www/philosophy words-to-avoid.html

[Richard M. Stallman]

CVSROOT:        /web/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Richard M. Stallman <rms>       14/01/23 19:51:01

Modified files:
        philosophy     : words-to-avoid.html 

Log message:
        (DigialLocks): Rewrite the text.

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.174&r2=1.175

Patches:
Index: words-to-avoid.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html,v
retrieving revision 1.174
retrieving revision 1.175
diff -u -b -r1.174 -r1.175
--- words-to-avoid.html 17 Jan 2014 18:03:27 -0000      1.174
+++ words-to-avoid.html 23 Jan 2014 19:51:00 -0000      1.175
@@ -375,22 +375,23 @@
 <p>
 &ldquo;Digital locks&rdquo; is used to refer to Digital Restrictions
 Management by some who criticize it.  The problem with this term is
-that it fails to show what's wrong with the practice.</p>
+that it fails to do justice to the badness of DRM.  The people who
+adopted that term did not think it through.</p>
 <p>
-Locks are not necessarily an injustice.  You probably own several
+Locks are not necessarily oppressive or bad.  You probably own several
 locks, and their keys or codes as well; you may find them useful or
-troublesome, but either way they don't oppress you, because you can
-open and close them.</p>
+troublesome, but they don't oppress you, because you are in a position
+to open and close them.</p>
 <p>
-DRM is like a lock placed on you by someone else, who refuses to
-give you the key&mdash;in other words, like handcuffs.  Therefore,
-we call them &ldquo;digital handcuffs,&rdquo; not &ldquo;digital
-locks.&rdquo;</p>
+DRM is like a lock placed on you by someone else, who refuses to give
+you the key&mdash;in other words, like <em>handcuffs</em>.  Therefore,
+the clear way to refer to them is &ldquo;digital handcuffs,&rdquo; not
+&ldquo;digital locks.&rdquo;</p>
 <p>
 A number of opposition campaigns have chosen the unwise term
 &ldquo;digital locks&rdquo;; to get things back on the right track, we
-must firmly decline to follow them in using that term.  We can support
-a campaign that opposes &ldquo;digital locks&rdquo; if we agree on the
+must firmly insist on correcting this mistake.  The FSF can support a
+campaign that opposes &ldquo;digital locks&rdquo; if we agree on the
 substance; however, when we state our support, we conspicuously
 replace the term with &ldquo;digital handcuffs&rdquo; and say why.</p>
 
@@ -927,7 +928,7 @@
 
 <p>Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2014/01/17 18:03:27 $
+$Date: 2014/01/23 19:51:00 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>