Slashdot Mirror

http://fallinggrace.com/article.php?story=20040811 015739829

• No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
• 
  and
• No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
• 
  and
• Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), a person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a particular portion of that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and that have not previously been readily available to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the extent any such acts of identification and analysis do not constitute infringement under this title.

The first excerpt says that if there is some "technological measure that effectively controls access to a work", it is now illegal to circumvent that measure. To borrow from the Fair Use example above, if someone purchased a music compact disc that had some technological measure on it that kept them from copying it to their hard drive as mp3s, it would now be illegal for them to circumvent that technological measure.

The second excerpt says that you cannot create or distribute tools or software that allows circumvention of technological anti-copying measures. To continue the Fair Use example, it is illegal for someone else to create a method to turn a protected purchased disc into mp3s, or to give that method to others.

The third excerpt

"Enderle seems to have declared war on Linux"

What ever gave you that impression. He loves Linux. See his keynote speech "Free Software and the Idiots Who Buy It"

http://fallinggrace.com/article.php?story=20040811 015739829

Enderle has (or rather, should have) no credibility whatsoever. About a year ago he gave a keynote at SCO Forum entitled "Free Software and the Idiots Who Buy It."

It took logical and rhetorical fallacies to a whole new level. I picked it apart line-by-line, and for a little while it was on the first page of the Google search for "enderle".

Here it is again, in case anyone needs convincing that this man should not be taken seriously.

- Neil Wehneman

All of my creative writing (such as a novel and a screenplay) is CC, as well as my legal writing. I also have some more blog-type entries on my site, which also happen to be CC.

</on-topic reply and semi-shameless plug>

If you don't want blog entries in your results perhaps you could use "-blog" or similar to try to filter? Alternately, add "short story" or "poem" to try to find the style of content you are looking for.

There is a not insignificant amount of non-blog content out there, and other replies have linked to some directories thereof. You are right in that the overwhelming majority of CC material are blog entries, and finding ways of filtering that out when desired is / would be very useful.

- Neil Wehneman

All of my creative writing (such as a novel and a screenplay) is CC, as well as my legal writing. I also have some more blog-type entries on my site, which also happen to be CC.

</on-topic reply and semi-shameless plug>

If you don't want blog entries in your results perhaps you could use "-blog" or similar to try to filter? Alternately, add "short story" or "poem" to try to find the style of content you are looking for.

There is a not insignificant amount of non-blog content out there, and other replies have linked to some directories thereof. You are right in that the overwhelming majority of CC material are blog entries, and finding ways of filtering that out when desired is / would be very useful.

- Neil Wehneman

All of my creative writing (such as a novel and a screenplay) is CC, as well as my legal writing. I also have some more blog-type entries on my site, which also happen to be CC.

</on-topic reply and semi-shameless plug>

If you don't want blog entries in your results perhaps you could use "-blog" or similar to try to filter? Alternately, add "short story" or "poem" to try to find the style of content you are looking for.

There is a not insignificant amount of non-blog content out there, and other replies have linked to some directories thereof. You are right in that the overwhelming majority of CC material are blog entries, and finding ways of filtering that out when desired is / would be very useful.

- Neil Wehneman

There is a very good, if not essential point in your post somewhere. Too bad it gets entirely snowed under by your repetitive use of the inflammatory and incorrect terms "theft" and "stealing".

At the end of my write-up I end up deciding that the NC-17 would be justified, and since it's the industry voluntarily doing it (and not the government) there isn't really a free speech issue.

There are two points on which my argument turns: first, that "those both under and over 17 are probably used to seeing vaginal sex referenced and occuring in mainstream commercial films, but are not used to seeing oral sex occuring." That fact would trigger "a film that most parents will consider patently too adult for their youngsters under 17."

The second is that self-regulation, under the implicit threat of governmental regulation if self-regulation doesn't occur, is not indirect censorship. And even if it were, it's only partial censorship, as consenting adults still have access to the film.

- Neil Wehneman

This movie almost got an NC-17 for having simulated oral sex between the marionettes.

Feel free to read my thoughts and pseudo-legal analysis on the subject.

I actually ended up endorsing a different position than I expected going in. However, my argument would be different if I viewed "as indirect censorship the government's long standing threat of the forced general labeling of movies absent industry self-regulation" (to quote myself).

- Neil Wehneman

When the original Harmony story broke, I created a write-up explaining what Real had done and how it was legal under the DMCA.

The full write-up is available here.

The executive summary: Real most assuredly circumvented "technological access control measures" in the creation of Harmony. However, under Sec. 1201 (f)(1) of the DMCA this is explictly allowed if the sole purpose is previously unavailable interoperation with an independent software program.

Their circumvention allows the interoperation of the iPod with the Real music store. This interoperation is achieved by creating a copy of FairPlay on mp3s sold by Real. The consumer themself is not circumventing a thing.

Yes, Real sickens me as a company. But this situation should be about the law, not about company reputations.

- Neil Wehneman

Didn't you read? They're planning to raise their prices.

Anyhow, I submitted something just like this, only with about a dozen links to more information (sadly, I don't have all of them here now), so perhaps I can explain more --

This motion follows IBM's motion to strike Sontag's declaration as incompetant (he doesn't know jack about IBM's internal source controls, but he made a number of wild guesses and swore to them under oath), as well as IBM's movement for a declaration of non-infringement concerning their Linux activities. It is ironic on the last part that SCO doesn't want to let them have one, and it says at the same time that they're not arguing that IBM has infringed on their copyrights now.

I'd link those motions, but I don't have time. They can all be found on Groklaw's legal documents page. Just be sure you're looking at the SCO vs. IBM part, and that you start at the bottom & scroll up--both SCO's complaint & IBM's counter-claims have changed over time, and you want the most recent version.

If they were to grant all of IBM's motions, they would be enough to rend pretty much all Linux-related issues from this case, and would leave SCO with almost nothing that could stand on its own and SCO would still face the counter-claims.

Of course, the judge has to be really strict on granting summary judgements. There have to be no material (relevant) issues of fact to decide--the evidence has to be so one-sided that no rational trier of fact could possibly decide for SCO on any of the issues the judge decides. This is important because the judge rules on the law, while the jury rules on the facts in any jury trial. If you can't guess from that, a summary judgement is where the judge gets to decide an issue early because there are no material issues of fact for a jury to decide.

In other words, though IBM's motions are well-argued, they face a *very* high standard of law here. Please note that while Enderle has said that he would decide for SCO, that's irrelevant because the trier of fact would have to be rational, and logic is not Enderle's strong suit.

shall we deflect discussion *away* from OSRM and Pamela? There's an idea

It just makes you a villain in your own life story.

Villain is a loaded word.

I think his keynote address at the SCO forum is his best piece of shi, I mean work...
http://www.sco.com/2004forum/agenda/Enderle_keynot e_SCO-Forum2004.html
not complete without a logical analysis done of it...
http://fallinggrace.com/article.php?story=20040811 015739829

And I think Bruce at Technocrat said it best http://technocrat.net/article.pl?sid=04/08/10/1742 206&mode=thread

This is slightly OT, but it's in regards to SCO.

A week ago at SCO Forum, Rob Enderle gave a keynote speech entitled "Free Software and the Idiots Who Buy It." Mr. Enderle employed repeated logical errors, accusations without evidence, and ad hominem attacks. He materially confused the meaning of Free Software, as well as assigning physical threats to the Groklaw / Free Software community without proof.

I have written a paragraph by paragraph critique of his keynote, and it is available at my site (Part One and Part Two)

I welcome and appreciate feedback and comments on it. I jokingly refer to the paper as "Logical Fallacies and the Idiots Who Use Them," but did my best to keep the text proper professional.

- Neil Wehneman

This is slightly OT, but it's in regards to SCO.

A week ago at SCO Forum, Rob Enderle gave a keynote speech entitled "Free Software and the Idiots Who Buy It." Mr. Enderle employed repeated logical errors, accusations without evidence, and ad hominem attacks. He materially confused the meaning of Free Software, as well as assigning physical threats to the Groklaw / Free Software community without proof.

I have written a paragraph by paragraph critique of his keynote, and it is available at my site (Part One and Part Two)

I welcome and appreciate feedback and comments on it. I jokingly refer to the paper as "Logical Fallacies and the Idiots Who Use Them," but did my best to keep the text proper professional.

- Neil Wehneman

I am in the process of writing a full critique of Enderle's keynote. Specifically, he employs numerous logical fallacies.

Read what I have written so far.

- Neil Wehneman

Well, as a guy, I automated part of the process of being rejected by women.

- Neil Wehneman

Is anyone aware of CMS's designed specifically for writers (or adaptable to them)? Or perhaps what I envision a Content Management System doing is different from what others are doing.

Specifically what I am in the process of coding (poorly) is a system that will allow me to manage and elegantly present information about the various writing I've done. This information would be metadata such as Date Written, Themes, Similar Pieces, Inspiration, etc...

What I have now on my personal site is pretty rudimentary. (example)

I just have the texts themselves as individual HTML files in a separate directory, while the metadata is in a MySQL database that is queried through PHP.

Thoughts, links, direction, or experiences to share?

- Neil Wehneman