On 5/19/14, Richard Hector <rich...@walnut.gen.nz> wrote: > On 19/05/14 14:01, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> On 5/18/2014 9:47 PM, Paul E Condon wrote: >>> On 20140518_2131-0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>>> On 5/18/2014 6:39 PM, The Wanderer wrote: >>>>> If the copyright on something restricted by DRM were to expire, and >>>>> the >>>>> DRM were still effective (or if breaking it were forbidden, e.g. by >>>>> anti-circumvention laws), then although people would be *allowed* to >>>>> copy and redistribute it at will, they would still not be *able* to do >>>>> so, without permission from whoever controls the DRM - which would, >>>>> likely, be the former holder of the copyright. >>>>> >>>>> There's more, but that should do as a first point. Objections to DRM >>>>> go >>>>> far beyond just objections to copyright. >>>> >>>> Please show an example where that has occurred. >>> >>> Please show an example of a digital recording that was copyrighted 75 >>> yrs >>> ago. It is a silly request, I know. But no less silly than yours. >> >> Not silly at all. But there are may of them. The works of Shakespeare, >> among others, are much older than 75 years, and have now entered the >> public domain. And they have been digitized. > > A more relevant request: how about an example of a digital (or any) > recording that was released _with_DRM_ for which the copyright has now > lapsed?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mickey_mouse_law -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caosgnsrj6iass0fg8d7sjffwg-rv6we+hodebw5rntermlq...@mail.gmail.com
