Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Licensing Fee Intended To Reduce Hobbyists

BokLM writes "Microsoft's Amir Majidimehr, Corporate VP of the Windows Digital Media Division, explained at a DRM conference in London why they require a license fee from device makers." From the article: "According to Amir, the fee is not intended to recoup the expenses Microsoft incurred in developing their DRM, or to turn a profit. The intention is to reduce the number of licensees to a manageable level, to lock out 'hobbyists' and other entities that Microsoft doesn't want to have to trouble itself with."

2 of 355 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Things haven't changed since 1976... by mopslik · · Score: 5, Informative

    'll paraphrase the above for you in fewer words.

    Interesting. I don't see one instance of Billy G mentioning:

    • that hobbyists should not make software
    • that software other than Billy's ruins the industry
    • that free software is bad

    What I do see is a screed claiming that:

    • stealing software does not reward financially-motivated software makers
    • stealing software does not motivate certain software makers into further delevoping said software

    So how is that paraphrasing again?

    Come on. I'm not fan of Billy G, but you can't honestly claim that the paragraph above says what you say it does.

  2. Re:Things haven't changed since 1976... by CastrTroy · · Score: 5, Informative

    No, what's he's saying is don't steal software just to write your own. Thanks to people like him, we now have many free tools and can write our own software without paying, and without stealing. If you truly think that a product is worth using, then pay what they are charging. If you don't think it's worth what they are asking, then don't use it.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.