rwmtest

We should answer the question of whether a paywall is a copyright issue, before we dive into the question of the importance of this question for the debate around the Paracopyright provisions in Bill C-11. I am familiar with paywalls from the perspective of both a user and a provider of such services. I will offer two specific examples of paywalls to illustrate the issues. I have been a paid subscriber to The Hill Times since 2005. This is an example of a service that offers some access to anonymous browsers on the Internet, but offers advanced services (full access to search through considerable archives, access to all new articles, etc) only to paid subscribers. You use a simple username and password to log in to prove you are a subscribe. My current job is as a software author and system administrator for Canadiana.org . We offer anonymous access to some content, while other content is only available to paid subscribers. All the content is in the public domain, so copyright isn

I had a heated conversation at GOSLING last evening about just how friendly to FLOSS or "good" that Google is compared to Apple.   I have personally disliked Apple and their products since the 1980's when I was first introduced to the Lisa and Mac, with the closest I ever came to Apple was having an Apple II clone in the mid 1980's.  This Apple II clone came with schematics in the manual, so a very different type of computer than the locked-down devices that people purchase from Apple today. This conversation is one where different people will have different opinions.  I've seen a lot of Mac's at Linux events over the years, from the same people who scream at Microsoft for their business practises.   I think it would be interesting to others for me to publish my own concept of the spectrum, even knowing there will be (sometimes quite strong) disagreement. A few select individuals and organisations, ordered from Freedom to imprisonment : Richard Stallman I

I was asked on twitter to explain why DRM is bad.  Given I have spent more than a decade talking about this topic, you would think there is a simple twitter-length answer: but there isn't. Whether you believe the acronym expands to Digital Rights Management, Digital Restrictions Management , or Dishonest Relationship Misinformation , it doesn't define a specific technology or technique.  The acronym is used to refer to non-controversial technologies such as databases describing content and eCommerce websites, to highly controversial things such as digital locks which lock out the owners of what is locked. We can't entirely avoid using confusing terms, as people will immediately say "Aren't you talking about DRM" when you want to speak about specific harmful activities.  It is very useful to be clear whenever the time is available. When some people are concerned about DRM they are concerned about the inability to loan electronic books, or to