Slashdot Mirror

Maybe its because software copyrights are all wrong? Copyrights seems to work much better in the music industry (overzealous RIAA tactics aside :P). They (in practice) protect the OUTPUT, that is, how the music sounds - not what instrument you used or how you played it. I think the obvious, but perhaps incorrect, extension to the software world was to copyright the CODE - just as you do the "music" (notes and arrangement), not the product (UI, algorithms, workflows, etc.). But perhaps that was a BIG mistake... there isn't the same monotone relationship (no pun intended) between code and product as there is between notes and songs. And yes, the damages seem way out of control.

me http://sree.kotay.com/

Hmm - we do something similar at AOL in terms of the poem (yes, I know - you're SHOCKED that big companies do similar misguided goofy things :P). I had just written about it on my blog given all the Apple press swirl about this.

But we (AOL) are not really trying to prevent the random developer or user from doing anything - obviously this isn't about being secure TECHNICALLY. We just wanted to prevent giant business partners and competitors and the like profiting from doing things with our software and users we didn't authorize.

I'd imagine Apple's reasons are similar, though that doesn't really line up with this shutdown order. As I don't think anything like this has gone to court yet, it sounds like either they need to enforce their rights everywhere to keep them, or they're trying to force the precedent, or they've got some zealous/quasi-religious entitlement thing going, between their iPod protectionism, shutting down rumour sites, and now this... Ah, its ok, they're Apple - EVERYBODY loves Apple :)

Hmm - we do something similar at AOL in terms of the poem (yes, I know - you're SHOCKED that big companies do similar misguided goofy things :P). I had just written about it on my blog given all the Apple press swirl about this.

But we (AOL) are not really trying to prevent the random developer or user from doing anything - obviously this isn't about being secure TECHNICALLY. We just wanted to prevent giant business partners and competitors and the like profiting from doing things with our software and users we didn't authorize.

I'd imagine Apple's reasons are similar, though that doesn't really line up with this shutdown order. As I don't think anything like this has gone to court yet, it sounds like either they need to enforce their rights everywhere to keep them, or they're trying to force the precedent, or they've got some zealous/quasi-religious entitlement thing going, between their iPod protectionism, shutting down rumour sites, and now this... Ah, its ok, they're Apple - EVERYBODY loves Apple :)

This isn't really an "ah-hah! gotcha!" kind of thing, or an attempt at humour (though it is a little funny). Its about LEGAL protections - copyright, DMCA, etc. We did something similar at AOL - I had just posted about this at my blog.

This isn't really an "ah-hah! gotcha!" kind of thing, or an attempt at humour (though it is a little funny). Its about LEGAL protections - copyright, DMCA, etc. We did something similar at AOL - I had just posted about this at my blog.