Re: [mmox] Permissions

Well, talking to a few others it seems the general consensus is "make
a field on assets for all this stuff and make the scheme extensible".

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Jesrad <jesrad@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hmm, "it's not gonna enforce IP technically" was not the point I
> wanted to make. The actual point is: attempting to define a mechanism
> for signalling what categories of actions are permitted or not under a
> specific copyright law (which may or may not be applicable depending
> on national/sovereign context) is a non-starter because of infinite
> recursion.
>
> This is one of the main reasons I suggest curtaining the issue
> entirely by adopting a multiple-host approach, where content (but not
> necessarily the MMOX-layer object reference itself) remains hosted on
> the originating grid and is not replicated between different grids
> through the cross-grid protocol. The other reason for following such
> an approach, is that it's the only one compatible with existing P2P
> VWs like Solipsis.
>
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Gareth Nelson <gareth@litesim.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Jesrad <jesrad@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Some people are going to insist on the DRM or not allow their content
>>>> to be transferred at all
>>>
>>> And some people like me will insist that there is a way to do it that
>>> cannot be prevented by third-party permissions system like this.
>>
>> But that's besides the point, since doing so isn't going to convince
>> people to allow the content to move AND this system does not in fact
>> prevent anything, it's a machine-readable version of the license - the
>> only force comes from compliant systems and users or the courts.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> mmox mailing list
> mmox@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox
>