal’ lanzar DRM de restricción de usuarios a GNU/Linux (usando palabras/términos técnicos como “HDCP”), la pieza más famosa y conocida del software libre. A los responsables de la Fundación Linux no les importa (ni siquiera usan GNU/Linux) o no se atreven a decir nada – viendo lo que les pasa a los que sí lo hacen.

La gente habla mucho sobre la situación de Stallman en este momento (una segunda ola de llamadas para eliminarlo de GNU) aunque pocos conectan lo que se le está haciendo a Stallman con lo que le pasó a Torvalds hace un año. Se está incitando a la gente contra los que hacen lo correcto.

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channels: Come and chat with us in real time

New to This Site? Here Are Some Introductory Resources

No

Mono

ODF

Samba logo






We support

End software patents

GPLv3

GNU project

BLAG

EFF bloggers

Comcast is Blocktastic? SavetheInternet.com



Recent Posts