EUCD in Portugal

[João Miguel Neves]

On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 19:12, Loic Dachary wrote:
> 	Could you please expand ? I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean
> that the portuguese implementation of EUCD is acceptable according to you, 
> except for "access control" ? 

I've not ready thouroughly yet. About the portuguese version what I've
seen is:
- Almost all exceptions are implemented.
- There is a process defined if the vendor doesn't supply unprotected
versions for legal uses.
- TPMs around software are not protected by law.
- It says that protections shouldn't impair legal uses.
- Take-down clause has been transformed for general law and is
implemented through court injuctions (In Portugal this means you'll have
the right to be heard before any action is taken).

This is why I said this is probably the best implementation we could
have hoped for. As far as I can see what we should fight for:

- Getting the law to say that TPM can't impede legal uses.

The main question regarding Free Software continues to be how do you
know if an implementation is legal or not ? What's the difference
between a player and a FS player ?

I still need to read it thoroughly. If you need information on what to
look for, I got an e-mail earlier about the discussion around EUCD in
Belgium.

-- 
						João Miguel Neves
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20021204/8113e492/attachment.sig>