Slashdot Mirror

Yes I know it's Internet2 and only links universities, industry and goverment for research purposes but still I'm sure the MPAA got their panties in a bunch over that qoute. Couldn't they use the standard measurement for data transfer speeds like how many times it can transfer the entire Library of Congress in a second?

And closed licenses are better? Yeah, they never start any flamewars...

As a movie employee, I see this myth being held by many, especially young, afraid adolescents; the myth you have to be at least 13 or with an adult to see a PG-13 movie.
The actual guideline (that the MPAA doesn't really like to promote) is that the
PG-13 rating still allows those under 13 to be admitted without a parent or guardian
source: http://www.mpaa.org/movieratings/about/content5.ht m

I'm even though a little surprised that PG-13 allow to get away with the RTFM word [In alien v. predator]; though it was used only briefly.
As for the article, it's accurate. I've seen customers turned off of a movie, who hold that a PG movie is mere anime and for little kiddies. [Napoleon Dynamite is one example]

Summary - Parents find out what your kids are watching; Tweens - don't feel bad sneaking into R-Rated movies. It's fun when me and fellow teenage workers watch your dissapointed & shockedlooks when you get kicked out. ^_^

Get over it.

If you want to rant ("used to being screwed by the _______"), it is best to get your bogeyman right.

It's not the RIAA, it's the MPA or the MPAA that would be involved with DVDs which show moving images, not simply recorded audio.

MPA is the Motion Picture Association. MPAA is the Motion Picture Association of America. See MPA.

RIAA is the Recording Institute (for audio recordings).

Additionnally, the MPAA has published a paper (PDF, 2 pages) titled "Protecting the Movie Magic in the Digital Age" that is basically what they have been up to (or at least parts of it) which you just might want to read. If anyone needs me i'll be watching King Arthur.

--Jack
http://www.mpaa.org/jack/

As for the original, it was not rated by the MPAA.

Seems to me that this goes hand-in-hand with the broadcast flag.

After sleeping on it, I have a few more things:

Thank you, total fringe lunatic who obviously doesn't have children or even really remember what it was like to be a child.

I do babysit.

don't deny kids the chance to be kids

Denying them Disney(tm) products doesn't deny them the chance to be kids. There are lots of family films produced by studios outside of the MAFIAA.

Show me hard evidence that a Disney production-- ... an actual, released to the public (or not) work with the Disney name-- was harmful to the people at large and children in particular

Miramax is a Disney name. Wouldn't one claim that the Kill Bill films are harmful to children should children watch them?

No, this is the new costume

new Darth costume

Do you fear riAA or mpAA in .uk?

The Motion Picture Association is the export arm of the MPAA and defends the government-granted monopolies and other interests of major American movie studios worldwide.

Two things:

1. It should be punctuated properly (Ass. is an abbreviation), so it would appear as:

Motion Picture Ass. Head

Of course, Google ignores punctuation in queries, so this won't affect people's search results.

It should probably point to the page http://www.mpaa.org/about/jack/index.htm instead of the main MPAA page, to give proper respect to the man who's actually the Motion Picture Ass. Head.

Two things:

1. It should be punctuated properly (Ass. is an abbreviation), so it would appear as:

Motion Picture Ass. Head

Of course, Google ignores punctuation in queries, so this won't affect people's search results.

It should probably point to the page http://www.mpaa.org/about/jack/index.htm instead of the main MPAA page, to give proper respect to the man who's actually the Motion Picture Ass. Head.

Grow up, will you? Leave Jack Valenti, Motion Picture Ass Head, alone.

I believe you meant Motion Picture Ass Head. Notice the "/jack/".

Don't you mean to say that the Motion Picture Ass Head is Mr. Jack Valenti?

End grammar cop session...

You really should not write that Jack Valenti is a Motion Picture Ass Head. That is not nice. You don't even know him. How can you say that he is a Motion Picture Ass Head?

You really should not write that Jack Valenti is a Motion Picture Ass Head. That is not nice. You don't even know him. How can you say that he is a Motion Picture Ass Head?

I thought he was trying to create a google bomb. In fact, it's such a good idea, that I think I'll help him. Jack Valenti is a Motion Picture Ass Head.

the internet--once heralded as a revolutionary force in politics--has turned out to be surprisingly nonthreatening to dictators and tyrannies.

I can think of a few dictators and tyrants whose kingdoms are threatened by the power of the internet. The internet is scary to some, exciting to others, because it's people working together.

Everyone's been posting Jim Louderback's premonition of TiVo's death like it's the Gospel, and so I feel compelled to tell you exactly why Jim (a reporter who's been naysaying the TiVo for years) is wrong, and that punchy three-word headlines don't equate to a balanced market analysis.

The simple reason TiVo will live is because TV is intimate. People want ownership of their experience, and they want ownership of the resulting media. This is exactly the opposite of what cable and satellite companies want.

Of course TiVo as a standalone appliance will fade away as Decoder-PVRs become common, but they'll grow into three other markets: The referenced cable/satellite set-top boxes, DVD-R burning hybrids, and as an integrated component of television sets. Two of these hybrids are already on the market (DirecTiVo and two different DVDiVos) and the third, Toshiba and Phillips TVs with integrated free 'tivo lite' will be here by Christmas.

Saying that Cable-PVRs will squash TiVo is like saying that cable squashed the VCR, when in reality it made it much stronger. For all the benefits that a cable PVR has (that it seems cheaper because the cost is built into your monthly charge), there's no content provider in the world who would ship a device that would record to DVD, and no network that would deign to be included in a service that did.

Recording to a DVD isn't as easy as recording to a tape, and this is where an integrated 'export this show to that disc' solution really shines. If you're going to buy a DVD anyhow, the incremental cost of adding PVR functionality is a gimmie. And yes, within the next 4 years it will be an incremental cost.

TiVo is source independent. Cable, satellite, bunny ears or closed-circuit TV, TiVo is your box. As each content provider has their own proprietary system, if you change providers, you have to change systems, a shift as big as switching from Mac to Windows. Oh yeah, and your shows are gone, too. It's content lock-in, and it's one of the big reasons Dish Networks wants you to use their box, so leaving their fold is more painful, even when they suddenly drop CBS, MTV, Comedy Central and Nickelodeon because of a contract dispute.

As long as content providers carry copyrighted material on their networds, they'll be hobbled by the demands of organizations like the MPAA and Viacom who will use all the leverage they have to inhibit the end user's ability to export to any portable digital media. Standalone PVRs and in-TV PVRs are farther outside their control, and as that control is flexed, PVR customers will flock to these options.

TiVo-in-TV, which Sony plans to market later this year, is another gimmie. It will provide a free 3-day window to the future, with an inexpensive up-sell to season pass functionality. The TV-TiVo-DVR box is probably about 24 months away.

Jim's main point is that TiVo will fail because the costs of enteing the market and delivering product are dropping rapidly, but this is likely why they'll succeed. TiVo will never be a Yahoo or other conglomorate, but they will become a platform standard with a steady revenue stream. When prices fall uniformly, users flock to the best solution, not the cheapest. Getting PVRs into peoples hands cheaply, on the backs of other products is exactly why the market will succeed, and when the market succeeds, TiVo will likely be at the top of it, based on product quality.

True, you won't have to buy a $299 box for your parents to bring them the light, but when you see the glow in their eyes, talking about the magic recording TV they bought at Best Buy last month, you can bet it'll have a little guy with two antennae and no arms stickered onto the remote.

Wow, are they high quality bootlegs (hard to tell from the original)? Or are they obvious fakes? Its a tough call, but you might want to inform the MPAA. I know the mpaa is unpopular but this is the kind of activity we DO want them pursuing.

The large businesses/corporations of Japan have considerable influence in their government, moving beyond petty lobbying towards very strong and well-set puppet strings.

Fortunately, American companies don't influence our government.

Oh boy..
BTW, MPAA might know how to manage ripped DVDs :)

http://www.mpaa.org/useconomicreview/2002/02 Economic Review w-cover.htm

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/040126/265198_1.html

Here is the link to /.

That the P, PG, PG-13, R, NC-17 system is not endorsed or enforced by the government. It's a form of self-censorship voluntarily undertaken by movie theaters. Here's a more in depth explanation. The explanation does not note that the ratings system can often arbitrary or illogical.

What's being proposed here is Government legeslation. It's entirely different. The article does say that stores aren't rigorously enforcing these voluntary ratings, but I think that argument's crap. Before I got a job, (age 16), there was no way I could afford a video game, or a video game system. I was completely dependant on my parents. The ratings are there for parents to see. The scenario where a child scraps together enough money for a video game is of an entirely different magnitude from where a child scraps together enough money for a video game.

The Bee article just says it's legaslation pending, but usually anti-video game legaslation has extreme fines in response to any infraction. This isn't the way it should be.

Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.

According the the MPAA not all of the studios mentioned in this article are members (maybe none of them are, I only checked the ones listed in the slashdot blurb).

Yeah, right!!!
Let's see one of us create a huge Matrix spoof moovie starring ourselves and show it at some large gathering or post it on the Internet. Warner Brother's and the MPAA's copyright nazis would be on us like stink on a big hot pile of fresh feces!!!

If you want to get really super pissed:
Read the MPAA's FAQ

A computer that has the DeCSS utility can use it to break the CSS code on DVDs making it possible for motion pictures in DVD format to be decrypted and illegally copied onto a computer's hard-drive for further distribution over the Internet or otherwise, in perfect, digital format. DeCSS is akin to a tool that breaks the lock on your house.

The DMCA does allow reverse engineering. However, the reverse engineering provisions in the DMCA were never intended to enable anyone to circumvent technical protection measures (TPMs) for the purpose of gaining unauthorized access to or making unauthorized copies of copyrighted works.

There are no legal software packages available for decrypting DVDs.

There is no such thing as a perfect encryption system that is immune to hacking. Newer and tougher copy protection systems are in development, but we acknowledge that determined thieves will attempt to bypass these protections as well.

They have some very angering quotes on that page.

at least two of those three exceptions you mentioned, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter and James Bond, were definitively not made by Hollywood

Here on Slashdot, "Hollywood" often refers to the seven major first publishers of motion pictures in the United States. Just because a film is shot on location doesn't make it any less of a movie produced by a Hollywood studio. The film adaptations of Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings and Rowling's Harry Potter are published by Warner Bros. (New Line has been part of Warner Bros. since Warner bought Turner), and the film adaptations of Fleming's James Bond 007 series are published by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. Both Warner and MGM are MPAA members.

I submitted this earlier today, but was rejected. So here's what I had to say. It contains a bit more information.

After the University of Rochester announced last week in its school newspaper that students there would be offered legal music downloads starting the spring semester, Penn State President Graham B. Spanier announced today that his University has signed an agreement with Napster to launch a program in which Penn State will make Napster's Premium Service available at no cost to its students. This comes from the annual EDUCAUSE meeting of thousands of information technology administrators from universities around the country. Most notably are the panelists who are part of a P2P file sharing disscussion. They include, Cary Sherman of the RIAA, Jack Valenti of the MPAA, the Provost of the University of Rochester, and the President of Penn State. Too bad it's Napster and not iTunes.

Probably Jackbeard.

Valenti?

Wrong *AA, I guess.

They should. George Lucas quit the MPAA after they tried to fine him for not putting opening credits in Star Wars. It didn't seem to hurt his career!

This is completely wrong. The MPAA is a collective trade and bargaining group of major studios (read a brief history here. It was originally created to deal with protectionist issues overseas. Now it is the collective "face" of the studios who set standards for everything from how loud a trailer is allowed to be (notice, for example that they don't blow your ears out like they used to) to self-policing through the use of a rating system. It is also a lobbying group, which regularly responds to legislative concerns such as violence in movies and works to get favorable legislation such as the DCMA passed. When the MPAA acts or speaks, it is the collective voice of "the Hollywood studios", the "majors", or "the industry".

The MPAA also acts as a "shield" behind which to hide unpopular actions, just as the recording industry hides behind the RIAA when suing people. If Warner Bros. sued a musician for downloading their music, people would boycott WB. But because it's under the auspices of "RIAA", it deflects attention from the member companies.

From what I've heard, George Lucas quit the DGA (Director's Guild of America) after the credits fiasco in Star Wars. The DGA is a union (umm, I mean a "guild") that represents the interests of directors specifically in negociating with the studios. It has a standard agreement with its signatories (the large studios) that includes stuff like minimum wages, credit determination, etc.

Other film industry unions and guilds include the WGA (writer's guild), IATSE (cartoonists, grips, etc.), SAG (Actors guild), etc. Each of the Unions typically have their own awards ceremony each year with members voting for them. The MPAA sends screeners to these voters because they want to win early awards like the WGA award, which creates buzz for the Oscars.

Finally there is AMPAS, the "Academy" that people are always thanking when they win an Oscar. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is like an honorary organization of filmmakers. They are the ones who put on the Oscars every year.

If those people decided to jump ship and form their own movie collective, they could. Easily. Hell, many of them ALREADY have their own production companies and\or studios. Sure the MPAA technically controls distribution - but do you see any of the huge theatre chains saying 'no' to the latest Redford or Scorsese flick

I think this is a misunderstanding of how movies get made. The production companies that you allude to owned by these directors or actors typically have what's called a "development deal" with the MPAA member companies-- ie, the studios. In the studio system, a production company gets development money, which pays for a production company's offices, development executives, etc. in exchange for a "first look" at any scripts being developed by the production company. In fact, when a script is bought in the first place by the production company, it's typically paid for by the studio. It's rare for a production company to have it's own money. Self-financed production companies are out there, but they're rare. A production company with its own money is called a "buyer" -- they compete with studios to buy scripts...

When a production company that has a deal with the studio finally makes a movie, the films are usually 100% funded by the studio that is going to distribute it.

In short-- it usually works something like this. Bob the Celebrity has a first look deal with a studio. The studio gives Bob money to run his company. Bob meets with writer's agents to solicit "spec" (speculative) scripts. They also develop their own ideas in-house. They might also be looking at comic books or video games or listening to pitch

New Line is distributed by Warner, and Miramax is distributed by Disney. From the quote you gave, it appears all the MPAA distributors except for Paramount have signed onto this.

But where are the independent films? Will studios not affiliated with a Big Seven distributor be able to get movies onto this system?

And how much of a cut will Disney take? I don't want to give any more money to Disney's lobbying department than I absolutely have to, for these reasons.

We'll, if Steven owns ten guns and threaten a government official, that's equivalent to two terrorists (5 guns / threat == 1 terrorist).

Please call the MPAA if you want to learn more about this new branch of mathematics.

60 million PS2 consoles worldwide? That is a lot of $$ for a company which the /. crowd has professed to really hate on many occasions. Even averaging say $200 USD for all those sales is an amazing $12 Billion USD in revenue.

Why enforce video game ratings stronger than movies? Do you really think there is a fine on movie theaters for allowing kids into R rated movies? Even the MPAA admits that the rating system is voluntary. I went to R rated movies when I was 14, thanks to the 'voluntary' rating system. Yes, I'm fine now, thanks.

Jack Valenti is actually the head of the MPAA. They are in charge of suing you when you download movies or distribute open source software to play DVDs.

The RIAA, the subject of this story, is in charge of suing you when you download music or copy CDs. The head of the RIAA is Cary Sherman, after Hillary Rosen retired recently.

Jack Valenti is actually the head of the MPAA. They are in charge of suing you when you download movies or distribute open source software to play DVDs.

The RIAA, the subject of this story, is in charge of suing you when you download music or copy CDs. The head of the RIAA is Cary Sherman, after Hillary Rosen retired recently.

Technology needs to become more universal, but its expense in implementation costs makes that hard to do. If you, in the US, are having problems enough getting hold of this kind of thing, can you imagine how hard it is for someone in, say, Russia, Egypt, or Australia, to gain access? And yet there's no technical reason why they shouldn't, and there are people within those nations who can afford such equipment and see it as worth while. But we limit the marketing of technologies, slavishly obeying arbitrary national borders, because of the difficulties associated with expansion.

Expanding means creating new marketing networks and providing the means of transporting this equipment to other countries. This is expensive, though if done with a shared spirit of cooperation and determination, there's no reason why, say, an open distribution network shared by any number of vendors, might not make such things possible. Such a network is, for all intents and purposes, impossible, because it relies upon there already being a large enough momentum towards unfettered distribution to work.

This quagmire of national boundaries restricting the flow of goods and services will not disappear by itself. Unless people are prepared to actually act, not just talk about it on Slashdot, nothing will ever get done. Apathy is not an option.

You can help by getting off your rear and writing to your congressman or senator. Write also to Jack Valenti, the CEO and chair of the MPAA, whose address and telephone number can be found at the About the MPAA page. Write too to Bill Gates, Chief of Technologies and thus in overall charge of systems like Windows NT, at Microsoft. Tell them that technologies and spreading the good they do to everyone, not just those in the very largest first world countries, is important to you. Tell them that open, standardized, distribution networks would help open up the free export of technologies across the world, bettering mankind. Tell them that you appreciate the work being done by individual manufacturers and individual store chains to try and provide some of this functionality but that if the insistance of exclusivity and the lack of standardization in business practices are not dealt with you will be forced to use less and less secure and intelligently designed alternatives. Let them know that SMP may make or break whether you can efficiently deploy OpenBSD on your workstations and servers. Explain the concerns you have about freedom, openness, and choice, and how a lack of a free and open technology distribution network harms all three. Let your legislators know that this is an issue that effects YOU directly, that YOU vote, and that your vote will be influenced, indeed dependent, on their policies concerning the distribution of technologies to everyone.

You CAN make a difference. Don't treat voting as a right, treat it as a duty. Keep informed, keep your political representatives informed on how you feel. And, most importantly of all, vote.

Technology needs to become more universal, but its expense in implementation costs makes that hard to do. If you, in the US, are having problems enough getting hold of this kind of thing, can you imagine how hard it is for someone in, say, Russia, Egypt, or Australia, to gain access? And yet there's no technical reason why they shouldn't, and there are people within those nations who can afford such equipment and see it as worth while. But we limit the marketing of technologies, slavishly obeying arbitrary national borders, because of the difficulties associated with expansion.

Expanding means creating new marketing networks and providing the means of transporting this equipment to other countries. This is expensive, though if done with a shared spirit of cooperation and determination, there's no reason why, say, an open distribution network shared by any number of vendors, might not make such things possible. Such a network is, for all intents and purposes, impossible, because it relies upon there already being a large enough momentum towards unfettered distribution to work.

This quagmire of national boundaries restricting the flow of goods and services will not disappear by itself. Unless people are prepared to actually act, not just talk about it on Slashdot, nothing will ever get done. Apathy is not an option.

You can help by getting off your rear and writing to your congressman or senator. Write also to Jack Valenti, the CEO and chair of the MPAA, whose address and telephone number can be found at the About the MPAA page. Write too to Bill Gates, Chief of Technologies and thus in overall charge of systems like Windows NT, at Microsoft. Tell them that technologies and spreading the good they do to everyone, not just those in the very largest first world countries, is important to you. Tell them that open, standardized, distribution networks would help open up the free export of technologies across the world, bettering mankind. Tell them that you appreciate the work being done by individual manufacturers and individual store chains to try and provide some of this functionality but that if the insistance of exclusivity and the lack of standardization in business practices are not dealt with you will be forced to use less and less secure and intelligently designed alternatives. Let them know that SMP may make or break whether you can efficiently deploy OpenBSD on your workstations and servers. Explain the concerns you have about freedom, openness, and choice, and how a lack of a free and open technology distribution network harms all three. Let your legislators know that this is an issue that effects YOU directly, that YOU vote, and that your vote will be influenced, indeed dependent, on their policies concerning the distribution of technologies to everyone.

You CAN make a difference. Don't treat voting as a right, treat it as a duty. Keep informed, keep your political representatives informed on how you feel. And, most importantly of all, vote.

And what are they bitching about?

They're megacorporations. They can do whatever the hell they want.

Not that this means I agree with you in your senseless flame of the person who put together this project, but I do have concerns when people do not themselves deal with issues. Creating jobs is creating something worthwhile, and I believe strongly that doing so will improve the situation for everyone.

This quagmire of job creation being undermined by unnecessary flames and those in work seeing the work of those who are not as worthless will not disappear by itself. Unless people are prepared to actually act, not just talk about it on Slashdot, nothing will ever get done. Apathy is not an option.

You can help by getting off your rear and writing to your congressman or senator. Write also to Jack Valenti, the CEO and chair of the MPAA, whose address and telephone number can be found at the About the MPAA page. Write too to Bill Gates, Chief of Technologies and thus in overall charge of systems like Windows NT, at Microsoft. Tell them that unemployment is a critical issue for you. Tell them that the talents of people are being wasted by not providing them with jobs. Tell them that you appreciate the work being done to improve the economy but that if unemployment continues to grow you will be forced to use less and less secure and intelligently designed alternatives. Let them know that SMP may make or break whether you can efficiently deploy OpenBSD on your workstations and servers. Explain the concerns you have about freedom, openness, and choice, and how unemployment harms all three. Let your legislators know that this is an issue that effects YOU directly, that YOU vote, and that your vote will be influenced, indeed dependent, on their policies concerning job creation.

You CAN make a difference. Don't treat voting as a right, treat it as a duty. Keep informed, keep your political representatives informed on how you feel. And, most importantly of all, vote.

Not that this means I agree with you in your senseless flame of the person who put together this project, but I do have concerns when people do not themselves deal with issues. Creating jobs is creating something worthwhile, and I believe strongly that doing so will improve the situation for everyone.

This quagmire of job creation being undermined by unnecessary flames and those in work seeing the work of those who are not as worthless will not disappear by itself. Unless people are prepared to actually act, not just talk about it on Slashdot, nothing will ever get done. Apathy is not an option.

You can help by getting off your rear and writing to your congressman or senator. Write also to Jack Valenti, the CEO and chair of the MPAA, whose address and telephone number can be found at the About the MPAA page. Write too to Bill Gates, Chief of Technologies and thus in overall charge of systems like Windows NT, at Microsoft. Tell them that unemployment is a critical issue for you. Tell them that the talents of people are being wasted by not providing them with jobs. Tell them that you appreciate the work being done to improve the economy but that if unemployment continues to grow you will be forced to use less and less secure and intelligently designed alternatives. Let them know that SMP may make or break whether you can efficiently deploy OpenBSD on your workstations and servers. Explain the concerns you have about freedom, openness, and choice, and how unemployment harms all three. Let your legislators know that this is an issue that effects YOU directly, that YOU vote, and that your vote will be influenced, indeed dependent, on their policies concerning job creation.

You CAN make a difference. Don't treat voting as a right, treat it as a duty. Keep informed, keep your political representatives informed on how you feel. And, most importantly of all, vote.

Exchange is a closed and entirely proprietry system, and with good reason: Microsoft knows that opening up the system entirely would be one area where its desktop monopoly could be threatened. Some proof of this can be seen in that this is the one area on the Mac where Microsoft has let their software lag behind - users of that platform can get an excellent office suite, a good web browser, internet access, all from MS. But users of Exchange are limited to bug ridden clients that have to be run under Classic, and while upgrades to Entourage, MS's Mac mail/group system, are in the works to support some interoperability with Exchange, these upgrades are a long time coming and will only scratch the surface of what's required.

Meanwhile, Internet email standards lag behind and cause interoperating clients and servers to appear crude and unprofessional. As an example, the Internet's "rich text" standard is HTML, which is usually entered using a crude unintuitive user interface, appears completely different on different viewers, and requires embedded objects to be located on a central server pre-arranged ahead of time. Some objects, such as line drawings, have no universally supported internet standard for embedding anyway.

Ironically, the crude and incomplete standards offered for interoperability means that Microsoft can safely support, for example, IMAP and LDAP, knowing full well that it will not produce an environment with full interoperability and that users of these systems will appear less professional to their Microsoft-user co-workers.

With unprofessional and unfinished standards, and with the dominant platform being essentially closed, entry into the groupware area is difficult.

This quagmire of closed standards making professional interoperability unviable, but open standards being to unprofessional and incomplete to support and persuade system administrators to switch to will not disappear by itself. Unless people are prepared to actually act, not just talk about it on Slashdot, nothing will ever get done. Apathy is not an option.

You can help by getting off your rear and writing to your congressman or senator. Write also to Jack Valenti, the CEO and chair of the MPAA, whose address and telephone number can be found at the About the MPAA page. Write too to Bill Gates, Chief of Technologies and thus in overall charge of systems like Exchange, at Microsoft. Tell them that viable, professional, open standards for groupware are important to you. Tell them that the current system must change, and that either Microsoft's excellent standards need to be opened up, or that new open standards need to be put into the public domain, and that Microsoft needs to adopt these standards in order to ensure that groupware really is group ware, not limited to a "group" that finds sharing a single platform viable. Tell them that you appreciate the work being done by the IETF to create open standards but that if these standards remain incomplete you will be forced to use less and less secure and intelligently designed alternatives. Let them know that SMP may make or break whether you can efficiently deploy OpenBSD on your workstations and servers. Explain the concerns you have about freedom, openness, and choice, and how cl

Exchange is a closed and entirely proprietry system, and with good reason: Microsoft knows that opening up the system entirely would be one area where its desktop monopoly could be threatened. Some proof of this can be seen in that this is the one area on the Mac where Microsoft has let their software lag behind - users of that platform can get an excellent office suite, a good web browser, internet access, all from MS. But users of Exchange are limited to bug ridden clients that have to be run under Classic, and while upgrades to Entourage, MS's Mac mail/group system, are in the works to support some interoperability with Exchange, these upgrades are a long time coming and will only scratch the surface of what's required.

Meanwhile, Internet email standards lag behind and cause interoperating clients and servers to appear crude and unprofessional. As an example, the Internet's "rich text" standard is HTML, which is usually entered using a crude unintuitive user interface, appears completely different on different viewers, and requires embedded objects to be located on a central server pre-arranged ahead of time. Some objects, such as line drawings, have no universally supported internet standard for embedding anyway.

Ironically, the crude and incomplete standards offered for interoperability means that Microsoft can safely support, for example, IMAP and LDAP, knowing full well that it will not produce an environment with full interoperability and that users of these systems will appear less professional to their Microsoft-user co-workers.

With unprofessional and unfinished standards, and with the dominant platform being essentially closed, entry into the groupware area is difficult.

This quagmire of closed standards making professional interoperability unviable, but open standards being to unprofessional and incomplete to support and persuade system administrators to switch to will not disappear by itself. Unless people are prepared to actually act, not just talk about it on Slashdot, nothing will ever get done. Apathy is not an option.

You can help by getting off your rear and writing to your congressman or senator. Write also to Jack Valenti, the CEO and chair of the MPAA, whose address and telephone number can be found at the About the MPAA page. Write too to Bill Gates, Chief of Technologies and thus in overall charge of systems like Exchange, at Microsoft. Tell them that viable, professional, open standards for groupware are important to you. Tell them that the current system must change, and that either Microsoft's excellent standards need to be opened up, or that new open standards need to be put into the public domain, and that Microsoft needs to adopt these standards in order to ensure that groupware really is group ware, not limited to a "group" that finds sharing a single platform viable. Tell them that you appreciate the work being done by the IETF to create open standards but that if these standards remain incomplete you will be forced to use less and less secure and intelligently designed alternatives. Let them know that SMP may make or break whether you can efficiently deploy OpenBSD on your workstations and servers. Explain the concerns you have about freedom, openness, and choice, and how cl