Comments for Natan Yellin http://natanyellin.com Entrepreneur, coffeeholic, and student Sat, 04 Feb 2012 16:35:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on VLC Illegal Under ACTA? by Natan Yellin http://natanyellin.com/2012/02/02/vlc-illegal-under-acta/comment-page-1/#comment-99712 Natan Yellin Sat, 04 Feb 2012 16:35:30 +0000 http://natanyellin.com/?p=1281#comment-99712 Tim, I have little experience with modern Windows development practices, but I would think libdvdcss is bundled with VLC on Windows. Either way, you're only shifting the issue from distributing VLC to distributing libdvdcss itself. Tim, I have little experience with modern Windows development practices, but I would think libdvdcss is bundled with VLC on Windows. Either way, you’re only shifting the issue from distributing VLC to distributing libdvdcss itself.

]]> Comment on VLC Illegal Under ACTA? by Natan Yellin http://natanyellin.com/2012/02/02/vlc-illegal-under-acta/comment-page-1/#comment-99711 Natan Yellin Sat, 04 Feb 2012 16:28:51 +0000 http://natanyellin.com/?p=1281#comment-99711 Ben, I don't know the answer to that. Those last few words might be important. However, as Johan points out, the real issue is future DRM schemes. Ben, I don’t know the answer to that. Those last few words might be important.

However, as Johan points out, the real issue is future DRM schemes.

]]> Comment on VLC Illegal Under ACTA? by Tim http://natanyellin.com/2012/02/02/vlc-illegal-under-acta/comment-page-1/#comment-99710 Tim Sat, 04 Feb 2012 13:40:24 +0000 http://natanyellin.com/?p=1281#comment-99710 Though of course neither VLC nor the VLC dvd plugins link directly to libdvdcss. As far as VLC is concerned, it doesn't exist. As I understand it, it may only be used at runtime by some of the libraries used if decss happens to exist. Though of course neither VLC nor the VLC dvd plugins link directly to libdvdcss. As far as VLC is concerned, it doesn’t exist. As I understand it, it may only be used at runtime by some of the libraries used if decss happens to exist.

]]> Comment on VLC Illegal Under ACTA? by Ben http://natanyellin.com/2012/02/02/vlc-illegal-under-acta/comment-page-1/#comment-99709 Ben Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:41:43 +0000 http://natanyellin.com/?p=1281#comment-99709 My point was basically that, because the encryption was broken (specifically, for DVDs), it must not have achieved it's objective of protection nor was it very effective. Of course, I still don't support ACTA. My point was basically that, because the encryption was broken (specifically, for DVDs), it must not have achieved it’s objective of protection nor was it very effective.

Of course, I still don’t support ACTA.

]]> Comment on Goodbye Planet GNOME by Natan Yellin http://natanyellin.com/2012/01/27/goodbye-pgo/comment-page-1/#comment-99708 Natan Yellin Fri, 03 Feb 2012 12:55:36 +0000 http://natanyellin.com/?p=1278#comment-99708 Raphael, that means a lot to me. Thank you. Raphael, that means a lot to me. Thank you.

]]> Comment on Goodbye Planet GNOME by Raphael http://natanyellin.com/2012/01/27/goodbye-pgo/comment-page-1/#comment-99706 Raphael Fri, 03 Feb 2012 12:49:52 +0000 http://natanyellin.com/?p=1278#comment-99706 Just wanted to say: although I still do use GNOME on a daily basis, as of late your blog posts about things like ACTA, etc. have been the reason I've stopped by PGO every couple of days. Thanks for sharing your thoughts! Just wanted to say: although I still do use GNOME on a daily basis, as of late your blog posts about things like ACTA, etc. have been the reason I’ve stopped by PGO every couple of days. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

]]> Comment on VLC Illegal Under ACTA? by glandium http://natanyellin.com/2012/02/02/vlc-illegal-under-acta/comment-page-1/#comment-99705 glandium Fri, 03 Feb 2012 09:20:04 +0000 http://natanyellin.com/?p=1281#comment-99705 effective != efficient. effective != efficient.

]]> Comment on VLC Illegal Under ACTA? by Johan Ouwerkerk http://natanyellin.com/2012/02/02/vlc-illegal-under-acta/comment-page-1/#comment-99704 Johan Ouwerkerk Fri, 03 Feb 2012 05:58:53 +0000 http://natanyellin.com/?p=1281#comment-99704 To people who say “no worries, this stuff is so long past its use it won't be upheld”, that is not the point, though, is it? The point is that when the media industry cook up yet another DRM scheme for a new media format -- then the VLC people cannot implement support or risk violating ACTA. To people who say “no worries, this stuff is so long past its use it won’t be upheld”, that is not the point, though, is it? The point is that when the media industry cook up yet another DRM scheme for a new media format — then the VLC people cannot implement support or risk violating ACTA.

]]> Comment on VLC Illegal Under ACTA? by mmu_man http://natanyellin.com/2012/02/02/vlc-illegal-under-acta/comment-page-1/#comment-99703 mmu_man Fri, 03 Feb 2012 02:30:23 +0000 http://natanyellin.com/?p=1281#comment-99703 Yeah, BD+ has been cracked for years already, whatever objective it had is since failed. Yeah, BD+ has been cracked for years already, whatever objective it had is since failed.

]]> Comment on VLC Illegal Under ACTA? by mmu_man http://natanyellin.com/2012/02/02/vlc-illegal-under-acta/comment-page-1/#comment-99702 mmu_man Fri, 03 Feb 2012 02:28:01 +0000 http://natanyellin.com/?p=1281#comment-99702 Well, to me the keyword is "adequate". The only "adequate" legal protection possible is simply *none*, since there is no proof that it has any positive effect, while we all know if impairs fair use of the digital goods. As for effective, well... But sadly IANAL. Well, to me the keyword is “adequate”.
The only “adequate” legal protection possible is simply *none*, since there is no proof that it has any positive effect, while we all know if impairs fair use of the digital goods.
As for effective, well…
But sadly IANAL.

]]>