An initiative of the Free Software Foundation (FSF), Defective By Design is urging all technologists to get involved at the start of the campaign. "Technologists are very aware of the dangers of DRM," said Peter Brown, Executive Director of the FSF. "We see this as the tip of the iceberg and it is our duty to do something about it." The tech community is uniquely qualified to lead this effort, in Brown's view. "We know about the collusion of Big Media, device manufacturers and proprietary software companies to lock us down," he continued. "Their aim is to put Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) into all our computers and homes".

DRM又不是MS發明的，這標題不完全正確啊……別忘了就連Linus Torvalds也不完全反對DRM（甚至考慮不採用將推出的GPLv3），我看FSF這條路應該還很漫長。

I've been covering the Free Software Foundation's Defective By Design campaign against Digital Rights Management (DRM) technologies since its planning stages. Starting from scratch, in less than three months, the campaign has grown to 7000 members. This number is impressive, especially since the campaign introduces a degree of activism previously unknown in the free and open source software communities. What strikes me, though, is that, for all the loathing of DRM, how rarely the reasons for opposing it are spelled out. In some cases, the reason may be that people consider them too obvious to be worth mentioning, but, too often when I've probed, people haven't even heard of the possible objections. These objections begin with the fact that the case for DRM has yet to be made, and continues with arguments about consumer rights, privacy, competitiveness, and industry standards.

其實，有關Linus Torvalds的問題我也提到過了
目前自由軟體界是有了不影響大局的分裂了
一邊是堅持絕對自由的理想派，RMS可視為代表
一方則認為軟體自由就好，又或者要求自由軟體能夠擺上桌面的實用派，像Linus Torvalds跟Eric.S.Raymond

Linus最近透露他好像一開始就打算永遠讓Linux用GPLv2了
當然我希望v3可以修改至讓實用派滿意的程度，因為當初v3的焦點其實不在DRM，而是在給自由軟體加防護盾的，因為鑑於SCO vs Linux(IBM?)的案件
當初SCO大叫Linux侵權，一邊出售根據Samba(好像也有linux源碼)的產品獲利，實在讓人不爽。v3就是加入保護條款，狀告自由軟體的話，其產品就不得使用自由軟體。