Aladdin Knowledge Systems, an information security company specializing in authentication, software DRM and content security, has announced that Aladdin HASP SRM, the first fully-integrated software- and hardware-based copy protection and licensing solution, now supports Linux.
Who ordered the Linux with DRM? Presumably the target audience for this sort of thing is the hard-line corporate type, the ones like Nokia who want a piece of the Linux pie without walking the Linux path.
Related: Removal of Ogg Vorbis and Theora from HTML5: An Outrageous Disaster
6 comments:
As I have already pointed out in response to the article cited in your post, the vast majority of our customers asking for Linux support have been software publishers who want to offer their customers - primarily small and medium-size businesses - a choice in operating systems.
To ensure Linux remains an attractive option, it's critical that there's also a wide range of applications out there that run under operating systems such as Linux. One way of doing this is through open source. Another way is to allow software developers and publishers to profit from their investments in building those applications - particularly high-value business applications running on Linux servers. I think we would both like to see the continued availability of multiple options for operating system platforms. Wouldn't you agree that there's more than one path toward that goal?
I guess they are not happy with the information age. It seems to exemplify the attitude that with enough equipment they can go back to the way it was, where they selected what people could see and hear based upon their ownership of the communications media. I don't think it will actually work, but it will be very irritating and stifling to experience the degree of effort they will go through to turn the clock back to 1950. They are planning chips for TVs also to control content and then they will require them hardwired in every computer sold. I don't think it is economically realistic, but I am sure they will keep working at it.
>As I have already pointed out in
>response to the article cited in your
>post, the vast majority of our
>customers asking for Linux support
>have been software publishers who
>want to offer their customers -
>primarily small and medium-size
>businesses - a choice in operating
>systems.
In other words, software publishers who want a piece of the Linux pie but do not want to go Open Source. They are, what economists call, people who want to have their cake and eat it.
>To ensure Linux remains an attractive
>option, it's critical that there's
>also a wide range of applications
>out there that run under operating
>systems such as Linux.
So these proprietary software publishers are doing Linux a big favour by ensuring that Linux remains an attractive option? How very "noble"...
>Wouldn't you agree that there's more
>than one path toward that goal?
I beg to differ. Doing it the way you have suggested violates the very nature and spirit of Linux.
Open Source is the (only) way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto Linux users, but by being Open Source.
>They are planning chips for TVs also
>to control content and then they
>will require them hardwired in
>every computer sold. I don't think it
>is economically realistic, but I am
>sure they will keep working at it.
"They may take our lives, but they'll never take our freedom!"
I agree with your comment that they can take our lives but not our freedom. I just got around to scanning your blog for comments. I have the feed and I should spend more time reading the comments also. The comments from Jeremy seem to echo the words of Bill Gates that I heard in an interview. Kind of like asking people to sell their ideals for a piece of silver.
>The comments from Jeremy seem to
>echo the words of Bill Gates that
>I heard in an interview.
I'm not surprised, since they're in the same league.
>Kind of like asking people to sell
>their ideals for a piece of silver.
If Jeremy is looking for people to agree with his views, he had better look elsewhere. $in-gapore is a good bet.
Post a Comment