From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Oct 10 9:46: 9 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from nef.ens.fr (nef.ens.fr [129.199.96.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EA4D37B408 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2001 09:46:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from corto.lpt.ens.fr (corto.lpt.ens.fr [129.199.122.2]) by nef.ens.fr (8.10.1/1.01.28121999) with ESMTP id f9AGk0N45673 ; Wed, 10 Oct 2001 18:46:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from (rsidd@localhost) by corto.lpt.ens.fr (8.9.3/jtpda-5.3.1) id SAA83048 ; Wed, 10 Oct 2001 18:46:00 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 18:46:00 +0200 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: Jamie Bowden Cc: Brett Glass , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SSSCA? Message-ID: <20011010184600.A82552@lpt.ens.fr> Mail-Followup-To: Jamie Bowden , Brett Glass , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG References: <4.3.2.7.2.20011010101446.053c3560@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from ragnar@sysabend.org on Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 09:39:25AM -0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Jamie Bowden said on Oct 10, 2001 at 09:39:25: > On Wed, 10 Oct 2001, Brett Glass wrote: > : > :>*Only* free software (and ordinary users, who don't > :>have a voice in these things) would suffer from it. > : > :Not so. Do you have any idea how many products IBM has? > :What about the approximately one zillion products that > :contain embedded systems? > > Got to side with Brett on this. I seriously doubt Chrysler, Ford, GM, or > any other car manufacturer is about to start paying fees and royalties for > shipping electronic ignition systems, traction control systems, antilock > braking systems, etc, which are all covered under this abomination as > written. Well yes I guess that's true. But what's to stop them watering it down so that only computers and operating systems need comply, with some suitable definition of "computer" and "operating system"? The way I see it, this could even be a ploy: they introduce this hugely broad bill which covers everything that has a microprocessor, there's an outcry, then they say "ok, how about just computers then", and the big boys agree and they're all happy. It won't cost IBM / Microsoft much to patch their OS's; IBM can even continue shipping linux pre-loaded if it wants to. I don't see why they won't agree: the same big boys have been backing CPRM and the DMCA itself. R To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message