[05:58]	<tqiu>	.
[08:35]	<JoshMalone>	hey joe
[10:41]	<JoshMalone>	Boy - the FSF sure seem to be getting less and less FREE all the time
[10:41]	<JoshMalone>	dictating what you can and can't do with GPL'ed code :(
[11:05]	<Eagle_Fire>	it's not about your freedom
[11:05]	<Eagle_Fire>	it's about the code's freedom
[11:05]	<JoshMalone>	sounds like a restriction to me :)
[11:11]	<JoshMalone>	anyway - the code is free to be used any way somebody wants to; this is just political agenda-ism being forced on us via license agreement
[11:11]	<JoshMalone>	and it sucks
[11:12]	<JoshMalone>	don't get me wrong - I'll never (again) buy DRM-protected media
[11:12]	<JoshMalone>	but I refuse to be told how to use "free" software
[11:12]	<JoeBorn>	well, it's an aggressive strike against DRM
[11:12]	<JoshMalone>	GPL already restircts me from using it as part of a commercial, closed piece of software
[11:14]	<Eagle_Fire>	yeah, i don't plan on releasing anything under the GPL v3
[11:14]	<Eagle_Fire>	v2 for me, or less
[11:15]	<JoeBorn>	well, I believe they may mean not using newer kernels than 2.6
[11:15]	<JoeBorn>	or maybe the code will fork or something.
[11:15]	<Eagle_Fire>	uh oes
[11:15]	<JoeBorn>	or maybe Linus won't use GPL v3
[11:15]	<JoshMalone>	Linux will go version 2 I'd imagine
[11:15]	<Eagle_Fire>	if they don't, who will
[11:16]	<JoshMalone>	(or just run netbsd :)
[11:16]	* JoshMalone  ducks
[11:17]	<Eagle_Fire>	why would you duck
[11:17]	<Eagle_Fire>	get back up here
[11:17]	<JoshMalone>	:)
[11:17]	<JoshMalone>	for the netbsd comment :)
[11:17]	* Eagle_Fire  smacks JoshMalone
[11:17]	<JoeBorn>	actually, this could be a real mess.
[11:18]	<Eagle_Fire>	yeah... it's like restricting the user from being able to play protected content
[11:18]	<Eagle_Fire>	that's... less freedom
[11:20]	<JoshMalone>	bingo
[11:21]	<JoshMalone>	it will be a real mess; luckily, Linux (ATM) is available under GPLv2
[11:21]	<Eagle_Fire>	wouldn't they need permission from all of the authors in order to change the license
[11:21]	<JoeBorn>	I believe that all the kernel contributors assign the copyrights to Linus
[11:21]	<JoeBorn>	I think he can change the license.
[11:21]	<Eagle_Fire>	hoe convenient
[11:22]	<JoshMalone>	no - the preamble for most linux files is
[11:23]	<JoshMalone>	Also note that the only valid version of the GPL as far as the kernel
[11:23]	<JoshMalone>	is concerned is _this_ particular version of the license (ie v2, not
[11:23]	<JoshMalone>	v2.2 or v3.x or whatever), unless explicitly otherwise stated.
[11:25]	<JoshMalone>	but also sometimes:
[11:26]	<JoshMalone>	This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
[11:26]	<JoshMalone>	it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
[11:26]	<JoshMalone>	the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
[11:26]	<JoshMalone>	(at your option) any later version.
[11:26]	<JoshMalone>	but it says "at _your_ option"
[11:26]	<Eagle_Fire>	lol, as if you'd ever choose a more restrictive license
[11:27]	<JoshMalone>	well - they had no idea when writing that preamble
[11:28]	<Eagle_Fire>	and now they pay for it
[12:51]	<Eagle_Fire>	Complete Corresponding Source Code also includes any encryption or
[12:51]	<Eagle_Fire>	authorization codes necessary to install and/or execute the source code of
[12:51]	<Eagle_Fire>	the work, perhaps modified by you, in the recommended or principal context
[12:51]	<Eagle_Fire>	of use, such that its functioning in all circumstances is identical to that
[12:51]	<Eagle_Fire>	of the work, except as altered by your modifications. It also includes any
[12:51]	<Eagle_Fire>	decryption codes necessary to access or unseal the work's output.
[12:51]	<Eagle_Fire>	Notwithstanding this, a code need not be included in cases where use of the
[12:52]	<Eagle_Fire>	work normally implies the user already has it.
[12:52]	<Eagle_Fire>	i think it won't affect us if the encryption/auth codes were never part of the firmware
[12:52]	<Eagle_Fire>	like bob said, as part of the microcontroller
[12:57]	<JoshMalone>	*sigh*
[12:58]	<JoshMalone>	FSF is sealing Linux's tomb in the CE world
[12:59]	<Eagle_Fire>	the problem is they're acting like idealists not businesspeople
[12:59]	<Eagle_Fire>	unfortunately if they acted like businesspeople there would be no gpl :(
[12:59]	<JoeBorn>	well, they can retreat too.
[12:59]	<JoeBorn>	and remember that the FSF is not Linux
[12:59]	<JoeBorn>	Linus position on linking and the GPL is not the same as the FSF
[13:00]	<JoshMalone>	I know
[13:00]	<Eagle_Fire>	according to the zdnet article GCC and glibc are expected to become gplv3
[13:01]	<JoeBorn>	I think basically they are trying to push back the slow march of the DRM tide by making an attack
[13:01]	<JoeBorn>	it's kind of risky for sure
[13:02]	<Eagle_Fire>	i suppose i don't like how they're gambling with the future of open-source software
[13:02]	<JoeBorn>	it's more gambling with the future of the GPL I think.
[13:03]	<JoeBorn>	and perhaps linux to some extent.
[13:03]	<Eagle_Fire>	i think the wording of the attack versus the actual change in wording in the GPL will work for us
[13:03]	<Eagle_Fire>	since RMS says it's an attack against DRM
[13:03]	<Eagle_Fire>	but the GPL says it's just an inclusion of decryption keys
[13:04]	<JoshMalone>	RIP: CE Linux. 1996 - 2006
[13:04]	<JoshMalone>	Too much idealism, not enough features
[13:04]	<Eagle_Fire>	if the v3 gets hold it will just be a hardware module in the device that serves keys or performs decryption by itself
[13:04]	<JoeBorn>	well, I think Linux will fork before it dies.
[13:04]	<Eagle_Fire>	should we reserve the name TrulyFreeLinux beforehand
[13:05]	<JoshMalone>	BSD'edLinux
[13:05]	<JoeBorn>	I mean from my perspective, some manufacturers will switch to winCE
[13:06]	<JoeBorn>	but it's costly.
[13:06]	<JoshMalone>	*sigh again*
[13:06]	<JoeBorn>	If they were already using linux, my guess is they will stay with it at 2.6
[13:06]	<Eagle_Fire>	for embedded devices, i daresay that's plenty
[13:07]	<JoeBorn>	and a fork will probably become inevitable
[13:07]	<JoeBorn>	or they will switch to something else eventually.
[13:07]	<Eagle_Fire>	so in the end, attack gets noted but remains entirely ineffective
[13:07]	<Eagle_Fire>	at worst, linux is dropped in commercial media devices
[13:08]	<Eagle_Fire>	and suffers a painful death
[13:08]	<JoeBorn>	well, I'm thinking.
[13:09]	<Eagle_Fire>	good for you
[13:09]	<JoeBorn>	Maybe you are right.
[13:09]	<JoeBorn>	if linux goes GPL 3 and it does force an ultimatum
[13:12]	<Eagle_Fire>	i wonder if the gplv3 will actually make any companies decide not to have drm
[13:12]	<Eagle_Fire>	i mean, businesses don't work like that
[13:13]	<Eagle_Fire>	if some path of action has a constraint that doesn't meet their business needs
[13:13]	<Eagle_Fire>	they don't usually contort themselves to fit, they'll choose another avenue without the restriction
[13:21]	<JoeBorn>	well, sure but you are assuming there is no market demand for linux
[13:21]	<JoeBorn>	I mean Neuros is on the extreme end of the spectrum, but if we were given and ultimatum and forced to choose between linux and DRM
[13:21]	<JoeBorn>	we'd chose linux.
[13:22]	<JoeBorn>	and we'd choose linux for business reasons, right.
[13:22]	<JoeBorn>	our consumers value open source more than DRM.
[13:22]	<JoeBorn>	no, for sure we have a unique niche of the market, but it's clear that there's a segment of the market that values linux and open source
[13:23]	<JoeBorn>	I mean Archos didn't release an SDK because they think it's neat.
[13:23]	<JoshMalone>	given the popularity of the iPod I can't imagine it's big
[13:24]	<JoeBorn>	well, the wordwide market for mp3 players is $50 Billion or something, so each 1% is $500 million
[13:24]	<JoeBorn>	so "big" is relative.
[13:25]	<JoeBorn>	"big" for Neuros is very different than "big" for Sony.
[13:25]	<JoeBorn>	but overall, I think you are probably right.
[13:29]	<JoeBorn>	what becomes interesting for Neuros though it that it will both isolate us more and make us more unique sticking with open source
[13:32]	<JoeBorn>	and the reality is, for better or for worse, DRM is still something of a niche application
[13:32]	<JoeBorn>	it's clear that the bulk of music loaded on the iPod is not coming from iTMS
[13:33]	<JoshMalone>	is it?
[13:33]	* JoshMalone  wonders what the % of iPods are that don't have anything from iTMS on them
[13:33]	<JoeBorn>	well, let's do a little math
[13:34]	<JoshMalone>	I'd guess the majority (50%) if iPod owners have bought >=1 tune from iTMS
[13:34]	<JoeBorn>	I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I believe Apple sold 20MM iPods last year
[13:34]	<JoshMalone>	given how easy and cheap it is
[13:34]	<JoeBorn>	I agree, that the majority have probably tried iTMS
[13:35]	<JoshMalone>	I recently tried buymusic.com
[13:35]	<JoshMalone>	even on a vanilla winXP laptop I couldn't even play the song in WMP
[13:35]	<JoshMalone>	(not even mentioning burning a CD or putting it on my xclef)
[13:35]	<NC-17>	i recently tried buying a CD, that was a wierd experience... i mean, i had this disc thing in my hands, what the heck was I supposed to do with THAT?
[13:35]	<JoshMalone>	LOL
[13:35]	<NC-17>	:)
[13:35]	<JoeBorn>	but if iTMS sold 100 million songs, and there were 20 million iPods sold
[13:35]	<NC-17>	sorry, go on
[13:36]	<JoeBorn>	well obviously I don't have the right numbers at hand, but anyway
[13:36]	<JoshMalone>	:)
[13:36]	<JoeBorn>	it translates to mean that there are a handful of songs from iTMS on each iPod.
[13:36]	<JoshMalone>	prolly
[13:37]	<JoeBorn>	and say the average iPod has a few HUNDRED songs on it.
[13:37]	* JoshMalone  knows 2 ipod owners; one has a few iTMS songs( 20...maybe), the other doesn't
[13:37]	<JoeBorn>	right, and either by you anecdotal or my napkin sketch, the conclusion is the same
[13:38]	<JoeBorn>	the vast bulk of the music on the iPods is not from iTMS, right?
[13:38]	<JoshMalone>	right
[13:38]	<JoeBorn>	so it hasn't really reached critical mass yet.
[13:38]	<JoshMalone>	my point was that probably MOST ipod owners have at least tried the iTMS, which means they're using DRM...
[13:39]	<JoshMalone>	and either don't realize or don't care because it "just works"
[13:39]	<JoeBorn>	agreed.
[13:39]	<JoshMalone>	now - that's not saying they want the DRM feature (beause it enables the iTMS to exist)
[13:39]	<JoeBorn>	so before they get too attached to DRM, FSF is taking a stand
[13:39]	<JoshMalone>	but they're at least comfortable with the DRM concept
[13:40]	<JoshMalone>	true
[13:40]	<JoshMalone>	another way of looking at it
[13:40]	<JoshMalone>	the way I see it:
[13:40]	<JoshMalone>	assumption 1: people will demand content
[13:41]	<JoshMalone>	assumption 2: content creators/distributors will want to control that content
[13:41]	<JoshMalone>	hypothesis: people will accept DRM because they demand content
[13:42]	<JoshMalone>	...up until the point where DRM sufficiently interferes with their consuption of the content
[13:42]	<JoshMalone>	Now Neuros owners want to have more control over the mode of consumption than others
[13:43]	<JoshMalone>	hence, they're your customers and not Apple's :)
[13:44]	<JoeBorn>	fair enough, the FSF approach seems to seek to accelerate the point where DRM sufficiently interferes
[13:44]	<JoeBorn>	and forces consumers to make a choice.
[13:45]	<JoshMalone>	that's like me shooting myself in the head so I can sue to make guns illegal because they hurt people
[13:45]	<JoeBorn>	no, I don't agree with that.
[13:45]	<JoeBorn>	it's not clear it's irreversable
[13:46]	<JoshMalone>	okay - but they are taking their marbles and going home
[13:47]	<JoeBorn>	well, if you really beleive that DRM is anathema to open source
[13:48]	<JoeBorn>	the fact is that it's quietly gaining ground every day.
[13:48]	<JoeBorn>	they have to choose between taking a stand and letting it take over.
[13:48]	* JoshMalone  agrees that it is, yes
[13:48]	<JoshMalone>	I agree mandatory DRM needs to be stood against
[13:49]	<JoshMalone>	(i.e., legeslating that all devices must protect content even without that content asking to be protected)
[13:49]	<JoshMalone>	it's a thin line...
[13:50]	<JoeBorn>	well there are legislative issues and market issues and the market issues are very often determined by critical mass
[13:50]	<JoeBorn>	who has it and who doesn't
[13:51]	<JoeBorn>	look at Microsoft
[13:51]	<JoshMalone>	but legislative issues aren't determined by critical mass
[13:52]	<JoeBorn>	right, I think they are two separate issues with two separate plans of attack
[13:52]	<JoeBorn>	I see GPL 3 as a market attack.
[13:52]	<JoshMalone>	I see
[13:53]	<JoeBorn>	Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing for it.
[13:53]	<JoeBorn>	I would prefer linux be BSD from a business person's standpoint.
[13:53]	<JoshMalone>	and I'm just being a Devil's advocate, to some extent :)
[13:54]	<JoeBorn>	well maybe not BSD, but you get the point.
[13:54]	<JoshMalone>	yeah
[13:54]	<JoshMalone>	I do
[13:54]	<JoeBorn>	but from a neuros perspective, things get pretty interesting.
[13:55]	<JoshMalone>	yeah - they do
[13:55]	<JoeBorn>	by driving a big stake between open source and DRM, the distinction between Neuros and basically all the other HW companies gets larger
[13:55]	<JoeBorn>	and more distinct
[13:56]	<JoeBorn>	and more obvious to a broader cross section of consumers.
[13:57]	<JoeBorn>	I've got it on my list of to-dos to fully understand the MS DRM tradeoffs
[13:58]	<JoeBorn>	clearly there are some issues with mass storage and MS DRM.
[13:58]	<JoshMalone>	:) good luck
[13:58]	<JoeBorn>	I have even heard that there are some issues with S/PDIF and MS DRM (don't know if it's true or not)
[13:58]	<JoeBorn>	now say there are issues with DRM and linux
[14:00]	<JoeBorn>	now imagine all other things are equal
[14:00]	<JoeBorn>	a Neuros and another brand of player, they are the same size, same functionality, etc.
[14:01]	<NC-17>	my samsung flash player does Plays For Sure and mass storage
[14:01]	<NC-17>	the Y7-TX zw77 or whatever it is
[14:01]	<JoeBorn>	on the whole player or do you have to partion it somehow?
[14:01]	<NC-17>	also ogg, which is why i got it
[14:01]	<NC-17>	seems to be totally open
[14:02]	<NC-17>	i suspect for the MSDRM you have to use the sync tool
[14:02]	<NC-17>	or WMP
[14:02]	<NC-17>	but ogg/mp3/pictures i can just copy over in windows explorer like an external drive
[14:02]	<JoshMalone>	well - I'm sure you're not seeing _everything_ in the player through umass
[14:02]	<JoshMalone>	(OS, firmware files, etc.)
[14:02]	<JoeBorn>	well, right, I need to do more research on it.
[14:02]	<NC-17>	thats correct
[14:03]	<NC-17>	i dont see that, but i do have the full gig to use
[14:03]	<JoeBorn>	I looked at a creative micro or something and you had to decide how much would be allowed for storing files.
[14:03]	<NC-17>	interesting
[14:03]	<JoeBorn>	that device was setup and using the DRM stuff though.
[14:04]	<JoeBorn>	like I said, I have to do the research, all this is just hearsay really.
[14:04]	<NC-17>	i think the plays for sure name is ironic
[14:05]	<JoeBorn>	right, well anyway, my case is hypothetical, but imagine it's the case.
[14:06]	<JoeBorn>	even someone outside the slashdot crowd would have to think twice before choosing DRM over mass storage, SPDIF and hopefully third party applications
[14:07]	<JoeBorn>	and the longer the FSF waits to have the "showdown" the lower their chances of victory are since DRM is quietly seeping in.
[14:07]	<JoeBorn>	that hypothetical person becomes more likely to choose DRM the more DRM content they have.
[14:15]	<JoeBorn>	and there's also another factor, I'll call the "outrage factor"
[14:16]	<JoeBorn>	the more common something is, the harder it seems to be to be outraged by it.
[14:16]	<JoeBorn>	for example, protected CDs.
[14:16]	<JoeBorn>	it's a lot easier to be outraged by DRM'd CDs because the standard is open and free CDs
[14:17]	<JoeBorn>	but DVDs are just the opposite.
[14:17]	<JoeBorn>	it's much harder to buy a DVD, find out you can't rip it with iTunes or WMP and express outrage
[14:18]	<JoeBorn>	because the first response you'll get it "oh, they are almost all that way."
[14:19]	<JoshMalone>	that is true, yes
[14:21]	<NC-17>	i concur
[14:21]	<JoeBorn>	it seems likely that this will ultimately have a profound effect,
[14:22]	<JoeBorn>	and certainly one on Neuros, but I can't honestly say what that effect will be really.
[15:59]	<pjz>	DRM is doomed to fail though
[15:59]	<pjz>	it's like a law of physics
[16:00]	<pjz>	doing DRM successfully requires secure, tamperproof hardware. Anything else can be broken
[16:01]	<pjz>	broken fairly easily, even.
[16:03]	<pjz>	and I'd rather have a non-DRM player that the community can improve than a DRM-capable one that only the mfr can improve.
[16:04]	<pjz>	b/c the community will keep things going longer than any mfr can afford to, and will come up with uses and extra features and such that the mfr would never think of.
[16:05]	<pjz>	right now the only DRM that it bugs me to not be able to use is audible.com b/c I like to listen to audiobooks on roadtrips.
[16:23]	<NC-17>	ive never really given audiobooks a shot
[16:23]	<NC-17>	for some reason i dont think i would concentrate on the story as well as reading it
[16:23]	<NC-17>	and then have to relisten to bits all the time