Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Nokia Urges Linux Developers To Be Cool With DRM

Posted by kdawson on Fri Jun 13, 2008 08:52 AM
from the unclear-on-the-concept dept.
superglaze writes in to note that according to Nokia's software chief, its plans for open source include getting developers to accept things like DRM, commercial IP rights, and SIM locks. "Jaaksi admitted that concepts like these 'go against the open-source philosophy,' but said they were necessary components of the current mobile industry. 'Why do we need closed vehicles? We do,' he said. 'Some of these things harm the industry but they're here [as things stand]. These are touchy, emotional issues, but this dialogue is very much needed. As an industry, we plan to use open-source technologies, but we are not yet ready to play by the rules; but this needs to work the other way round too.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] How Nokia and Linux Can Live Together 155 comments
Bruce Perens writes "Ari Jaaski of Nokia is concerned that the Linux developers need to learn to live with DRM, SIM-locking, and 'IPR'. But they won't. Fortunately, Nokia can do all that it wants with Linux, while being GPL2 and even GPL3-compatible. The key is knowing how to draw bright lines between different parts of the system. That's a legal term, and in this case it means a line between the Free Software and the rest of the system, that is 'bright' in that the two pieces are very well separated, and there is no dispute that one could be a derivative work of the other, or infringes on the other in any way. All of the Free Software goes on one side of that line, and all of the lock-down stuff on the other side." A very interesting read, and a good how-to for any company that is looking to use GPLed code as part of their products, or even just make their products to be hacker-friendly.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Say what?!? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nahdude812 (88157) * on Friday June 13 2008, @08:53AM (#23776733) Homepage

    but we are not yet ready to play by the rules; but this needs to work the other way round too
    So you're not yet ready to play by our rules, but you want us to play by your rules so that you have an opportunity to take advantage of the work we produce and provide to you for free (beer/speech); when the only stipulation we have is that you provide it back for free?

    I'm sorry, it sounds like you have your head firmly rooted somewhere dark and unnatural.

    "These things suck and hurt both you and us, and we won't bend on that. But we want you to work for us for free anyway."

    Holy cow man, listen to yourself. This is our playground and we give you an opportunity to play in it for free; in return we purchase the goods you produce as a result. You play by our rules or we take our playground and our purchasing power to someone who will.
    • Re:Say what?!? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by WiglyWorm (1139035) on Friday June 13 2008, @08:56AM (#23776773)
      I wish my moderator points didn't just expire. Hit the nail on the head.
    • Re:Say what?!? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by qortra (591818) on Friday June 13 2008, @09:01AM (#23776837) Homepage
      Interesting. I read it as more of a ransom note:

      "We have QT, and unless you give us DRM software in 6 months, you can kiss future GPL releases goodbye!"
    • Re:Say what?!? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by paroneayea (642895) on Friday June 13 2008, @09:02AM (#23776853) Homepage

      Hopefully at some point soon OpenMoko [openmoko.com] will become good enough for normal phone usage. Now there's a company that, from the very beginning, has wanted to play by our rules.

      Want to get the linux community's support? Asus did it, even though I'm not entirely sure they realized it when they began doing so. By releasing a machine that's linux friendly and not locked down, you're sure to get a community surrounding you that will help even improve the usefulness of your product.

  • by base3 (539820) on Friday June 13 2008, @08:54AM (#23776741)
    Write your own damn code!
  • Translation (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dreamchaser (49529) on Friday June 13 2008, @08:55AM (#23776747) Homepage Journal
    "We want to ditch your rules but have you live by our rules. We know it's wrong and bad for consumers but too bad. We want to lock in our profits".

    Pretty typical attitude in the industry I'd say.
  • I think they are the ones that need to be "educated".
    • by Opportunist (166417) on Friday June 13 2008, @09:01AM (#23776843)
      Educated? I'd say LARTed.

      Can you imagine what a cell could become if it is "OSS friendly"? Yes, you will most likely not lock your customers into having to use it, but here's a really novel, radical and completely unthinkable idea: They just might want to use your product because it caters to their needs.

      I know it is so last century, but how about making a product again that the customer wants to buy instead of trying to force him to buy it with vendor lock-in snares?
  • Emotional? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Opportunist (166417) on Friday June 13 2008, @08:56AM (#23776771)
    Huh? A corporation talking about emotion?

    It's about money. It's about vendor lock-in, it's about customer control and about avoiding competition.

    They want cheap/free (the beer kind) software, but under their sole control, without allowing the user of the software to apply it to their needs. Sorry, OSS doesn't swing that way.
  • by mr_da3m0n (887821) on Friday June 13 2008, @08:57AM (#23776791) Homepage
    In other news, a dictator urged the population to be cool with a totalitarian state.
  • SIM locks?! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jez9999 (618189) on Friday June 13 2008, @08:57AM (#23776797) Homepage Journal
    Are you shitting me? IP rights are one thing (we don't expect people not to respect IP rights, we may disagree a bit on how extensive those rights should be), but SIM locks are an anticompetitive abomination, and this guy is a moron if he expects intelligent developers ever to like them. They're all about vendor lock-in, and removal of consumer choice. I bought my phone independently of a contract. It cost more but means I just put in whatever company's SIM I want and I switch providers that easily. Nokia, if you don't like that, fuck off. (It's a Nokia phone)
    • Re:SIM locks?! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MoonBuggy (611105) on Friday June 13 2008, @09:09AM (#23776959) Homepage
      I'm particularly surprised to hear this from Nokia, actually. It's been a few years since I was working with mobile phones, so maybe they've changed since then, but their SIM locks seemed like pretty much token efforts to appease the networks. Back then, at least, a lot of Motorola and Sony Ericsson phones were only unlockable with a full flash of the phone's OS while Nokias just needed a code that could be easily calculated from the phone's serial number. I always got the impression that Nokia wanted their phones to be unlocked - they don't make any money from the network contract anyway, so it was in their interests to have the handset itself as useful as possible to the customer.
  • 'Why do we need closed vehicles? We do,'


    I'm sure that will do wonders to convince all of the second-grade OSS programmers to help you out.

    Me, I'm not interested. Because you're a doody-head, because you are.
  • RE (Score:5, Funny)

    by Kroc (925275) on Friday June 13 2008, @09:00AM (#23776823)
    Asking Linux users to accept DRM is like asking them if it's alright to take a shit in their kitchen.

    There is *no* cool way you can word it.
  • I'm cool with DRM (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Skapare (16644) on Friday June 13 2008, @09:00AM (#23776827) Homepage

    ... as long as it doesn't interfere with my rights to reprogram anything using any free/libre software and doesn't intefere with my fair use rights to use the content I pay for.

  • by seanellis (302682) on Friday June 13 2008, @09:00AM (#23776831) Homepage Journal
    "As an industry, we plan to use open-source technologies, but we are not yet ready to play by the rules."

    Sounds like they are not yet in a position to use open-source technologies.

    It would be interesting to see if turnabout is fair play. I'd love to have a free high-end smartphone, but that means taking up an expensive monthly airtime contract. Instead, I'll just declare that I am "not yet ready to play by the rules", take the benefit of the free handset now, and later on I'll sign up for a contract when I am ready to play by the rules.

    OK?
  • by Rinisari (521266) on Friday June 13 2008, @09:02AM (#23776859) Homepage Journal
    If I don't control it, I don't own it.
    If I don't own it, I can't trust it.
  • by RiotingPacifist (1228016) on Friday June 13 2008, @09:03AM (#23776865)
    1) encrypt something
    2) send encrypted data to their computer
    3) send key to their computer
    4) wait for somebody to take a memory dump
    5) NO profit

    Even if somebody was to make a binary blob to prevent memory dumps at kernel level, all you need is to run linux in a virtual machine (i hear its good at that) or use some rootkit.