[kwlug-disc] Kitchener-Waterloo Debates and C-32 - Braid defends C-32 and digital locks

[Russell McOrmond]

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Raul Suarez <rarsa at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I didn't see him confused, just stating the party line that "They are protecting
> the intellectual property of the creator".

  That would be correct if we were talking about C-32 overall, or some
of the more obviously Copyright related aspects.

  But this article being brought up in the context of the debate spoke
about anti-interoperability locks on content, and the transition costs
this brings.  It is an issue that was articulated a few times at
committee with him sitting a few feet from witnesses.

> RIM made their position clear on the Nortel issue, so it can clearly be used as
> an example there.

  Patents, Copyright, and TPMs are very different topics, and what a
person or corporation expresses on one cannot be extrapolated to
another other.

  As to the added transition costs that anti-interoperability locks
cause, this doesn't need RIM to have spoken on it.  It is a well known
effect of this abuse of technology.  Even if RIM decided they wanted
to play that game of Russian roulette and publicly suggested they were
supportive of this use of cryptography, it doesn't change the fact of
the transition costs.

-- 
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property
rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition!
http://creform.ca/petition/ict/

"The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware
 manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or
 portable media player from my cold dead hands!"