Slashdot Mirror

Here's why...

In this USA Today article, Microsoft's Jim Cullinan says, ''[...] Once a trade secret is in the public domain, you can't put it back in the bottle.''

So, here's a nutshell summary of why this IS censorship.

1) Microsoft packaged the specification in a freely downloadable, self-extracting EXE file. (no condition for downloading this file)

2) As most everyone and their dogs who've ever used WinZIP knows: self-extracting EXE files can be easily opened with an extraction program for many reasons -- including but not limited to: extracting only a single file from the package (self-extracting EXE files are not a security measure -- it's like selling a few paragraphs on single page document in a transparent, cellophane wrapper: Why purchase it when you can stand there at the counter and read it while you're waiting for the guy in front of you to pay for his gas, nachos, soda, and cigarrettes?).

3) In the quote above, MS acknowledges that once a "trade secret" is released to the public domain (free distribution in the form of a self-extracting EXE file qualifies as such), you can't "retract" that.

4) Thus, MS, having released a spec into the public domain, is now trying to squelch any reproduction of it.

In the true form of all that is MS, they're attempting to BLAME SOMEONE ELSE for their own incompetence.

Signed: somebody else who's lazy to login

• UniSci
  
• Space Telescope Science Institute
  
• MSNBC
  
• BBC
  
• CNN (buggy--text at bottom)
  
• Spaceflight Now
  
• Space.com
  
• USA Today (under weather... Bah!)
  
• Fox News
  
• Science Daily
  

Personally, I've always prefered the New York Times over other national newspapers (read McNews), now I have more reason to love the paper. This is the type of Journalism we need to see more of, unbiased, fair coverage of both sides of the story. It sure beats my local paper's "MP3: Local Students Stealing Music Online".

My Prediction: The NYTimes is fond of freedom of the press. Their defiance of the MPAA will lend legitamacy to the OpenDVD cause.

Mirror DeCSS on on a T-Shirt.

Not to mention: monitoring such a remedy would be more expensive for taxpayers.

This was my thinking early-on - when the trial first started. While I have waffled on breakup-vs-other-remedies from time-to-time, I keep coming back to breakup as the most viable solution. Along with time-limited prohibitions against special cooperation between the resulting "Baby Bills." (As I note in a followup elsewhere.) This solution is the cleanest and the most easily administered, IMO. Plus it leaves the resulting companies free to innovate without constant oversight and intervention.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washd c/ncssun12.htm

• USA Today coverage
• Washington Post coverage

OK, so there's a demand for this type of program. Where is the demand coming from?
--

Think about what you know for a minute: how long ago did you become acquainted with the place name "Kosovo"? and who where and how did "Kosovo" come to your attention? and what "facts" do you know - the more accurate word is believe about the last three years's events in Kosovo?

I have clipping I found funny on this. It was on the front page of USAToday a while back. Right after the "war in Kosovo" was "over".

Here it is

--

As has been documented elsewhere, such profiling is dubious at best and harmful at worst. Further, the dubious usefulness of anonymous tips have even been questioned by our current schizophrenic Supreme Court. Anonymous tipping in the hands of angry and powerless high-school students is simply ripe with abusive potential. No program of this kind will be able to successfully prevent school shootings, no matter how good it might make us feel to know it is in place.

- Rev.

Poll: MS case a waste of money

"The poll, conducted by Zogby America for Americans for Technology Leadership, found that 67% of those interviewed said the government's decision to pursue court action against the world's largest software company was a poor use of public funds."

...and...

"Only 16% said they believe consumers have been harmed by Microsoft's business practices, which the government called monopolistic. Another 55% said the company has helped consumers."

And for the sake of it, another poll shows that 68% of the people polled have a favorable opinion of Bill Gates. Additionally, 58% oppose any breakup.

Food for thought.

Poll: MS case a waste of money

"The poll, conducted by Zogby America for Americans for Technology Leadership, found that 67% of those interviewed said the government's decision to pursue court action against the world's largest software company was a poor use of public funds."

...and...

"Only 16% said they believe consumers have been harmed by Microsoft's business practices, which the government called monopolistic. Another 55% said the company has helped consumers."

And for the sake of it, another poll shows that 68% of the people polled have a favorable opinion of Bill Gates. Additionally, 58% oppose any breakup.

Food for thought.

I just updated my mirror page with a link to this slashdot article. I thought I'd post the others on the list here for everyone's edification (and because the server of my personal web page probably wouldn't take it if you went there for it!)

• Wired: Mattel Stays on the Offensive (27 Mar 2000 2:45PM PT)
  "Upping the stakes in a battle over a utility that reveals Cyberpatrol's list of off-limits websites, Mattel threatened mirror sites with contempt charges during a court hearing Monday afternoon."
• ZDNet: Hackers settle Cyber Patrol suit (27 Mar 2000 2:11PM PT)
  "ACLU attorney 'surprised' as programmers surrender rights to their hack of Cyber Patrol filter and agree to permanent injunction."
• ZDNet: ACLU slams Cyber Patrol tactics (27 Mar 2000 4:03AM PT)
  "The American Civil Liberties Union criticized Internet filtering software maker Microsystems Software Inc. and its parent company Mattel Inc. on Friday, accusing them of attempting to limit free speech on the Internet."
• Wired: Mattel's Filter Fiasco to Court (27 Mar 2000 3:00AM PT)
  "A federal judge in Boston will hear arguments on Monday over whether a program that reveals Cyberpatrol's secret blacklist should be banned from the Internet."
• ZDNet: You've got a subpoena! (24 Mar 2000)
  "Call it legal spam. Lawyers in the Cyber Patrol legal battle have created an e-precedent -- sending subpoenas by e-mail."
• CNN: Cyber Patrol decoding brawl gets ugly and international (21 Mar 2000)
  "A legal dispute between a U.S. toymaker that produces a popular Internet pornography filter and two programmers that decoded the software could heat up into a messy international brawl."
• Slashdot: Mattel/Cyber Patrol Censors Critics Again (20 Mar 2000)
  "Mattel is updating the Cyber Patrol blacklists for all of their customers to include the homepages of the authors and all of the mirrors, blocked under every blocking category the product has."
• USA Today: Judge helps Mattel zap effort to undermine filter (20 Mar 2000)
  What a misleading headline. Yet another example of McPaper earning its abysmal reputation.
• Wired: CyberPatrol Hackers Lose Round (17 Mar 2000)
  "A federal judge in Boston has tried to ban the distribution of a computer program that reveals CyberPatrol's secret list of sex sites."
• Slashdot: Mattel dislikes being embarrassed (16 Mar 2000)
  "In addition to demanding the removal of the decryption utility, Mattel is also seeking the logfiles of the Swedish ISP that hosts the decryption utility, to identify everyone who has downloaded it to date. Today's news was filled with Mattel's PR lies about their suit."
• Wired: Mattel Sues Over Blocking Hack (16 Mar 2000)
  "Toy-maker Mattel has sued two programmers who revealed how to circumvent its CyberPatrol blocking software."

Several news outlets uncritically ran Ted Bridis's AP newswire story characterizing the decryption program as a tool to let children view pornography:

"A company that makes popular software to block children from Internet pornography is suing two computer experts for distributing a method for kids to deduce their parents' password and access those forbidden Web sites."

• SJ Mercury News: Software Co. Sues Hackers (15 Mar 2000)
  
• cnet: Hackers crack online porn filters (16 Mar 2000)
  cnet's version adds this interesting paragraph:

  "Early today, activists copied the utility and details of the effort and began distributing them across the Internet on nearly two dozen Web sites that duplicated Jansson and Skala's original work. Those efforts apparently were coordinated on technology Web site Slashdot.org, where the lawsuit was roundly condemned."

• CNN: Software company files lawsuit against hackers (16 Mar 2000)
  CNN's version also adds the cnet paragraph and some additional reportage, but still mischaracterizes the program. However, their later coverage was more evenhanded.

But this omits the other forecast that by 2050 we'll be able to make an electronic recording of human brains. So by 2100 we'll be in machines also, so one way or another there will be machines with intelligence. And Trolls will be able to run at electronic speed...

According to this review in USA Today, it is a worthwhile read.

To add my own comment, I purchased the text in Palm format this morning from Peanut Press and had no problems with the download or installation (aside from having to free up some space on my Palm V). $2.50 is a small chunk of change if it will encourage other authors to follow suit. I don't have the time to read King's longer novels, but a 66-page short story that I can carry on my Palm V is right up my alley.

I spent a few minutes looking for articles on the websites of newspapers, magazines and TV networks to disprove you, but I was hard pressed to find anything. I came across a few, like this at USA Today and another at CNN, but most of their coverage was articles culled from ZDNet, C|Net and IDG. I certainly hope their coverage improves, and I expect it will. Newspapers and TV networks sometimes do a superb job of reporting on controversies in their industry, and I hope that continues. I think my real point - that news groups owned by corporations often report against the alleged "corporate agenda" - is still valid.

I also agree with you that "Enforced copyrights and freedom cannot coexist in cyberspace." But it would have been just as true if you inserted "meatspace" instead. Copyright enforcement, like all intellectual property - or any law enforcement, for that matter - inherently involves limits on freedom. As precious as our current freedom in cyberspace is, it is going to be curtailed again and again in the coming years. We must accept that, and realize that it is incumbent upon us to make sure we influence the direction of those limitations, so as to minimize their authoritarian effect.

I also agree with what you said about me being a windbag; it's inherited.

Cheers.

When I went to read the USA Today story, the banner ad consisted of the following directly adjacent two images: the left side and the right side. To save you the trouble of downloading them, I'll tell that they depict a sexual scene, and come with the words (and alt tag) "Ignite his passion tonight". Now, I have to go fix adzapper to drop those pesky banners from USA Today ...

When I went to read the USA Today story, the banner ad consisted of the following directly adjacent two images: the left side and the right side. To save you the trouble of downloading them, I'll tell that they depict a sexual scene, and come with the words (and alt tag) "Ignite his passion tonight". Now, I have to go fix adzapper to drop those pesky banners from USA Today ...

It almost has become a category now -- the "be afraid" studies. In 1998, we had "the more time people spend online, the more depressed they get" report. That came after 1997's big "Net addiction" survey and, in 1995, Marty Rimm's "the Net's just one big porn site" study. Each had its own serious methodological problems, but each was quick to blame the Net for various social ills.

Right on. Read it here.

A. Keiper

Try this link for an online version.


#include "disclaim.h"
"All the best people in life seem to like LINUX." - Steve Wozniak

You can go to USA Today where they then have a link to Ad Meter which is where you can vote for the best one. They don't have every single one on there but they have most of them in RA format so you can go and watch them.

--MD--

You can go to USA Today where they then have a link to Ad Meter which is where you can vote for the best one. They don't have every single one on there but they have most of them in RA format so you can go and watch them.

--MD--

From the article:

"Moreover, he adds, DoubleClick itself would hand over to privacy
advocates the list of participating companies if it could. But as in many
lines of business, partners frown when their relationships are disclosed
without their permission, he says."

Ok, am I the only one that has a problem with this? The companies involved would frown on their information being passed to us, but through this "service" our information gets passed to them, and most people probably don't even realize their information is being sent (let alone knowing that they can opt out).

If they are getting people's personal information, those same people should be able to know who the companies are as well. Why should their privacy be protected while mine is so blatently abused? Oh, wait, they have the money. That's right.

btw, mindstrm, do you have a link to these privacy laws? I can go look for them, but thought I would ask.

oh yeah. Good point.
I wonder how many people believed in this and it wasn't true.

But that doesn't matter to you. Does it?

Thank goodness he didn't have an office on Piedmont Road.

Seriously, the person you describe is all too similar to Mark O. Barton and that is not good. I would post a link to the AJC, but that is a fee-based service so here is one to refresh your memory.

When I read the article, it immediately irritated me, though I had to take a minute to figure out why: the description of the groups activities implies that there is no technical grounding for their methods - there sadly is no mention that part of the group's raison d'etre is to convince people that using 'security through obscurity is wrong' and 'with enough eyes all bugs are shallow' as standard policy is good for the consumer.
It's good for people to know the news, but often we miss out on why these articles are important to know.

An aside: does anyone know who first referred to USA Today as "the television of newspapers"?
Thanks

----

When I read the article, it immediately irritated me, though I had to take a minute to figure out why: the description of the groups activities implies that there is no technical grounding for their methods - there sadly is no mention that part of the group's raison d'etre is to convince people that using 'security through obscurity is wrong' and 'with enough eyes all bugs are shallow' as standard policy is good for the consumer.
It's good for people to know the news, but often we miss out on why these articles are important to know.

An aside: does anyone know who first referred to USA Today as "the television of newspapers"?
Thanks

----

According to eToys' stock history, they've dropped from almost $80/share to ~$25.50/share.

Does anyone have a really credible analysis on this? I found some ideas over at the Red Herring. Toys R Us is down to $14.13, $10 off its yearly high. The entire online toy purchasing industry is suffering from a lack of confidence, resulting (reportedly) from their inability to fill toy orders on time.

While customers of other toy makers (Toys R Us) and KBKids professed (at a rate exceeding 40%) they wouldn't shop there again, the rate of terminal dissatisfaction with eToys is 12%.

My prediction is that eToys' stock will rebound. The eToys death watch will be an excruciatingly slow event and will suffer quite an ugly setback as eToys (in my non-investor prediction) gets out of the hospital bed around early Spring, the time by which eToys will most likely have gotten their butts in gear with regards to meeting customer orders. They will either have more efficient fulfillment techniques, or customers will buy earlier, but in either case this major depressant upon their stock value will be lifted away by April.

So is there cause for despair? Yes and no. Surely we cannot avoid eating a few crow feathers here and there when eToys' stock rebounds. But the way to keep the whole crow from being stuffed down, i.e. the way to keep their stock from rebounding too far, and perhaps even drag it down to sub-$20 levels, is rather clear.
1) If you know of any online artist groups, inform them about the eToy vs eToys issue. The artist community does not suffer this crap very easily.
2) If you know of any non-online artist groups of any sort - stores, galleries, you name it - let them know, also.

There is the more drastic and difficult theory, also:
3) Gather donations and fund an ad in USA Today, documenting the tragedy of eToys' attack on etoy.com. Express it as an attack on artistic free expression by means fraudulent legal tactics (false patent claims, etc.), under an atmosphere of judicial ignorance favoring the biggest-mouthed, deepest-pocketed lawyers. Call for a boycott on eToys.com.

You have to find ways to create massive tides of bad press for eToys - this and this alone will create a major dampener on their stock value. This should start right now, while their stock is down, so as to depress the upcoming rebound as eToys prepares a mission plan to prevent their previous customer fulfillment failures from happening again.

Now I've checked USA Today for their information on the costs of a full page ad, and the rates are almost $11,000 for a 1/16 page ad, up to $81K for a full pager. It ain't cheap. Of course the bigger the ad the more people are going to notice it, but I think even at 1/16th page it is still going to cause major press, and grab the attention of a lot of people.

What do y'all think?

You apparently aren't aware of the bill that was passed last week that allows the satellite companies (DirecTV and Dish at least) to carry offer local networks to residents in select cities. For instance, DirecTV now offers the New York networks to New York customers over their DirecTV receiver and LA networks to LA customers. More cities are on the way and Dish is offering a similar service. It doesn't do much for people is smaller cities whose networks DirecTV and Dish won't be carrying since you still can't legally receive a network from another city if you are in the Grade B countour. It also allows people outside of the Grade B countour to receive the national network feed from NY or LA, depending on time zone.

I like the Fiat example. At what point is a company a government entity and thus different restrictions apply?

Apparently some new techniques are around the corner that should significantly improve accuracy to the point where 20/20 would be considered an absolute minimum, and much better vision would be the norm. They would also avoid the need for "touch up" operations which only increase the risk involved.

There was a decent article about it a few days ago in USA Today.

Check out the front page of today's (Oct 7, 1999) USA Today. There's a story about Disappearing Inc., a San Francisco start-up that offers an e-mail time-out service. Add their software to your e-mail program and you've got e-mail that becomes unreadable after a certain date. The article talks about the software as a lawsuit defense system.

See http://www.disappearing.com.

exactly! Is the Internet *not* a new geographic frontier? Is the e-conomy *not* growing much faster than the average national economy? Under whose jurisdiction is the 'net? WTO? IMF? Who enforces the "laws"? In which language are they written? Who do the laws serve? Who do patents serve? Innovators? Governments? "Public Servants"? Lawyers? Shareholding owners of stock? Which of these groups is most needed in the invention process?

Patents in this increasingly complex global context may end up costing their prosecutors too much time and money to manage and enforce. Maybe we can trade our ingenuity here on the net by some kind of alternative model for self-governance and global organization. Aren't we responsible for creating our own choices?

Likewise encoding huge chunks of your CD collection onto one CD using MP3 compression would also be covered under fair use as long as you don't give the CD away, sell it or otherwise distribute the files on it. You can use it for your own use so you don't have to stop and change CD's every 72 minutes.

You're getting into some hazy areas with linking. IANAL, but I'll take a stab at it. Linking is just telling someone where to find something else. If you say I can be prosecuted for copyright violations for linking, you'd damn well be ready to go down that road.

1) If I call you on the telephone and tell you where to find MP3 files, can I be prosecuted for copyright violations?

2) If I say on a radio show where to find MP3 files, can I be prosecuted for copyright violations?

3) If the MP3's are legit, obviously I can't be prosecuted for copyright violations.

4) Can you prove I knew the MP3's weren't legit? Should you have to?

5) If I link to a site that has displays one image that violates copyright laws, can I be prosecuted for copyright violations?

6) Do I have to ask permission before I do this?

You'd better be willing to answer "yes" to most of these questions if you want to go down that road. Apparently the RIAA is willing to answer yes to most of these questions. Are we?

This was reported several places several weeks ago. I submitted it then, but can't find most articles now. USA Today on smart dust

• American Banker
• Americas Job Bank
• Black Enterprise
• Business Week
• Career Pulse
• CareerBuilder*
• CareerCity
• CareerExchange
• CareerMosaic
• Caree rPath
• CareerWeb
• CareerFuture
• CitySearch
• CNET
• Dallas Morning News
• DICE
• EDN
• Hispanic Online
• HotJobs
• Internet.com
• JobOptions
• Monster
• MSBET
• NationJob
• Phillips
• QuestLink
• SelectJobs
• Test and Measurement World
• USAToday
• WETA
• WomenConnect
• Yahoo

okay, here's the article, and a relevant quote from the sidebar:

"If it were an algorithm (or formula) for robust encryption, and if we were to confirm that, then, yes, it would be subject to export control," says William Reinsch, undersecretary of Commerce for export administration.
"We've ruled that if (such algorithms) are printed in a book, we have not controlled them, but if the same algorithm appears in electronic form, on diskette or the Internet, we do seek to control it," he says. "We've tried to maintain a policy balancing the needs of privacy and e-commerce with the needs of national security."
---------------

...are a reality, according to USA Today. No details as to the specifics, but it's going to happen.


-Virgil
--

Jim Ewel has made some seriously boneheaded statements (just like Ed Muth). Here's one from USA Today. "I kind of look at Linux and open source as the resurgence of socialism as opposed to capitalism. People who are providing good products and good value for lucre are being attacked as kind of horrible." The full article is here. A resurgence of socialism? Good products for good value? Uh huh. If you'd like to provide some constructive criticism, his email address is jime@microsoft.com.

Testimony in the MS-DOJ trial said that MS uses paper accounting. Gates book says electronic accounting.
AP story in USA Today

Just a comment, but I found it very distracting to read the review that Hemos linked. Seems to have been the result of a search for the name "Katz" and everytime the word appears it's bold and italic-- very tough to read.

In case you overlooked this, now you know.

I got to this headline a bit late; between the time that it was posted and when I read it the URL had changed. The new address:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/mds022.htm

I love seeing this story in major news sources. I can't wait to see the rest of the articles and fallout. Knock 'em dead with the lawsuit, eneryone who's in on it!

"A 16-year-old Irish schoolgirl may have made e-mail even faster."