Slashdot Mirror

I came to a MSNBC story about Harry Potter pr0n some days ago. You can read it at: http://www.msnbc.com/news/621503.asp

Just last month, Microsoft changed the service agreement for their passport system to require only an email address and password to sign up. Did Microsoft do this without any armtwisting? No. Did they do it, though? Yes.

Just keep the pressure on them up. They're going to go ahead with some sort of service no matter what, but the amount of opposition they face now will determine how many of these concessions will be made "voluntarily". That way, even if the FTC doesn't come down with a favorable ruling, we won't be completely left out in the cold.

Incidentally, msnbc also has some coverage. A disinterested and impartial news source if there ever were one... or not, as it were.

Time Magazine
Newsweek

W

I'm posting this, because I know Slashdot will sit on this until after 8PM when no one will read it.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/621827.asp

Aug. 30 -- It's easy to load a small library of electronic books into your laptop or handheld organizer and carry it with you on the bus or to the beach. But try to make backup copies of those same e-books or loan one to a friend, and you'll run smack into the digital equivalent of an electrified fence. The problem is that once a literary work has been liberated from the printed page, it's potentially vulnerable to unlimited digital piracy--a danger that makes most e-book publishers insist on strict software controls to prevent anyone but the purchaser from opening an e-book file.

COMPETING "digital rights management" systems offered by companies such as Adobe Systems, Microsoft, Reciprocal and ContentGuard allow publishers to outfit e-books and other forms of electronic content with customized usage rules. The companies naturally strive to make these systems as hacker-proof as possible. But Technology Review recently learned of a home-brewed decryption program that defeats the most advanced antipiracy features built into Microsoft Reader, a leading e-book program downloaded by over a million people since its debut in August 2000.
(MSNBC is a Microsoft-NBC joint venture.)

CODE BREAKING
The decryption program enables purchasers of "owner-exclusive" Microsoft Reader titles--Microsoft's most highly protected form of e-book--to convert these titles to unencrypted files viewable on any Web browser. The program's creator, a U.S. cryptography expert who asked not to be identified, says he wanted to circumvent the "two-persona" limit, a rule built into Microsoft Reader at the behest of publishers that allows purchasers to read the same e-book on up to two devices, but no more.

Though the decryption program works on any Windows PC, the programmer hasn't released it, saying he developed it for his personal use. But the program's existence, together with decryption efforts directed against e-book formats from other companies, such as Adobe, illustrates the vulnerabilities in digital rights management schemes. It also promises to fuel the ongoing debate over the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, under which it is legal in certain circumstances to use--but, paradoxically, not to make or distribute--software that circumvents technological copyright protections.
Microsoft controls access to copyright-protected e-books through Microsoft Reader, the software used to display e-book files. Reader is a free program that can be installed on any Windows laptop or desktop. When you purchase a Reader e-book from a retailer such as Amazon.com, special server software equips your title with one of three levels of copy protection, as specified by the publisher.

E-books with owner-exclusive protection, the level used for premium titles such as current bestsellers, are encrypted during download using a unique mathematical key contained in your copy of the Reader software. This key is obtained by "activating" your copy of Reader, which requires you to register for a Microsoft Passport account and supply Microsoft with an e-mail address and other identifying information.
Currently, only two copies of Reader can be activated under the same Passport account--the "two-persona" rule--so access to owner-exclusive e-books is limited to the devices on which those two copies of the software are installed.

READERS RESPOND
Such rules irritate many e-book readers, who feel that once they have purchased a book, they should be able to read it wherever they want. "I like to read e-books at my desk, when I'm traveling, lying on the sofa and when I'm eating lunch. I use different computers for these things, so I need more than two activations," says Roger Sperberg, a publishing consultant and a columnist for the industry site eBookWeb.

Some readers also complain that Microsoft's limitation makes it difficult to recover their e-books after a hardware upgrade, which can invalidate the activation key. The anonymous programmer says he wrote his decryption software partly to sidestep such practical problems, and partly so that he could extract the text of his e-books for display on additional devices such as the REB1100, a dedicated reading device manufactured by RCA.
The programmer's software works by recovering a series of well-hidden encryption keys specific to each activated copy of Reader and to each owner-exclusive e-book. It essentially reverses the process that publishers follow when they assemble source files such as text and images into a final e-book. The software dumps unprotected copies of these files into a new folder on the user's computer--as the programmer demonstrated to Technology Review using an actual owner-exclusive e-book purchased from a major online bookstore.
Approached for comment, Jeff Ramos, director of worldwide marketing for Microsoft's "eMerging Technologies" group, said, "We do not comment on alleged security violations of our software. In general, if necessary in response to such incidents, we take appropriate measures."

DIGITAL-RIGHTS DEBATE
So far, programmers intent on exposing e-book security weaknesses haven't been deterred, even by the possibility of legal action. Indeed, the publicity surrounding the prosecution of Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian cryptographer who wrote similar software that strips copy protection from Adobe e-book files, has only added to widespread criticism of digital rights management technologies and the laws designed to bolster them.
FBI agents arrested Sklyarov at a July hacker convention in Las Vegas after a tip-off from Adobe that Sklyarov's employer, ElcomSoft, had been selling the protection-removing software from its Web site. The arrest--the first criminal case brought under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act--spurred a boycott against Adobe products and protests against the company in more than 20 cities around the world. (Adobe quickly withdrew its support for the prosecution, and Sklyarov was released from custody in August. The U.S. Department of Justice continues to pursue the case.)

One issue in the Adobe debate is a conflict in the copyright act. An exemption to the legislation makes it legal to circumvent technological protections when an e-book is malfunctioning, damaged or obsolete. Civil-liberties groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation say such exemptions are necessary to protect traditional rights of "fair use" of copyrighted materials. But the act outlaws the manufacture, distribution or sale of software or devices that would allow consumers to exploit the exemption--a provision supported by publishers.
"There is no device that can currently distinguish between a fair use and an illegal use of a copyrighted work," explains Allan Adler, vice president for legal and government affairs at the Association of American Publishers.

But unless publishers give readers the leeway to use e-books the same way they use print books, say many critics, few consumers will ultimately buy into the technology. To eBookWeb's Sperberg, getting rid of the "crazy catch-22" in the copyright law and rules like Microsoft's two-persona limit would be a good start. The fact that Microsoft has now joined Adobe as a victim of e-book decryption efforts, he says, should make it clear that "digital rights management doesn't make things harder for the professional pirate or the black-market publisher; it makes things harder for me, the reader."
Until software makers and publishers can figure out how to protect their e-books without treating all readers like thieves, in other words, the summer of beach-blanket e-books may never materialize.

ascii spork

First, Ximian: The announcement says tose who subscribe will have "5-% faster downloads durring peak hours". This suggests that they will still ovver the service for free, with some diminished capacity, but the announcement doesn't really say.Can anyone confirm or clarify this?

Regarding Lessig's comments oc Copyright: I'd like to point out that James Madison was on Lessig's side regarding Copyright.

--CTH

Damn, I just lost $5.58. It must be around here somewhere...

Here's the link for the MSNBC version of this story. Has a pic of the judge, good bio, many links.

Of course, MSNBC is partially owned and operated by Microsoft, so caveat emptor.

And this business is allowed to feed it's brand of journalism to the public, claiming it to be ubiased news. The best part is that nothing will change. Despite showing a clear desire to deceive the American public by blatantly influencing elected officials with fabricated statements, today will be just another day for breaking news about sharks attacking missing interns. No corporate charter will be outright revoked, in the way that, for instance, an attorney would be instantly disbarred for deceiving a judge or simply their own client in the same way. If a local newspaper made up stories, I gaurantee it would take more flak than microsoft will over this, without even having to lie to any attorney generals.

Let's take a look at the big picture; corporations can commit corporate crimes because they have influence over the governing body, and because they control the mediums through which the public will ever hear about it. Choose your news outlet and their respective owner, which would you trust:

-Fox Broadcasting: News Corp - $$$

-ABC: Walt Disney Company - $$$

-CBS: Viacom-Infinity - $$$

-CNN: AOL-Time Warner - $$$ - $$$

-NBC: General Electric - $$$ - $$$

God bless America.

Consider the major television media players:

• CNN - owned by Time Warner
  
• ABC News - owned by Disney
  
• NBC - in a strategic partnership with Microsoft
  
• Fox - owned by a content congomerate of the same name
  
• CBS - owned by Westinghouse, which is
  diversifying into ownership of cable music channels
  

Read the article and give it a "10" at the bottom so that it might show up under the MSNBC Viewer's Top 10 list and people will find out about this.

Newsweek has also has a very anti-DMCA article on their now hosted MSNBC website.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/612847.asp

Read the article and give it a "10" at the bottom so that it might show up under the MSNBC Viewer's Top 10 list and people will find out about this.

Check out this article from Newsweek which is typical of this kind of stuff. My favorite part is the paragraph about "Steve Gibson, a respected info-security guru". Respected? Yeah, right! The rest of the article is good for a laugh, especially when the writer sits down to test BlackIce Defender.

When someone can explain why "Rhythms Notifies Customers of Service Termination; Reduces Workforce by 700 Employees" is more important than my rejected article about Code Red III I'll read the fucking article.

What's wrong with you paranoid slashdotters, why can't you see that this article reads the exact same way as THIS ONE? :-)

MSNBC has a longer story.

Fox News has a few words to say.

ABC copied the AP story.

CBS still seems to think the red tide is receeding.

Meanwhile the worm has knocked on my computer's door six times since I started this post. Uh, make that seven.

MSNBC has a longer story.

Fox News has a few words to say.

ABC copied the AP story.

CBS still seems to think the red tide is receeding.

Meanwhile the worm has knocked on my computer's door six times since I started this post. Uh, make that seven.

They are now: http://msnbc.com/news/606910.asp

I can honestly say that people who break copyright laws and abuse their kids are more hurtful than people who use cocaine and abuse their kids, and that copyright infringement cartels that regularly assassinate people are worse than Columbian drug cartels that regularly assassinate people.

That's absolutely ludicrous. Please give an example of a single copyright infringement cartel that has ever assasinated a person. I can pull several news stories on drug cartel killings. Also, the instance of child abuse and neglect among drug users is far higher than the average population, including copyright infringers. I understand that you're all for drugs, but the act of copyright infringement does not significantly alter your brain chemistry, cause physical addiction, impair your motor reflexes or judgment, or generally lead to increases in armed robberies or prostitution, as drugs do. It's not even in the same league.

...a cocaine manufacturer may or may not be guilty of using cocaine.

A cocaine manufacturer, however, is directly responsible for manufacturing an illegal product with known serious health effects and which has a negative impact not only on the user but on those around him. A book, whether electronic or not, does not have such effects. In fact, the effects of books foster increased literacy, learning, and exchange of ideas. That's why city governments fund libraries (which loan out copyrighted books every day to the general public) and vice squads (which arrest drug dealers).

The drug manufacturer is likewise guilty of manufacturing a useful consumer tool.

Once again, moving a book that I purchased from one of my computers to another one of my computers does not even come close to comparing to manufacturing an illegal and harmful substance that leads to increases in crime and child abuse.

Further, the primary purpose of his product is for a judge and a jury to decide.

Unfortunately, it seems that you are correct in that this will surely happen.

Just because it can also be used for mass redistribution doesn't make it illegal.

I'm sure that mass redistribution of copyrighted material is illegal under the DMCA and other existing copyright laws. That's not the issue here. Frankly, I think that mass redistribution *should* be illegal. The point is, however, that they've not only outlawed mass redistribution, but are now making claims against fair use rights which have been in place since the founding of copyright law in this country in 1791, such as limited copying for education or research, and "first sale" rights which allow for the purchaser of a copyrighted work to do anything he wishes with said work save redistribute unauthorized copies for a profit. Sklyarov's tool is necessary for the exercise of these rights in the e-book's current form. The DMCA is attempting to outlaw this and other tools, thus effectively eliminating fair use rights altogether. A good link for more information is this story from MSNBC

The difference is that the primary purpose of this tool is to circumvent copyright protection.

Wait a minute, you said above that the primary purpose was for a judge and a jury to decide. Did you suddenly change your mind? I believe that the evidence will show that the primary purpose of this tool is to take back fair use rights which were unfairly removed from the product. As you said, however, the judge and jury will be deciding that.

(http://www.msnbc.com/news/608839.asp?0nm=N12O)

"Last June, Dell announced it was expanding efforts with software maker Red Hat Inc. to market Linux, an alternative operating system to Microsoft's Windows that can be downloaded for free over the Internet.

Linux users must memorize and type commands and forgo compatible software applications."

---------

Uhhh...I think they are confusing it with DOS!

Even tastier, though, how many PCs in university labs are wasting cycles (or using them on SETI@home or dnet)? Wonder how likely it would be to get a client on those and use it like another big computer?

msnbc has a story on it here

There was an article on msnbc.com recently that discussed the history of copyright, from the 1500s to the present. There is particularly nteresting information about Jefferson and Maddison.

Historical view of Copyright

--CTH

Run code on certain number that has already been discovered. Compare with said number. Lather, rinse, repeat. 100% accuracy over several million numbers is in mathematical terms enough to safely say that it will be the same over the next several million numbers. And after that, they can always draw some really big circles :)

Microshaft still OWNZ JOO!

But Slashdot is mainstream media ... oh, sorry ... you must have meant MSNBC.

Boston Globe:
Adobe shifts, urges hacker's release

CBS News:
Hacker Held Under New Law

ABC News:
Russian programmer arrested at hacker convention for alleged violation of copyright law

MSNBC:
Adobe seeks release of Russian programmer arrested at Def Con

New York Times:
U.S. Arrests Russian Cryptographer as Copyright Violator
Arrest Raises Stakes in Battle Over Copyright
Protesters Target FBI Nominee Over Russian Arrest
Adobe Opposes Prosecution in Hacking Case

Those all seem pretty mainstream to me.
--

check it out here. Keep rating it 7 to keep it at the top!

The linked story above, From MSNBC is one of the better pieces I've seen. It rips on the DMCA as well as having all the facts together. Please go there and at the bottom is a spot where you can vote for how important this story was so that other people can see it. I think it's pretty important. Here's the info about the author: Siva Vaidhyanathan, a cultural historian and media scholar, is the author of "Copyrights and Copywrongs: The Rise of Intellectual Property and How it Threatens Creativity." He teaches information studies at the University of Wisconsin at Madison.

This article is not yet in their top 10 list - only you can make it so :-)

"Hackers are bad. They are the cause of the high prices on CDs, videos, DVDs, books, tapes, etc. Poor starving artists. Evil hackers."

Adobe's insistance on the arrest has presented the opportunity to push our views of the DMCA into the more general public via the news media. What was an obscure little argument all of a sudden becomes cause celebre that needs to be exploited.

The MSNBC article makes the wonderful point that it is not the application on the law that is the problem, but the law itself.

America has advanced further into the realm of a corporate state than most people realized. What big business wants, big business gets.

This opportunity shouldn't be wasted with irrational rhetoric and ranting. If the spotlight of the mainstream media continues to shine on this issue, it should be used to show the DMCA for what it is -- a frontal assault by Corporate America on the Constitution and the Freedoms of our Citizens.

--
Charles E. Hill

I'm (perhaps naively) confident that the people over there in the Treasury dept know a little something about managing debt appropriately, even in the face of strong future U.S. economic growth and substantial budget surpluses "as far into the future as the eye can see."

Protests are ineffective, if not counter-productive, in most cases. The thing to do is not shout and wave banners for a one time shot on TV, but to seek out mainstream journalists and get them to relay the Sklyarov story to a larger, more receptive audience. Here's the first mainstream opinion piece that I've seen so far. Get more attention paid to the issue this way and you won't need to dress up like turtles and attack police in riot gear.

Hey! Wanna see some of MSNBC's ASP code? Just overload the site so it produces errors and prints out the .inc filename. :)

http://www.msnbc.com/m/inc/std.inc

----------

The fact that the editors do form an opinion or add humor to a story is why I read slashdot so much. And it's just that -- an opinion. You have the freedom to give your own in the comments as you have already shown above. If you want "just plain news" then go to MSNBC. ;)

Well, actually, the space station has mainly lables in Russian on the Russian made components (and they are always augmented by English lables). Also, the main language for this space station is English, but US astronauts are taught Russian during their training time in Russia.

At a seminar by one of the US astronauts who was my lecturer when I was at uni, which I attended a few months ago, he (Greg Chamitoff) mentioned the interaction between cultures on the ISS. He said that during training, they (American astronauts) spend time in Star City, Russia training with the Russian cosmonauts and equipment, and practicing Russian as well.

The good thing is, the astronauts know it is still a station in development (appropriate name, alpha :-), and they also know that there will be a lot of interaction problems with other nationalities on this, but they see it as a learning exercise, and a challenge not an obstacle.

Who the hell said that?

Slashdot did. Actually they were quoting some guy on MSNBC, I think. That's what I thought they meant when they said, "the estimate made a few months ago."

How could the number of genes in a human have any relation to religion?

You tell me. :)

What "fact" are you talking about?

By "fact" I meant the older, now purportedly inaccurate estimate. The post I was responding to said nothing was firm yet, so we shouldn't necessarily accept either estimate. My thought was, I wonder how many textbooks were printed during the time between the first estimate and the second.

Or are you disputing the whole theory of how genetic makeup relates to biology?

No. I think perhaps I wasn't clear, or you read a little too much into what I was saying, or you didn't quite have all the context available that I had in my mind (thinking of the slashdot story a few months ago).

Notice any pattern? :)

Q

games.swirve.com Talk to the guy who runs the site (Mehul) - maybe he'll be willing to give you some tips (maybe not).

Microshaft still OWNZ JOO!

Now we have the upper-hand through and through. And yes, this is a damned crusade and M$ IS playing unfair and dirty. Check the sig in this comment for proof (up-to-date direct link to the usage policy from THEIR server).

Microshaft still OWNZ JOO!

This is really offtopic, but I'm going to ramble on anyway...

1. Comparing the US's attempts to enforce embargos on communist countries run by dictators to the EU's implied goal of protecting European businesses to the detriment of US business is COMPLETELY INVALID.

2. Take the GE/Honeywell merger for example. Historically, the litmus test for US regulators is whether how a merger/etc will impact consumers. The EU takes a totally different course - looking at how the merger will impact European businesses. See this article for more details. Historically, European companies held down by socialist governments can't compete on a level playing field with US companies. By blocking the GE/Honeywell merger the EU was protecting the largely government-financed Airbus.

3. If the Europeans want to go ahead with Kyoto, why haven't they ratified it?!?! If Kyoto is aimed at protecting the enviroment and not holding back the US economy why are third world countries like china exempt? Not one senator voted for the treaty. And it's good that they didn't - their job is to protect Americans and our interests - and Kyoto isn't in America's best interest.

Interesting that the MSNBC story about /. was in the "Business" section while this MSNBC story about Thomas Jefferson's concerns about monopolies is located in the "Opinions" section.

Just struck me as funny.

Interesting that the MSNBC story about /. was in the "Business" section while this MSNBC story about Thomas Jefferson's concerns about monopolies is located in the "Opinions" section.

Just struck me as funny.

Psst - try http:// next time...

Microshaft still OWNZ JOO!

I don't know about the sterile argument. It makes sense, but many people have insulin pumps that are hooked up to a tube that enters the body.

Newsweek had an interesting article about the replacement heart and the company that makes it in the June 25th issue. Here is a link to the online article.

Why not use a standard LNB module instead of a juice can? Is it not possible to transmit with one of those? How about one from those 2-way dishes (is there even any difference)?

Microshaft still OWNZ JOO!

Microsoft Breakup Decision Overturned by the Court of Appeals

Judge Jackson had compared Microsoft to "drug traffickers".

by Michael Jennings

(Thursday, June 28, 2001) Today the Court of Appeals handling the Microsoft anti-trust case overturned the lower court's decision to split Microsoft into two or more companies. The breakup would have placed the Microsoft Windows operating system in one company and created a second business for everything else.

This decision of the Court of Appeals has been widely recognized as fair because of the behaviour of the judge of the lower court, in which he had not given the required appearance of impartiality. Judge Jackson had, for example, compared Microsoft to "drug traffickers", and Bill Gates to Napoleon. (See page 111 of the Court's decision [PDF format]).

The Court of Appeals found that Judge Jackson's 206-page Findings of Fact, in which Microsoft was found to have engaged in illegal conduct, was entirely acceptable. It was his conduct outside the courtroom that was a violation of the code of conduct for United States judges. (For more about this, see pages 111 to 115 of the decision.)

Earlier, many people had praised Judge Jackson's skill in handling the case inside the courtroom. Technically oriented observers considered the Findings of Fact to be very well informed.

However, the penalty that Judge Jackson recommended for Microsoft was voided because of his public misconduct. The Court of Appeals directed that a new district judge examine the case, using the Findings of Fact as a starting point.

The story is very widely reported. For examples, see: ABC, AP, BBC, Washington Post, Seattle Times, CNet, The Industry Standard, Reuters, Guardian, Motley Fool, and MSNBC. The NY Times article requires that you register. Registration is free.

Silicon Valley.com said "[Microsoft] can continue its brutal practices for a while longer..."

There were two parts to the anti-trust case, 1) the Findings of Fact, in which Microsoft was found to have engaged in illegal activity, and 2) the remedy, which is what would happen as a result of the court finding illegal activity. Judge Jackson had ordered that Microsoft be broken into two companies. It is only this second part, the remedy, that has been voided (vacated) by the Court of Appeals.

The Court of Appeals wrote, "We vacate the judgment on remedies, because the trial judge engaged in impermissible ex parte [outside the court] contacts by holding secret interviews with members of the media and made numerous offensive comments about Microsoft officials in public statements outside of the courtroom, giving rise to an appearance of partiality."

The Court of Appeals added, "Although we find no evidence of actual bias, we hold that the actions of the trial judge seriously tainted the proceedings before the District Court and called into question the integrity of the judicial process."

The ruling of the Court of Appeals was unanimous, by a 7-0 vote.

More links:

Open Secrets.org report on Microsoft soft money donations

Common Cause report on Microsoft political contributions

Antitrust Law and Economics Review

Older Articles:

Microsoft Unfazed by Threat of New Antitrust Suits (Thursday, June 21, 2001)

What, me worry? Microsoft's Ballmer stays cool, confident, composed. (PC World, June 17, 1998)

Michael Jennings
Futurepower®
P.O. Box 14491
Portland, OR 97293-0491
U.S.A.

Tel: (503) 233-7820
Fax: (419) 781-4606
E-Mail: jennings_michael @ hotmail.com (remove spaces)

Futurepower is a registered trademark.
Copyright 2001

The scientists put a firefly in a container and started adding nitric oxide. The Nobel prize for medicine was awarded a few years ago for the demonstration that nitric oxide was helpful in the dilation of blood vessels. What the link between that and shining asses, I don't know, but they used the research to come to the firefly theory.

The key to the lighting is oxygen. When oxygen is flowing to the lantern, the photocytes light up. The nitric oxide suppresses the firefly's mitochondria from energy production (oxygen usage) which in turn leads to an excess of oxygen which then gets funneled into the tail, lighting it up.

I'm sure this was in the article. If not, see the MSNBC one (that I submitted this morning) with video and pics.

Dancin Santa

Anybody got any other game quotes?

Microshaft still OWNZ JOO!

just submitted a link to:
Hackers move too fast for CIA
Wait to see how long until it gets rejected.

---

I find it odd the Gates says this even with the recent news from MSNBC. So even though with GPLed software is it "impossible for a commercial company to use any of that work or build on any of that work", a commercial company (like MS) can still use code from FreeBSD, which is open source.

---