On 09/03/2016 16:53, Adrian Farrel wrote:
Eliot,
Picking one piece out of your MUD...
I've floated an idea in draft-lear-mud-framework-00.txt which talks a
little about this. The idea is to learn what the Thing is and then have
its manufacturer communicate to a deployment how the thing is intended
to be used.
This approach worries me. While the manufacturer might not object to this, the user and the system integrator should. The fact that a device was manufactured for foo should not stop it being used for bar.
Adrian
Indeed, and too often manufactures already do this as part of their
business model.
A classic example is where performance is throttled, or features are
enabled only by
licence.
It is but a short step to application specific restriction, although if
an application has
third party IPR there can be a liability that rests with the
manufacturer, in which
case you can understand the concern.
As distasteful and frustrating as this is, restriction of application
may be an unfortunate necessity.
- Stewart