I have stopped replying to AP defenders for some time, because it is really just a waste of time. Some pages ago someone said the author is not a company, is a person. So i shouldn't criticize him. I am just laughing at the logic.
Don't make shit up, that's NOT what I said. What I was pointing out was that this was a product by an individual for free, so there's no reason for him to make changes so that more people can use it. Seeing as he gets no money from this product (unlike companies that sell systems/games/accessories) there's no personal gain in it for him to remove the AP.
The point was not that the author was a user instead of a company, but that the author gains nothing from people using his program so he's in no need to take steps to make it appeal towards more users. This is the opposite of commercial products which are sold for a profit (or at least to cover production/operating losses), where a main goal is to sell to as many people as possible.
I had never guessed there would be so many AP (or DRM, say whatever pleases you) defenders on a site focused on homebrew.
I have stated
multiple times in this thread that I do not like the AP he included. However I'm defending his right to include it if he wants, based on his own morals.
Even on a site focused on homebrew, AP measures can be defended so widely.
I, at least, am not defending the purpose of AP in general (as much as you'd like to believe it). I am against AP in general. I have refused to buy products with AP, I will often crack the AP on products I do get so they don't interfere with my actions (debuggers, virtual machines, etc.), and I cheer whenever companies announce they won't be using AP (such as
this example).
What I'm defending is the author's rights to write a product the way he wants.
I know this software is free, but it doesn't mean i can't criticize the author's decision.
There's a difference between criticizing a decision, and some of the
bullshit being flung around in this thread.
There have been plenty of good critical posts, and as I've pointed out, the defenders of the author (myself included) have not touched those posts because they're right.
It's the posts with bullshit that treat the author like he owes them something that we attack, because they're childish.
Yes, it is interesting where people situate themselves in terms of morality and legality. According the the DMCA, hacking a Wii for homebrew is illegal. However, some have absolutely no problem with that...
The assumption that morals and technical legalities always match up is incorrect, which is probably contributing to your confusion.
Just because it's law does not mean it's considered right.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/repeal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_repealed_legislation
Maybe I'm just dense, but I haven't noticed anyone in here defending the AP. Myself and others have simply defended the author's right to do whatever the fuck he wants with his program and the user's right to not use it if they disagree with him.
It's also the user's right to criticize poor design choices that screw him and limit the app's usefulness.
Yes, like this one.
http://gbatemp.net/topic/330634-why-add-anti-piracy-measures-to-devolution/page__view__findpost__p__4307304
This is a legit post listing the reasons why the AP is not a good idea, notice nobody's torn into this one.
Notice also that this post does not act like the author owes him anything, it doesn't make childish demands for the source or insult the author, and it doesn't sit there and assume things that aren't true about the author's intentions or methods.