Slashdot Mirror

I wonder if there is a way to trick them into auditing you even if you have never agreed to their license. Then maybe you could charge them with trespass or harassment. If you're in Pennsylvania, you might even be able to hammer them with a third degree felony, like they did to those high school kids.

107 is the four factor test. Again, I'm not a legal genious, so I'll refer generously to Stanford and the EFF for help in this matter.

1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
Personal use is clearly non-commercial.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
In this case, the work is creative which is a point for their side.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
In my case, it's a whole copy of the work, another point for their side, however it's a reduced quality copy which is a point for my side.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
With Blockbuster's particular business model, I've already demonstrated it's actually MORE profitable for them to have me rent a movie rip it in 20 minutes and return it. As for future sales loss, that's not relevant to this argument because of a crucial factor - I delete them after I've watched them. The Supreme Court (Universal City Studios v. Sony Corp., 464 U.S. 417 (1984)) ruled that a time shifted copy does not deprive them of revenue, and that was for a broadcast, not even a paid rental as in my case. I firmly believe that the courts would uphold my arguement that I rented the media that it's on but bought a license to watch the movie. In fact, Blockbuster's terms and conditions does not stipulate how many times you may watch a movie that you've rented, it merely stipulates how long you can keep the media. I've time-shifted the right to watch the movie until after the media is returned, but that doesn't negate my right to watch it, and the Supreme Court upheld my right to time shift it.

Yeah, it's pretty rich for someone using the DMCA to accuse the receipient of such notices of being evil.

Correct me if I'm wrong (I don't play MMOGs), but isn't this a case of somebody going out and buying a game in a box, only to have it break completely a few months later?

This is the thing I don't like about proprietary software and service-oriented gaming. You aren't in control; they can disappear at any time. Proprietary software because they inevitably aren't compatible with whatever system you'll be running in the future, and service-oriented gaming because the servers can go away due to reasons out of your control.

It would be great if somebody made a server that could support these games after the service has been dropped, but the last time somebody did that, Blizzard sued them for violating the DMCA.

It seems to me that a lot of Slashdotters bitch and moan about DRM when it's applied to their music and DVDs, but quite happily lap it up when it comes to them in game form. Where are all the complaints that you don't really own your digital media when the subject of MMOGs comes up?

looks like it allows connections from tor servers. I love routing my IM's over tor to stop prying eyes. ;-)

http://tor.eff.org/

"We know some IP addresses cannot be shared by one person. These are the ones that would require a person to move faster than possible. If we have one IP address in New York, then one in Tokyo 60 minutes later, we know it can't be the same person because you can't get from New York to Tokyo in one hour." - Surely this is flawed if the user is utilizing an Onion router (e.g. http://tor.eff.org/)?

microsoft is incorporating a lot more than HDCP restriction requirements in their winhec standards. They are also building in encrypted "protected media path", allowing revocation of components in vista based PC's and requiring hardware and driver based DRM for "windows logo testing approval"

They are also requiring a new form of device ID which is designed to prevent any emulation without contacting the emulated device's originator

I tried to give slashdot the heads up on this over a month ago and, like a fellow poster, my story was rejected.

There's a reason Vista took so long to develop, and that reason has nothing to do with consumer-centric design

microsoft is incorporating a lot more than HDCP restriction requirements in their winhec standards. They are also building in encrypted "protected media path", allowing revocation of components in vista based PC's and requiring hardware and driver based DRM for "windows logo testing approval"

They are also requiring a new form of device ID which is designed to prevent any emulation without contacting the emulated device's originator

I tried to give slashdot the heads up on this over a month ago and, like a fellow poster, my story was rejected.

There's a reason Vista took so long to develop, and that reason has nothing to do with consumer-centric design

"is better to work on creating something done right, or to object to it on moral grounds?"

Open-source developer support or not, I don't think it matters.

1. Monitoring internet traffic is hard
   • There is quite a lot of it and predicting how much of it will flow where isn`t easy, ask anyone who has been slashdotted
   • There is little correlation between internet routes and NSA targets, there is no centralised UN, shell and bin laden cabeling like there was centralised soviet cables.
   • Fiber optics do not leak their traffic electromagneticly
   • spam
   • If you don`t follow standards on your telex or telephone you dont get connected. If you dont follow an RFC precisly or just use a diffrend (say im) protocol noone cares...except the guy who has to code parsers for al veriations of RFC interpretations of all the application protocols the internet has.
   • There is more languages and dialects on it, translators with cultural knowledge are expsensive (on a per message basis) compared to computers and electronics. The NSA is often said to have the most and most skilled and least leaky translators of the US TLA`s though.
2. The NSA is said to have trouble (hundreds of millions over budget and doing worse on schedules... as far as publicly reported) adapting to "modern communication systems" and there are calls for more "unconventional operations"
3. US intelligence people know full well that going on the net from ip`s that resolve back to nsa.gov isn`t smart... This is why the DoD sponsors/(sponsored?) ToR and why it is possible browse the web from niprnet anonymising proxies that resolve only to osis.gov.

Now don`t get me wrong, the NSA and its world wide little brothers are powerfull and scary but before they invest money into overcoming these problems to read your e-mail you have to be a valuable target...

Then again there used to be only one australian isp with a cable going to the rest of the world (I recall stories of pissed of ausie isp`s becouse the big isp wouldn`t peer with them thus forcing lots of australian traffic through that expensive piece of cable). I dont think its unlikely that US inteligence agencies learned the hard that to stay out of webserver logs. Some other western ones still haven`t learned this.

Indeed. Since you can't trust the authorities, why not take the privacy in your own hands. Use Tor. And start using it now.

The EFF is also asking for help on this one.

*sigh* I can't wait for election day!

It would be Verizon that went to bat with RIAA all the way to Federal Appeals Court. They tried to go all the way, but were denied hearing.

http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/RIAA_v_Verizon/opin ion-20031219.pdf

The EFF is a light in a dark wilderness. How amazing that a group of people so talented, experienced, and dedicated to digital liberty can come together and accomplish so much. Episode #74 of This American Life features EFF co-founder John Perry Barlow's touching account of a romance that blossomed between him and a wonderful woman he met at a convention. (Computer geeks take heed... play this story for a girl you fancy and see if it softens her heart.)

DMCA has a lot more of stuff, your statement that it only applies if you distribute is totally false.

For instance it also says its a federal crime to bypass copy protection or DRM. Which is what you would be doing if you copied a DRMed e-book.

Just look at all the things ppl have sued for under DMCA. Garage door maker sued a company that made replacement garage door openers. Because they copied the encrypted door opener code. Printer company sued a replacement cartridge maker company because they copied the chip that says if its empty or not. Hardware Backup company sued (and WON!!) a 3rd party maintence company for typing in thier maintnece password before doing maintence. The equipment was owned (not leased) by a company that was just trying to save a little money so they hired a 3rd party to maintain it. A company could use this ruling (*cough cisco cough*) to prevent all 3rd party maintence just by putting a password into stuff. Then you'd have to have a service contract with the manufacture in order to do anything. They could have a monopoly and charge anything they want (kinda like some of them already do).

Technically doing a backup of a DVD you own is against the DMCA as well since you bypass DRM. And no, I dont think there's any exceptions in there. You might be able to argue fair use in court, but I wouldn't count on it.

There's more examples if you search. Here's a few places to start:
small list of gadgets and things that are illigal or potentially so under DMCA and other actions. http://www.eff.org/endangered/list.php
Some of the unintended consequences because DMCA is so broadly written, including news links etc. Its even slowed down science in some areas.
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20030102_dmca_unintende d_consequences.html
And here's a more general status/info page on DMCA
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/

If you wish to have more sites that just EFF, google, there's other sites out there. EFF just happens to be a really good source.

DMCA has a lot more of stuff, your statement that it only applies if you distribute is totally false.

For instance it also says its a federal crime to bypass copy protection or DRM. Which is what you would be doing if you copied a DRMed e-book.

Just look at all the things ppl have sued for under DMCA. Garage door maker sued a company that made replacement garage door openers. Because they copied the encrypted door opener code. Printer company sued a replacement cartridge maker company because they copied the chip that says if its empty or not. Hardware Backup company sued (and WON!!) a 3rd party maintence company for typing in thier maintnece password before doing maintence. The equipment was owned (not leased) by a company that was just trying to save a little money so they hired a 3rd party to maintain it. A company could use this ruling (*cough cisco cough*) to prevent all 3rd party maintence just by putting a password into stuff. Then you'd have to have a service contract with the manufacture in order to do anything. They could have a monopoly and charge anything they want (kinda like some of them already do).

Technically doing a backup of a DVD you own is against the DMCA as well since you bypass DRM. And no, I dont think there's any exceptions in there. You might be able to argue fair use in court, but I wouldn't count on it.

There's more examples if you search. Here's a few places to start:
small list of gadgets and things that are illigal or potentially so under DMCA and other actions. http://www.eff.org/endangered/list.php
Some of the unintended consequences because DMCA is so broadly written, including news links etc. Its even slowed down science in some areas.
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20030102_dmca_unintende d_consequences.html
And here's a more general status/info page on DMCA
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/

If you wish to have more sites that just EFF, google, there's other sites out there. EFF just happens to be a really good source.

DMCA has a lot more of stuff, your statement that it only applies if you distribute is totally false.

For instance it also says its a federal crime to bypass copy protection or DRM. Which is what you would be doing if you copied a DRMed e-book.

Just look at all the things ppl have sued for under DMCA. Garage door maker sued a company that made replacement garage door openers. Because they copied the encrypted door opener code. Printer company sued a replacement cartridge maker company because they copied the chip that says if its empty or not. Hardware Backup company sued (and WON!!) a 3rd party maintence company for typing in thier maintnece password before doing maintence. The equipment was owned (not leased) by a company that was just trying to save a little money so they hired a 3rd party to maintain it. A company could use this ruling (*cough cisco cough*) to prevent all 3rd party maintence just by putting a password into stuff. Then you'd have to have a service contract with the manufacture in order to do anything. They could have a monopoly and charge anything they want (kinda like some of them already do).

Technically doing a backup of a DVD you own is against the DMCA as well since you bypass DRM. And no, I dont think there's any exceptions in there. You might be able to argue fair use in court, but I wouldn't count on it.

There's more examples if you search. Here's a few places to start:
small list of gadgets and things that are illigal or potentially so under DMCA and other actions. http://www.eff.org/endangered/list.php
Some of the unintended consequences because DMCA is so broadly written, including news links etc. Its even slowed down science in some areas.
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20030102_dmca_unintende d_consequences.html
And here's a more general status/info page on DMCA
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/

If you wish to have more sites that just EFF, google, there's other sites out there. EFF just happens to be a really good source.

In particular, software-only copyright protection is usually fairly quickly cracked, since it's not hard to put it inside a box and debug it.

MS has solved this problem in Vista: if you have a debugger installed, an HD DVD or Blu-ray software player will refuse to start. It's not foolproof, but it will make DVD Jon's life harder.

Firstly I don't believe there will ever be a requirement to backdoor CPE like Linksys desktop switches, DSL routers etc. LEO taps are usually made at the service provider level. There are protocols and technologies in bog-standard Cisco, Juniper,.. vendor(n) products, in their backbone and border (peering, transit) routers. These tend to be a tad bigger than yuor Linksys and won't fit on your desktop unless you've got a fully loaded 42U rack on it. These beasties come with, eg, dozens of line cards, each with 48 OC3 ports. Google for 'Cisco BFR' for the real high end. Ahhh, packet geek porn ;)

Incidentally I am an EFF member, and they do have good stuff on the supression of free speech, corporate land grabs etc etc not just now but over the past fifteen years. Go read about it.

http://www.eff.org/endangered/

Electronic Frontier Foundation fucktard.

it's electronic freedom foundation

No, it's Electronic Frontier Foundation. http://www.eff.org/

Know your rights.

I run a mom-and-pop ISP with almost 15k users. We get little phone calls and visits from scary men-in-black people all the time. Because we know our rights we tell them to go away and come back with a legal order that requires us to give them what they ask for. They huff and threaten and we smile and close the door. They come back with the legal order, we bring it to our lawyer and often make it go away. Their only advantage is getting people quickly, otherwise digital trails dry up faster than anything.

The EFF has some very useful pages for ISP/OSPs for dealing with this sort of stuff, if you ever are considering an ISP ask them if they are aware of these, and what they do in these situations. http://www.eff.org/osp

See: Commissioner's Subpoena page 27.

-Jeff

However, the unsealed documents reveal that the government never officially demanded the computer servers -- the subpoena to Rackspace only requested server log files. This contradicts previous statements by the web host that it took the servers offline because the government had demanded the hardware. The documents also contradict Rackspace's claim that it had been ordered by the court not to discuss publicly the government's demand. It cannot be determined from the unsealed documents whether or not the government informally pressured Rackspace to turn over the servers. By giving the government more data than it requested, the company not only violated the privacy of Indymedia journalists whose information was housed on the servers, but also undermined the free flow of information by taking Indymedia's websites offline. Moreover, the logs that the government requested didn't exist, so Rackspace should never have given the government anything at all.

Unless you can see the part of the subpoena that they won't let you see, it is best to assume that you have been given no information at all.

From Secret Documents About Indymedia Server Disappearance Unsealed: "It cannot be determined from the unsealed documents whether or not the government informally pressured Rackspace to turn over the servers."

Certainly it seems that is what happened, that there was illegal activity on the part of the government. Otherwise you have to believe something like this:

U.S. government (Calmly): We just need some log files from you.

Rackspace: Oh wow!!! We will damage our reputation by giving you far more than you asked!!! Our customer's trust means nothing to us!

It is a better guess that someone at Rackspace was very, very scared because of being intimidated.

Most people in the U.S. don't want to know how corrupt their government has become. In this thread from yesterday, someone claims "Christianity has matured - it's a peaceful religion" when the U.S. government, a government of a Christian country, has killed more than 3,000,000 people since the end of the Second World War.

[Rackspace] was compelled to produce a copy of the server owned and operated by Rackspace containing the data as outlined above. The compact disc provided herein is the true disc as provided by said entity.

"Produce a copy of the server"? Does that mean the whole system? Rackspace has said they turned over complete hard drives. The data certainly wouldn't have fit all on one CD (we're talking gigs of data on the servers). If the FBI just wanted log files, why did they take complete hard drives (which would have been around 6 drives or so)? The FBI certainly had the opportunity to look at all data on the hard drives. Do you think they did that or restricted themselves to a couple logfile lines? ;)

-Jeff

As the sysadmin of ahimsa (the seized servers), I'm wondering what he's certifying here. Our httpd.confs substituted "noip" for IP addresses in the logfiles. Like this:

LogFormat "noip - - %t \"%r\" %>s %b \"%{Referer}i\" \"%{User-Agent}i\" %T %V" noip
CustomLog /imc/logs/italy-access_log noip

Also, finding the location of the logfiles on the servers would have been as simple as a `locate access_log`...

-Jeff

Talking about dropping the ball: (from the EFF site)

the logs that the government requested didn't exist, so Rackspace should never have given the government anything at all.

Just what is going on here exactly?

-Jeff

-Jeff

The fit hits the shan in less than a year when Microsoft releases their new OS in summer 2006. By then yes, the systems will be coming with the required certificates and it is a DRM system and worse. Apple's new hardware switchover is what, a year after that in 2007? If it too includes a TPM (which appears likely despite the conflicting claims and reports) then the TPM will be a DRM enforcement device there too.

That is completely wrong. Read what Seth Schoen of the EFF wrote two weeks ago about Microsoft's plans for the TPM in Windows Vista. Seth is one of the most knowledgeable Trusted Computing opponents on the net, author of the so-called User Override concept which would eviscerate the most useful features of TC. He wrote:

"The most important message at the 2005 WinHEC about Microsoft's trusted computing effort, now known as Next Generation Secure Computing Base (NGSCB), is that it is late and will not be included in Windows Longhorn.

"In fact, Microsoft is not implementing support in Longhorn for the controversial remote attestation features of trusted computing hardware. That means that publishers and service providers will not have a hardware-based means of forcing people to use particular programs for interoperability, nor of stopping people from reverse engineering or altering software on their own computers."

In short, you are wrong that Vista in 2006 will use TPMs with certs for DRM purposes. This will not happen. There will be no remote attestation, hence no certs, hence no utility of the TPM for DRM, not in that time frame. Maybe never, depending on the politics of the issue.

Normally EFF(http://www.eff.org/) and CDT(http://www.cdt.org/) send out alerts. As close as this legislation was with only a two vote passage in the House, it's a real shame they fell down on the job. I think they would have been able to make a difference on this vote.

Accept email, instant messages, etc via a tor network.

The technology is out there. The founding father of untraceability is David Chaum. There is a tradeoff between untraceability and practicality. Chaum describes perfect untraceability in the Dining Cryptographers paper, but it is impractical and subject to DOS attacks. Chaum's Digital Mixes are a more practical type of system and all of the anonymous remailers are based in this principal. TOR: The Onion Router Project is what you should check out, it is a real time Chaum mix net for TCP connections.

http://tor.eff.org
http://www.i2p.net
Set up a server in tor or i2p, log nothing.

The newspaper and the source could communicate via a blog or wiki hosted on TOR. It would be impossible to find where the actual server was, and if the source never provides his/her name and other information the newspaper could never find it, nor could prosicuters.

The newspaper itself could even host the wiki/blog and provide the public with the Tor Rendevous address. The government could force the paper to open it's page but there would be no logs available and the paper itself would never know who the informant is.

An example would be the Hidden Wiki available only to those using TOR.

i2p would also work, but requires open ports so won't work behind a firewall/NAT without configuration.
--
You could BugMeNot, or you could just click. You decide

Yes but most movies, which is what most people are talking about when they talk about DVDs, are

...illegal to transcode into PSP Memory Stick video format (unless and until the DMCRA gets passed) and unavailable for purchase in UMD Video format.

Best E-voting Bill Reintroduced - Lend Your Support!
Verify the Vote In 2004, thousands of EFF activists helped Rep. Rush Holt's Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act (VCIAA, HB 550) garner immense support before the session ended. The bill contains several critically important election reforms, including the requirement of a paper audit trail for all electronic voting machines, random audits, and public availability of all code used in elections. HB 550 was reintroduced in February, and it currently has over 130 bipartisan cosponsors.

The momentum is on our side, and it's more important than ever to ask your representative to support this bill since many counties across the country are choosing voting equipment now. Tell Congress to stand up for election reform!

The Communications Decency of 1996 act is extremly obvious - it banned a lot of stuff nadwhen it was struck down there was much rejoicing (more info http://www.epic.org/free_speech/CDA/here).

The famous crypto ban, which prohibited the export of strong crypto. Again, code is speech (crypto software is what the Bernstein cort aftually ruled was protected speech. http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Crypto_export/Bernstein _case/.

Thirdly, software patents. Software is code, is instructions, is speech. See the Bernstein courts' ruling if you don't believe me.

Finally, the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) is obscene. It bans some software - which is speech. the case of Dmitry Sklyarov (http://www.freesklyarov.org/ URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Sklyarov> )is an example of this.

The Communications Decency of 1996 act is extremly obvious - it banned a lot of stuff nadwhen it was styruck down there was much rejoicing (more info http://www.epic.org/free_speech/CDA/here).

The famous crypto ban, which prohibited the export of strong crypto. Again, code is speech (crypto software is what the Bernstein cort aftually ruled was protected speech. http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Crypto_export/Bernstein _case/.

Thirdly, software patents. Software is code, is instructions, is speech. See the Bernstein courts' ruling if you don't believe me.

Finally, the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) is obscene. It bans some software - which is speech. the case of Dmitry Sklyarov (http://www.freesklyarov.org/ URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Sklyarov> )is an example of this. CDS DMCA

a fairly good breakdown on it can be found here.

Read this before you donate to the EFF. Some of their policies are good. Others you may disagree with.

The EFF opposes blocking or filtering of any spam sent by any charity, government, political party, political action group or private individual.

http://www.eff.org/Privacy/printers/wp.php

RTFA.

http://www.eff.org/Privacy/printers/wp.php

other lovely "security features" include Protected Media Path, Component Revocation, Windows Driver Lockdown

This machine will be even MORE locked down than what was proposed under Hollings' "fritz chips" bill...

Designed to be "fully compliant" with hollywood's AACS media lockdown technology, It will be useless to anyone wanting to use a PC for more than an overpriced DVD player.

other lovely "security features" include Protected Media Path, Component Revocation, Windows Driver Lockdown

This machine will be even MORE locked down than what was proposed under Hollings' "fritz chips" bill...

Designed to be "fully compliant" with hollywood's AACS media lockdown technology, It will be useless to anyone wanting to use a PC for more than an overpriced DVD player.

Maybe, just maybe, Consumers Union, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, or at least somebody who represents the needs of the user?

These guys are taking blogging way too seriously! These guys definately don't.