Slashdot Mirror

The Uniform Commisioner's page on UCITA is not as informative. The Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility have a page which has not been updated for some time.

Great links!

Great links!

It's about time that source code was given the legal protection of being self-expression - almost everything else creative is given this distinction so this sounds like it will finally give source code the recognition it deserves.

That already happended

for the lazy...

. Bernstein v. United States Department of Justice, released on May 6, 1999, states that software source code is a language worthy of First Amendment protection.

and a second source for effect.
--

I mean, when you allow technology like this, which the public does not understand, to become central to the democratic process, you empower a small technological elite who understands the technology and its limitations.

Not meaning any disrespect (since I amd not referring to the previous author, but our community as a whole) but losing control by not understanding technology is no different than losing controil by not understanding history (i.e. how things really work in the long term), politics (how things really work in the short term) or not understanding, or even bothering to read (*gasp*) THE LAW (how things are *supposed to work - and what we are talking about here)

This bill has been discussed here since it was introduced in May, and the 1999 hearing have been on line much longer. The House passed this law two weeks ago and the final version on the law has been online since June 8.

I urge all slashdotters to read this bill (or at least this summary), so we can discuss this intelligently.

Perhaps more importantly, take a look at this list of other currently and recently pending laws on digital security and e- cyber- computer-whatever before Congress. As the people who understand the technology, we need to play an active role in forming these laws and discussion, which means we need to have a clue about the laws under discussion. (Hint: the subject is *never* ipchains or alernative files systems, etc. Those are just incidentals to the law.)

BTW, when reading the linked laws/discussion, please remember even 'dead' legislation is likely to come back. The current bill was formed from the 1999 'Bliley Bill" (HR 1714), and 1999 Senate 761.

I mean, when you allow technology like this, which the public does not understand, to become central to the democratic process, you empower a small technological elite who understands the technology and its limitations.

Not meaning any disrespect (since I amd not referring to the previous author, but our community as a whole) but losing control by not understanding technology is no different than losing controil by not understanding history (i.e. how things really work in the long term), politics (how things really work in the short term) or not understanding, or even bothering to read (*gasp*) THE LAW (how things are *supposed to work - and what we are talking about here)

This bill has been discussed here since it was introduced in May, and the 1999 hearing have been on line much longer. The House passed this law two weeks ago and the final version on the law has been online since June 8.

I urge all slashdotters to read this bill (or at least this summary), so we can discuss this intelligently.

Perhaps more importantly, take a look at this list of other currently and recently pending laws on digital security and e- cyber- computer-whatever before Congress. As the people who understand the technology, we need to play an active role in forming these laws and discussion, which means we need to have a clue about the laws under discussion. (Hint: the subject is *never* ipchains or alernative files systems, etc. Those are just incidentals to the law.)

BTW, when reading the linked laws/discussion, please remember even 'dead' legislation is likely to come back. The current bill was formed from the 1999 'Bliley Bill" (HR 1714), and 1999 Senate 761.

I mean, when you allow technology like this, which the public does not understand, to become central to the democratic process, you empower a small technological elite who understands the technology and its limitations.

Not meaning any disrespect (since I amd not referring to the previous author, but our community as a whole) but losing control by not understanding technology is no different than losing controil by not understanding history (i.e. how things really work in the long term), politics (how things really work in the short term) or not understanding, or even bothering to read (*gasp*) THE LAW (how things are *supposed to work - and what we are talking about here)

This bill has been discussed here since it was introduced in May, and the 1999 hearing have been on line much longer. The House passed this law two weeks ago and the final version on the law has been online since June 8.

I urge all slashdotters to read this bill (or at least this summary), so we can discuss this intelligently.

Perhaps more importantly, take a look at this list of other currently and recently pending laws on digital security and e- cyber- computer-whatever before Congress. As the people who understand the technology, we need to play an active role in forming these laws and discussion, which means we need to have a clue about the laws under discussion. (Hint: the subject is *never* ipchains or alernative files systems, etc. Those are just incidentals to the law.)

BTW, when reading the linked laws/discussion, please remember even 'dead' legislation is likely to come back. The current bill was formed from the 1999 'Bliley Bill" (HR 1714), and 1999 Senate 761.

Yes, Microsoft has a history of steamrolling IP and trademark owners.

When you have money, you have power, and you are the law. Bow before Mr. Gates and repent.