Slashdot Mirror

This isn't exactly in line with what you are doing, but it's similar enough that you may get some good ideas from it. JWZ, of Netscape fame, has been hard at work at a night club called DNA Lounge. It includes kiosks for internet access based on Linux terminal servers, as well as a few other ideas. If you go to the backstage area of the site, you'll find instructions on how to do many of the things he's done.

In opening his club, Jamie Zawinski messed around with a linux based POS system..

interesing article here:

Linux-Based Point-of-Sale Software

I wanted to point out, after establishing the point of the Salon article, that Mr. Byrd is appealing to the RIAA vs. Napster judge to free his music. "Since Sony is stealing it, everyone should be able to!" is his basic point.

JWZ is railing against (and rightfully so!) the fact that the royalties he pays never go to the artists who actually (wrote | recorded | etc.) the music he's playing in his club!

effectively eliminate radio broadcasters

I love how the recording industry tries to deny this with the following quote:

KSDS-FM ... rates would be about $51 annually.

The rates are $184 per year per listener. This means the example they use, KSDS-FM, must average less than zero-point-three listeners.

Jut just as bad, or maybe worse are the paperwork requirements:
1. The name of the service;
2. The channel of the program (AM/FM stations use station ID);
3. The type of program (archived/looped/live);
4. Date of transmission;
5. Time of transmission;
6. Time zone of origination of transmission;
7. Numeric designation of the place of the sound recording within the program;
8. Duration of transmission (to nearest second);
9. Sound recording title;
10. The ISRC code of the recording;
11. The release year of the album per copyright notice and in the case of compilation albums, the release year of the album and copyright date of the track;
12. Featured recording artist;
13. Retail album title;
14. The recording label;
15. The UPC code of the retail album;
16. The catalog number;
17. The copyright owner information;
18. The musical genre of the channel or program (station format);

In addition, webcasters must report information on the audience as well:

1. The name of the service or entity;
2. The channel or program;
3. The date and time that the user logged in (the user's timezone);
4. The date and time that the user logged out (the user's timezone);
5. The time zone where the signal was received (user);
6. Unique user identifier;
7. The country in which the user received the transmissions.

-

jwz has written up a nice article that explains how the current licensing works and how the proposed CARP licensing would work here. There is no way Internet radio will be feasible if this goes in to effect, even without the added fees. Check out the information broadcasters would be required to report to the RIAA: there is no fewer than 18 pieces of information required for each song played! Not to mention the information that must be gathered from each listener. But just in case, the fees can be applied retroactively.

I hope that if this does go into effect, there is a large backlash. Remember that this is an election year. Votes still matter and politicians still care about getting them.

dont' ask me if internet radio can survive, read a rant by JWZ.

Pics from the con are also available on the club's website.

Pics from the con are also available on the club's website.

You can check out the most recent weblog at jwz's DNA Lounge for a short, informative rant on this. It starts a little below where the link jumps to, beginning with "In 'impending doom' news...".

Here is the original post, on the Freenet homepage about the Infoanarchy piece, as to whether it was posted on Kuro5hin or InfoAnarchy, read either, it doesn't matter. At the above link is an MP3 file of the original cited speech (at Codecon).

They just announced Ryan at HavenCo has changed the password to the codecon.org server and conference organizers can no longer log in. They have setup a New Server for CodeCon which has updated info on the conference.

The source to the Freedom Network servers linked from this new server is now at Linux Fund. Yeah!

CodeCon's being held at Jamie Zawinski's (JWZ's) club, the DNA Lounge, in case you were curious.

--jwz, ex Netscape programmer.

Reference

So be there or be square!

* ok, or at least well-rigged demos :-)

jwz is trying to do 24/7 streaming video(plus audio it seems) at his nightclub...

check it out: DNA Lounge tools

also of interest: DNA Lounge: Video Webcast

jwz is trying to do 24/7 streaming video(plus audio it seems) at his nightclub...

check it out: DNA Lounge tools

also of interest: DNA Lounge: Video Webcast

(As someone who has had their place robbed twice in the past two years, I find the low capture/prosecution rates depressing; it just doesn't seem to be a priority with law enforcement. Sigh. Oh well, if anyone tries to hit me again, they'll be on candid camera :-)

Oh, you mean just like jwz? ;^) (BTW, if you read a little further, you'll see the guy didn't get caught. sigh)

• ASCAP/BMI got paid when the radio station bought the CDs;
  
• ASCAP/BMI got paid again when the radio station paid their broadcasting license fees;
  
• ASCAP/BMI got paid a third time when the store paid their broadcasting license fees.

I just don't think this hacker convention will be as fun as some other dna events NAUGHTY CHRISTMAS

Seriously, I think its cool that they are not even going to bother with Digital Right Mangement and the hole political aspect of p2p. Just concentrate on the programs and users.

What with all the Internet kiosks and all. Jamie's input alone will make this a hypercool event. Plus, everything that goes over the Lounge's sound system is streamed live to the Internet. Does that include CodeCon, I wonder?

Still, it's too bad it couldn't have been held in JWZ's old Tent of Doom (essentially a cubicle wrapped in 500' of camo netting to ward off the ST:TNG theme of the Netscape office decor). I know it's ancient history now, but his TOD page was an inspiration to cubicle-dwellers everywhere, when it was up. Like the once-bright promise of Netscape, it will be missed.

What with all the Internet kiosks and all. Jamie's input alone will make this a hypercool event. Plus, everything that goes over the Lounge's sound system is streamed live to the Internet. Does that include CodeCon, I wonder?

Still, it's too bad it couldn't have been held in JWZ's old Tent of Doom (essentially a cubicle wrapped in 500' of camo netting to ward off the ST:TNG theme of the Netscape office decor). I know it's ancient history now, but his TOD page was an inspiration to cubicle-dwellers everywhere, when it was up. Like the once-bright promise of Netscape, it will be missed.

Jamie Zawinski wrote a most informative rant on the labyrinthine regulations and pitfalls that potentially face anyone wishing to Webcast. As he owns and operates the DNA Lounge nightclub in San Francisco, which does its own share of Webcasting, the man has definitely done his homework. Definitely worth a read.

Schwab

Jamie Zawinski wrote a most informative rant on the labyrinthine regulations and pitfalls that potentially face anyone wishing to Webcast. As he owns and operates the DNA Lounge nightclub in San Francisco, which does its own share of Webcasting, the man has definitely done his homework. Definitely worth a read.

Schwab

Not quite in time. These would have made good kiosks for DNA Lounge.

bars that take cash only are a relic of days gone by

Since I own a bar that only takes cash, I think I'm qualified to tell you that you're wrong.

The reason most bars only take cash is because we make more money that way. Credit cards slow down the bartender a lot: not only do they have to ring it in, but they have to get a signature. Good bartenders will parallel-process to get around this, but it still takes time. The faster our bartenders, the more drinks we serve, and the more money we make. Plus, the credit card company charges a fee for using credit cards. If you run a tab, where you hold on to the customer's card until the end of the night, the situation is somewhat better, but still not as good as cash: there's a lot more to keep track of, and a lot more potential for fraud. Plus, people tip less when they are paying by credit card, so both the bar and the bartenders make less money.

We take cash only, and have an ATM inside, right next to the bar. People are welcome to get cash advances on their credit cards before giving us cash for the drinks.

Yes, compulsory licensing is already a fact. Interestingly enough, webcast licenses are just now coming up for negotiation. See JWZ's writeup for more good info on the issue.

Remember: it's a "Microsoft virus", not an "email virus",

...opening night at the DNA Lounge.

I can imagine the kind of patter you'll be hearing on the dance floor...

"Yeah- its got a good beat, you can catalyze to it. I give it a 9."

"I just wish they'd have considered adding a RNA polymerase, you know? Its missing something. You ain't gonna be synthesizing mRNA if you can't transcribe the nucleotide sequence."

"True. True..."

but it's been up for months. I remember reading it ages ago when he was still building the DNA Lounge.

Oh wait... he still is building the DNA Lounge. Good to see progress being made. ;-)

Gerv

The correct link to DNA Lounge.

• http://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/webcasting.html

As I understand it, the basis of RIAA's suit is that even though Launch is paying for "statutory" (or "manditory") licenses, those licenses don't allow them to offer any level of "interactivity". "Interactivity" is legalese for "customization". That is, listeners aren't allowed to request songs, or hit "fast forward" or "rewind".

So what this suit means is that RIAA is now claiming that any kind of rating system constitutes interactivity, and is thus not permitted under statutory/manditory licenses.

The way LaunchCast works, their rating system really amounts to picking a genre of music: it's absolutely not the kind of thing you could use to tell the system to play a song on demand, which is the boogyman that is the basis for the statutory license rules.

So they're saying now that Launch needs "negotiated" licenses to do what they do. But this means that they won't be able to do it at all, because RIAA is under no obligation to give anyone a "negotiated" license at all.

Burn, Hollywood, Burn.

The article can be found here.

Lando

To qualify for a compulsory license, you have to follow certain rules that make them consider your webcast to be an ``Eligible Non-subscription Transmission'' (an ``ENT''). Don't ask me where they get these stupid names. The rules to qualify as an ENT are as follows.

(And note that these rules are for webcasts only: RF radio stations have a different, less strict, set of rules.)

• The webcast is not limited to particular users who pay for it (that's the ``non-subscription'' part.)

• The user must not be able to choose and receive a particular recording: that is, no playing songs on demand.

• In a three hour period, you can't play more than three tracks from a given album, and no more than two consecutively.

• In a three hour period, you can't play more than four tracks by a given artist, and no more than three consecutively.

• If the webcast is archived, the archive must be at least five hours long, and must not be made available for more than two weeks. The idea here is to make it hard for users to scan through the webcast to pick out and save individual songs.

• If the webcast repeats itself (plays in a loop) then the loop must be at least three hours long.

• The webcast must not publish prior announcements of the songs: you can't let the users know what songs are coming up next, and you can't publish your playlists ahead of time.

• You must identify the song title, album title, and the featured artist in text during the performance of the song.

Paul

Yeah, I'm sure he is... his Mozilla resignation letter sure makes for entertaining reading now. An object lesson in the value of sticking with it, through thick and thin?

Or maybe he's just having more fun with his other massive, over-budget, behind schedule project. I'm actually hoping he won't give up on DNA... It could be very cool, but it doesn't have the structural resilience of an open source project, where others can take over if the leader loses the faith.

Q

Sadly, that nightclub ended up going with an NT-based solution becaus the Linux POS market was so barren.

Hell no: the DNA Lounge is a No Microsoft Zone, and will stay that way. Because the Linux POS market is so barren, we ended up going with plain-old cash registers, no network, no OS to speak of: just buttons and LEDs. Perhaps we'll upgrade someday when something better comes along that isn't prohibitively expensive.

"Beware by whom you are called sane."

"Beware by whom you are called sane."

After looking through more of the photos all I can say is those things'd better be heated!

-- fencepost

The ironic shot of the guy about to steal the webcam out of jwz's club.

For such 'incidental' copies, the RIAA is asking the US Copyright Office to issue a ruling to either develop a new area for copyright, or determine under what area that digital broadcasts and DLs fall. It is the current legal grey area WRT to royalties that is holding up music delivery by the industry. Lord knows, if you assume one thing, and then it's later ruled to be different, you face lawsuits. So the RIAA is not moving forward with digital broadcast plans over the internet till the USPTO rules. Geez, READ people. This is not exactly a close reading, either. My understanding from reading the petition is that they'd like on-demand streams covered under existing broadcast royalty structure. Furthermore, they'd like (limited) downloads to be covered under their existing mechanical royalty structure. For those who might not know, "mechanical royalties" are those royalties paid in exchange for the right to turn a recording into a tangible object like a CD or 8-track tape. Broadcast royalties are your typical ASCAP/BMI dollars toward which radio stations and (radio-model) webcasters are paying flat yearly fees. See jwz's write up at http://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/webcasting.html for some detail. The RIAAs fights against mp3.com/Napster/et al. have always been about the control of the distribution channels. This is an extension of the classic political tactic summarized by "they who control the water supply controls the people". The issue of whether non-RIAA mechanisms are "right" or "wrong" is beside the point of the conflict, as many people have speculated that the RIAA just plain has a problem with alternative distribution systems. This "problem" is that their revenue stream is dependent on maintaining a consistent channel of commerce in which to place the works of the artists under their contracts, intercepting the money that is spent on recorded works. This, rather than the wellbeing of artists, is what the embattled online services threaten. So it comes as no surprise that they want to duplicate the function of these services, and those who determine the interpretation of copyright are not only aware of this dynamic, but are fully supportive of their desire to be the only legal gateway for this form of distribution. Increasingly, it seems the only way around them is to start over with a new distribution model that doesn't include them or any of their labels and consequently, artists.

I wouldn't really want to go to one.

But I think jwz has the right idea with his new project; it looks like it will be extremely cool, and there's some 'geek' element to it by the inclusion of a pack of Linux terminals.

Well, first, you should probably check out DNA Lounge. jwz (of Mozilla fame) is working on it, and he has some interesting notions.

I think that one of the important features is that it's somewhere where geeks can socialize offline. I've been to cyber-cafes and they are pretty lame. I think that jwz had it right when he decided to not be a cyber-cafe, while still retaining the geekish computer-centric attitude.

I think that you are on the right track with the video games. That appeals to the population you want and enables you to have more than just a terminal room.

I would say that you should have music at your club, since most geeks that I know will really appreciate it. See about getting live bands and DJs. But, based on my geek-centric concert activities, you want to turn the volume down below the earsplitting level, especially off of the dance floor. Most of my geek friends seem to dislike places where they can't hold a conversation. But you might as well invest in excess capacity so that you have the potential to crank up if I'm making a generilization that doesn't hold.

You didn't mention where you were located. Location is very important, because you need to be in a place where there are a good number of geeks. Bay Area good, Podunk Illinois bad.

Make it no smoking and have a wide assortment of drinks -- both alchaholic and non. Most geeks tend to have more diverse tastes in both categories, plus a lot of geeks don't smoke. You can always tweak both depending on demand.

And finally, make it look geek. Not cheezy-geek, but geek-chic. Comfortable, yet futuristic. You get the idea.

Alcohol behind lockable cabinets or a separate closable bar so that you can serve coffee and websites after the bar closing time and be open all night.

Dont forget a free email account with your first pitcher.

And no pisswatery beer.

I also recommend tabletop / board games. You could even have tournaments. Beats frickin' karaoke. Hell, at a place like that I could have some interesting MTG games.

I had the same idea about a year ago, but personally I dont have the funds nor associates who think its a good idea, nor do I relish the idea of having to fight Boston's repressive tendencies. I'd open it in a tight place like Flann's, call it something corny like "The Root Sheller," and wait for Cambridgiophiles to deign to visit it. (Maybe it's not such a great idea.)

BTW, have you seen jwz's notes on the DNA Lounge that he is building in SF? Dunno if he has 'geek bar' in mind, but his experience is still helpful:
http://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/log/latest.html

Kdt

Not something straight forward and stand alone, his solution covers everything from determining whether or not the phone will ring to pulling up information on the caller -- similar to what William Calvin describes.

• It listens to the com port of a standard voice modem for Caller-ID info
• Based on the Caller-ID (and its' entry in the database) it determines what action to take
• Time-of-day and screensaver aware -- if you're asleep (and your computer is too), the phone doesn't ring.

The code for all this is available, perhaps it will help push things in the right direction.

• Program Description: Caller ID Hack (Overview)
• Database Program: The Insidious Big Brother Database
• CODE: Modem control & database interface
• CODE: Phone-ring-sound script (Parts are specific to SGI)
• CODE: Laptop-Home call notification

There is no reason to use proprietary software to send out an audio-only stream. Icecast is all you need.

Video is a different matter: for Video, you get to choose between: RealVideo (cross-platform, but very, very expensive); Microsoft (Windows-only, but "free"); and QuickTime (Windows and Mac only, but "free".)

• My audio streams and how I do them ;
• My video stream and how I do it .

There is no reason to use proprietary software to send out an audio-only stream. Icecast is all you need.

Video is a different matter: for Video, you get to choose between: RealVideo (cross-platform, but very, very expensive); Microsoft (Windows-only, but "free"); and QuickTime (Windows and Mac only, but "free".)

• My audio streams and how I do them ;
• My video stream and how I do it .

There is no reason to use proprietary software to send out an audio-only stream. Icecast is all you need.

Video is a different matter: for Video, you get to choose between: RealVideo (cross-platform, but very, very expensive); Microsoft (Windows-only, but "free"); and QuickTime (Windows and Mac only, but "free".)

• My audio streams and how I do them ;
• My video stream and how I do it .

There is no reason to use proprietary software to send out an audio-only stream. Icecast is all you need.

Video is a different matter: for Video, you get to choose between: RealVideo (cross-platform, but very, very expensive); Microsoft (Windows-only, but "free"); and QuickTime (Windows and Mac only, but "free".)

• My audio streams and how I do them ;
• My video stream and how I do it .

Check out JWZ's explanation of all this (which was linked to from Slashdot awhile ago):

When reading about this stuff, you'll come across two terms, ``compulsory license'' (also known as a ``statutory license'') and ``voluntary license'' (also known as a ``negotiated license''.) A compulsory license is one where the license fee is fixed: you pay the fee, you get the license, no muss, no fuss. The reason it's called ``compulsory'' is that the licensor has no choice but to grant you the license if you pay the fee. A voluntary license is one where you negotiate the terms of the license on a case by case basis, and they don't have to grant you the license at all if they don't feel like it. So generally, ``compulsory licenses'' are much easier to deal with.

A "compulsory" license would simply remove the record labels' ability to use their copyright power to control distribution (by not licensing to companies with alternative distribution methods). This is their big fear, since their monopoly on distribution ensures them obscene profits.

-Dan

Jamie Zawinski looked at three options for his webcam page (Real, Windows Media, Quicktime). He ended up choosing Real because it was the only player with broad platform support.

It really depends on who your audience is. If you can't afford Real and you're aiming for a Joe Sixpack crowd, forget Linux users and use Quicktime or WIndows Media. That sounds like flamebait, but if you're opposed to Windows because Microsoft is "icky" or because you'd rather spend X thousand dollars to support 5% of your audience, you're a bad businessman.

The planned end result is pretty standard. Band, bar, dance floor, DJ booth, webcams, Internet kiosks, all of which have been seen in SF nightclubs before. No hydraulics, robots, or Vegas-style effects. I'd expected something more exciting, or at least more innovative.

In San Francisco, there's also the "BGP Problem". For over two decades, Bill Graham Presents had a lock on the better bands and venues. Nightclubs not under BGP control were stuck with inferior bands. Only 1015 Folsom and the Maritime Hall, both big venues, successfully booked major acts without BGP cooperation. Since Bill Graham died and BGP was acquired by The Contemporary Group, the local industry has changed somewhat, but it's still rather centralized.

Oh well.