Re: [Fsfe-uk] Explanation of Tivosiation and problems - comments sought

[rob]

Quoting Chris Croughton <address@hidden>:

> It seems to me that banning locks is itself anticompetitive behaviour.

It is anti-anti-competitive behaviour. A ban on bans would not lead to more
bans. ;-)

> If someone wants to make a locked PC, I simply won't buy it, I'll buy
> one which isn't locked.

They are *sold* unlocked. But Vista can activate the locks for you if 
you like.

> As far as I have heard no one is passing a law
> that there must be locks on all computer hardware.

No such law is required. Intel and Microsoft have taken it on 
themselves to add
the locks.

> If they did then
> businesses would see such a rise in costs that it would quickly kill the
> economy, because they gain by using 3rd-party software far more than
> they'd lose by not having locks.

Surely the existence of DRM would reduce costs to businesses as it 
would reduce
theft? ;-)

> Having screws on the outside is not comparable to having the source of a
> program.  The latter is equivalent to supplying the Haynes manual plus a
> full box of spare parts...

Having the source of the program is equivalent to owning the car. Not 
having the
source is equivalent to calling a taxi.

- Rob.