Nokia Urges Linux Developers To Be Cool With DRM

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.'"

Say what?!?

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?!?

I wish my moderator points didn't just expire. Hit the nail on the head.

Re:Say what?!?

-1 Carpentry Reference

Re:Say what?!?

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?!?

well thats the wonder of the GPL, we can just take the most current version of QT and FORK.

Re:Say what?!?

If that is their plan, they must not realize the low value of QT (we have plenty of alternatives) compared to the high value of the no-DRM ideals in the F/OSS community. They really aren't in a bargaining position.

Re:Say what?!?

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.

Here's an idea? Want DRM in your product?

Write your own damn code!

Re:Here's an idea? Want DRM in your product?

Well, I suppose someone could write an open source DRM module for mplayer. Would that work for you?

Re:Here's an idea? Want DRM in your product?

Funny, but why not? Optionally installed of course.... Trying to mandatorily include DRM in all opensource media players would be a very strange and ludicrous idea. But if someone wants to hang themselves, give them some more rope and fetch the popcorn.

Translation

"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.

They need us more than we need them

I think they are the ones that need to be "educated".

Re:They need us more than we need them

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?

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.

In other news...

In other news, a dictator urged the population to be cool with a totalitarian state.

Re:In other news...

Huh? Bush gave a speech and neither FOX nor CNN covers it?

SIM locks?!

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?!

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.

That's some great logic there...

'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

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

... 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.

Have cake, eat it too.

"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?

Two simple principles:

If I don't control it, I don't own it.
If I don't own it, I can't trust it.

even open source cant make DRM work

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.

Re:Based on the quotes in the article header,

I RTFA, and it's actually an accurate summary of his speech. It really sounds like the guy honestly believes the crap he's spewing.