Slashdot Mirror

Hehe.. In your face, Scott McCollum! Put *that* in your narrow little pipe and smoke it!

(and for those of you who dunno who our dear friend Scott is, he's a 'writer' for WorldTechTribune.com makes a habit of writing screed after screed of his anti-Linux and anti-open source opinions (and tries to pass them off as news half the time). I wouldn't hate his guts so much if his arguments made sense, but he just basically sits there spouting nothing but FUD and thinly disguised pro-MS propaganda, and when OSS advocates react with proper indignation to his bull, he has the sheer gall to act all shocked and point at their emails and go 'Look, see, they're attacking me for no reason, it just goes to prove those dirty Open Source hippies are nothing but savages!'. Also, he wrote a couple of articles about how Win2K had gotten this same certification when Linux didn't have it yet, and then he went on to proclaim that Linux would *never* get this certification because it was inherently insecure and flawed, unlike his beloved Win2K. So, from IBM with love, fuck you, Scott McCollum.)

It's due to the special, legitimized variety of theft promulgated by socialists and known as "open source" that IT job skills are currently in the toilet. Why write your own code when you can steal someone else's?

whatever happened to the MIT hacker, Andrew "bunnie" Huang who supposedly put a custom solder board between x-box components to read the data traveling between them? he supposedly deciphered the security format and figured out the key.

you can read about it here

his ultimate goal was to create "a legal way to create a boot ROM," and he said that "hopefully, in a couple of months we'll have a canned, easy-to-use solution that will allow people to write their own code." you can read his self recorded exploits here

Whatever happened to this guy?

for these hired goons.

terrific. happy gnu year. very merry. fud on.

Look everyone, Scott McCollum of World Tech Tribune! What are you doing among the Linux cultists, ya big troll?

It was followed by a short lived, but lengthy discussion with regular readers of worldtechtribune (including the editor-in-chief apparently) and some other newsforge readers.

You may or may not find some interesting thoughts, or just more (mis)information.

It was followed by a short lived, but lengthy discussion with regular readers of worldtechtribune (including the editor-in-chief apparently) and some other newsforge readers.

You may or may not find some interesting thoughts, or just more (mis)information.

World Tech Tribune had a rather hilarious FUD article covering this several days ago.

"Microsoft announced that Windows 2000 has passed all required tests for certification under the Common Criteria (CC) at Evaluated Assurance Level 4 (EAL4) to demonstrate their 'commitment to security'... Where was Linux(TM) when Microsoft dropped this bombshell? Linux(TM) was nowhere to be found. There was no one from Red Hat, no one from Mandrakesoft (makers of Mandrake Linux), and no one from SuSE. Linus wasn't there. Not even the self-appointed patron saint of open source, Richard Stallman, bothered to show up.

Oh Linux(TM), oh Linux(TM). Where art thou, Linux(TM)? Why dist thou not showst up?"

Remarks by Steve Ballmer
CEO, Microsoft Corporation
Gartner IT Expo
Orlando, Florida
October 9, 2002

I know this whole thing is supposed to lead to "we should all be using Linux which is free-as-in-beer/liberty under the GPL," but I'm curious: Does the slow uptake of existing open source software signal the movement's peak or just the normal Linux hypocrisy?

www.worldtechtribune.com Oh, make sure to call this a troll and give it a negative rating.

Gee, the Linux mascot got the wrong bird - it should've been an ostrich they way you all hide your heads in the sand at the first sign of trouble...

Hey, I'm curious: Does the slow uptake of open source software signal the movement's peak or just the normal amount of Linux h4x0rz hypocrisy?

www.worldtechtribune.com

Make sure and give this post a negative rating and call it a troll, freaks...

Second, I'm not sure that using the phrase "workspace" is the greatest choice. Looking at Metrowerks' package design or the name "Sourceforge" gives you a neat, romanticized image of some code artist beating away on a big piece of iron, forging something new. Its designed to appear attractive to the person doing the work, not his manager -- not MS's strong point. "Workspaces"? Might appeal to the corporate world, but in the hobbyist market, out to write some good code and have fun, I think they're missing the mark.

As is their custom, CNet's News.com posted a big, sloppy kiss to the open source counterculture Thursday with a thousand-plus words dedicated to "Apache entrepreneur" Randy Terbrush's new business venture. Terbrush, the treasurer for the non-profit Apache Software Foundation, is described in the article as "influential" and "a pioneer" in making the Apache open source web server software a "a commercially-viable product." Apache, as many reader of World Tech Tribune.com already know, is the open source software that currently has a 60% stranglehold on the web server market and has been troubled by numerous security holes in the past few months.

http://www.worldtechtribune.com/worldtechtribune/a sparticles/buzz/bz10052002.asp

Your silence is the sound of hypocrisy...

http://www.worldtechtribune.com/worldtechtribune/a sparticles/buzz/bz10052002.asp

Your silence is the sound of hypocrisy...

We all know the much-hated and evil Micro$oft Korporation hates to be ripped off by theives crying about their eroding cyber-liberties, but who else? Where's Electronic Arts' support for copying all their games under the libertine aegis of "Fair Use?" Or the those open source stalwarts at Oracle? Why aren't the new software powerhouses like Siebel signing on to the bill?

Open source doesn't make money. You're lying if you say it does. VA Linux/Software, Red Hat, Covalent (a company given a reach-around by CNet's News.com on Thursday as a company that "secures" Apache web server software and falsely characterized as a "viable" business) and other open source darlings have all been losing money for years. What started off as some killer technology that was supposed to revolutionize the world turned out to be more of a dopey ideology that just re-hashed everything that commercial software vendors did and called it free-as-in-liberty. Investors are getting wise to that fact and it'll take an act of Congress to keep this ideology alive.

Unfortunately, it looks like Congress may do just that...

Sharman's contracts with legitimate businesses amount to owning a piece of a front business for organized crime: They aren't running a loan sharking operation, they help run a respectable restaurant that just happens to be built on a basement where people that don't promptly pay interest on personal loans get their legs broken. Kazaa is built a huge pirate network that they are now trying to sell real estate for "respectable" front businesses. How many big shot artists will sign up to have the music distributed through Cornerband on Kazaa rather than Atlantic or Sony Music Entertainment? How many new European broadband customers will the relatively-small Tiscali ISP get through Kazaa compared to Wanadoo, Deutche Telekom and all the other European state-supported telecommunications companies already offering ADSL at better rates?

Remember, since u will all hypocritically wave the flag of free speech on /. while trying to supress something u disagree with, make sure to vote this as a "Troll" rather than "Insightful." Thks!

" 'So what? This isn't Napster with servers you can shut down. You can't stop us because we're everywhere on millions of machines around the world.' However, all it takes is one self-replicating P2P worm like 'Slapper' sent to those 120 million+ Kazaa thieves and the police boarding up the doors of Sharman's offices in Australia and Europe. Remember, most of you have all claimed that you're all untouchable yet watched in horror as 'secure, stable and virus-free' Linux was repeatedly raped by Slapper... "

He can't possibly be paid to write tripe like this (unless Micro$oft is paying him)! Plus, that website's Microsoft ASP based forums are a joke - censoring words like "tit" in the word "Constitution" (maybe it's because these morons don't recognize the Constitution).

" 'So what? This isn't Napster with servers you can shut down. You can't stop us because we're everywhere on millions of machines around the world.' However, all it takes is one self-replicating P2P worm like 'Slapper' sent to those 120 million+ Kazaa thieves and the police boarding up the doors of Sharman's offices in Australia and Europe. Remember, most of you have all claimed that you're all untouchable yet watched in horror as 'secure, stable and virus-free' Linux was repeatedly raped by Slapper... "

He can't possibly be paid to write tripe like this (unless Micro$oft is paying him)! Plus, that website's Microsoft ASP based forums are a joke - censoring words like "tit" in the word "Constitution" (maybe it's because these morons don't recognize the Constitution).

Except the Pope barely ever fires a Cardinal.

The editorial mentioned at the end of the slashdot article is painfully bad. The person writing it obviously has very little idea what he is writing about.. Let me give some examples..

First, Sun will forego the PC OEM deals for StarOffice 6 because Sun Microsystems' main revenue stream comes from their own PC sales.

This is in reference to SUN not getting together with companies like Dell and Gateway to put StarOffice on their machines. The first thing that got me, though, was that it says that SUN's main income is from their PC sales. Last time I checked, SUN doesn't make PCs. And, while they may start in the near future, they certainly don't have any revenue from it now.

After years of protestation and lawsuits against Microsoft giving away IE for free, is Sun hypocritically hoping to create an illegal monopoly of their own by giving StarOffice 6 to students for free?

Again, just because you do something that mirrors what Microsoft does, does not make you Microsoft. Giving away software does not make you a monopoly. Immoral business practices do. Besides, as the author tries to mention, SUN makes its money on hardware (not PC sales), similar to Apple. All they're trying to do is show people there's an alternative to the Wintel platform. They're trying to show people that you don't have to have a box running windows to be productive. That you can have a Linux box (that they'd love to sell you in a few quarters) and run StarOffice on it and be doing just fine. As far as I can tell, there's nothing wrong with that. Another thing people need to remember is that there's a big difference between a non-monopoly business practices. If a non-monopoly says "If you don't put our software on all your machines, you can't put it on any, it doesn't matter, because the OEM has choices. When a monopoly does it, it is illegal, because the OEM has no real choice (go out of business?).

If the schools had actually purchased the software rather than acquired it for free, the deal adds up to a $5.7 billion (yes, billion with a "b") missed opportunity. That's $5.7 billion USD in sales that Sun will never see because they gave it away at a time when they don't need to be giving away $5.7 billion.

Oh come on, buddy. This is complete nonsense. While the numbers work out, it's meaningless. Software doesn't have intrinsic value. That's not like saying "I'm going to give away 100 cars." It's the same thing about trying to figure out the value of "pirated" software. You can't say you lost 40 millions dollars, because one million people "pirated" your $40 software. It just doesn't work like that. These schools wouldn't have paid $5.7 billion for this software, so SUN didn't give away $5.7 billion.

Anyways, the editorial just goes on and on like this.. it's truly painful to read.

It really is quite hilarious. The thing is, these people actually seem to believe the illogical spam they put on their site. Much to their credit, however, surprisingly open to opposing viewpoints (if only to try to shoot them down with Cold War analogies). When the JPEG patent news broke, I posted a parody of Scott's articles to the site... and they started asking me for guest commentaries!

Liberal = bin Laden = Clinton = communist = godless = inferior = open-source

Conservative = superior = Microsoft

Well, maybe not quite that bad, but close. Here are some samples from their articles:

"What makes open source the secure, stable and elegant software panacea open source cultists claim it is? ... say you are the IT director at a bank and you buy into the Linux is stable, secure and bulletproof hype. ... Welcome to the lazy, cut-and-paste world of open source 'innovation' where people who should be smart enough to know better still think you can get something for nothing. It would be humorous if it wasn't so pathetic..." ("Thanks to open source methods, only 2 out of 500 job-hunting programmers pass skills test")

"The outcry against Palladium doesn't really stem from a concern about your privacy, but more from a vocal minority who wish to impose their anarchistic schemes onto us under the guise of 'freedom' and 'liberty.'" ("Microsoft's Palladium transforms Internet from Wild West to suburban neighborhood")

"many customers who purchased those inherently more stable, secure and virus-proof Linux servers are probably wishing there was a multi-million dollar virus protection industry to help them out." ("New Linux virus creates peer-to-peer terror network")

"The SE Linux project was developed during the Clinton administration ... NSA officials say their cyber security enhancements made for SE Linux have not only benefited the NSA, but because of the terms of the GPL have also strengthened the security architecture of computers used by malicious cyber terrorists around the world." ("NSA deputy director says 'never again' to Open Source")

That last article is just hysterical. The NSA administrators, under pressure from Microsoft, stopped development on SELinux -- because Microsoft didn't like the fact that government-developed code was released freely under the GPL. Microsoft objected to the competition. WorldTechTribune is using all its quotes out of context, and pretending that the objection was concerning national security and terrorism. Amazing.

Liberal = bin Laden = Clinton = communist = godless = inferior = open-source

Conservative = superior = Microsoft

Well, maybe not quite that bad, but close. Here are some samples from their articles:

"What makes open source the secure, stable and elegant software panacea open source cultists claim it is? ... say you are the IT director at a bank and you buy into the Linux is stable, secure and bulletproof hype. ... Welcome to the lazy, cut-and-paste world of open source 'innovation' where people who should be smart enough to know better still think you can get something for nothing. It would be humorous if it wasn't so pathetic..." ("Thanks to open source methods, only 2 out of 500 job-hunting programmers pass skills test")

"The outcry against Palladium doesn't really stem from a concern about your privacy, but more from a vocal minority who wish to impose their anarchistic schemes onto us under the guise of 'freedom' and 'liberty.'" ("Microsoft's Palladium transforms Internet from Wild West to suburban neighborhood")

"many customers who purchased those inherently more stable, secure and virus-proof Linux servers are probably wishing there was a multi-million dollar virus protection industry to help them out." ("New Linux virus creates peer-to-peer terror network")

"The SE Linux project was developed during the Clinton administration ... NSA officials say their cyber security enhancements made for SE Linux have not only benefited the NSA, but because of the terms of the GPL have also strengthened the security architecture of computers used by malicious cyber terrorists around the world." ("NSA deputy director says 'never again' to Open Source")

That last article is just hysterical. The NSA administrators, under pressure from Microsoft, stopped development on SELinux -- because Microsoft didn't like the fact that government-developed code was released freely under the GPL. Microsoft objected to the competition. WorldTechTribune is using all its quotes out of context, and pretending that the objection was concerning national security and terrorism. Amazing.

Liberal = bin Laden = Clinton = communist = godless = inferior = open-source

Conservative = superior = Microsoft

Well, maybe not quite that bad, but close. Here are some samples from their articles:

"What makes open source the secure, stable and elegant software panacea open source cultists claim it is? ... say you are the IT director at a bank and you buy into the Linux is stable, secure and bulletproof hype. ... Welcome to the lazy, cut-and-paste world of open source 'innovation' where people who should be smart enough to know better still think you can get something for nothing. It would be humorous if it wasn't so pathetic..." ("Thanks to open source methods, only 2 out of 500 job-hunting programmers pass skills test")

"The outcry against Palladium doesn't really stem from a concern about your privacy, but more from a vocal minority who wish to impose their anarchistic schemes onto us under the guise of 'freedom' and 'liberty.'" ("Microsoft's Palladium transforms Internet from Wild West to suburban neighborhood")

"many customers who purchased those inherently more stable, secure and virus-proof Linux servers are probably wishing there was a multi-million dollar virus protection industry to help them out." ("New Linux virus creates peer-to-peer terror network")

"The SE Linux project was developed during the Clinton administration ... NSA officials say their cyber security enhancements made for SE Linux have not only benefited the NSA, but because of the terms of the GPL have also strengthened the security architecture of computers used by malicious cyber terrorists around the world." ("NSA deputy director says 'never again' to Open Source")

That last article is just hysterical. The NSA administrators, under pressure from Microsoft, stopped development on SELinux -- because Microsoft didn't like the fact that government-developed code was released freely under the GPL. Microsoft objected to the competition. WorldTechTribune is using all its quotes out of context, and pretending that the objection was concerning national security and terrorism. Amazing.

Too bad sites can't be moderated as -1 troll... :-)

New Linux virus creates peer-to-peer terror network
HP finally fires their anti-business business strategist for Linux
Disbanding the RIAA will turn the music scene into 17th Century Europe
The GPL, open source freedoms and the Cold War

This last article has this classic quote:

The small minority of geeks who adhere to the cultish mindset of the GPL and Linux will definitely take offense to this, but there is no reasoning with someone who blindly follows the precepts of open source and the GPL ...those people will never understand why the NSA would reject the GPL. For rational people, I can sum up exactly why the GPL is not and in its current form will never be useful for the NSA or any similar enterprise: "Open" is the exact opposite of "secure."

New Linux virus creates peer-to-peer terror network
HP finally fires their anti-business business strategist for Linux
Disbanding the RIAA will turn the music scene into 17th Century Europe
The GPL, open source freedoms and the Cold War

This last article has this classic quote:

The small minority of geeks who adhere to the cultish mindset of the GPL and Linux will definitely take offense to this, but there is no reasoning with someone who blindly follows the precepts of open source and the GPL ...those people will never understand why the NSA would reject the GPL. For rational people, I can sum up exactly why the GPL is not and in its current form will never be useful for the NSA or any similar enterprise: "Open" is the exact opposite of "secure."

New Linux virus creates peer-to-peer terror network
HP finally fires their anti-business business strategist for Linux
Disbanding the RIAA will turn the music scene into 17th Century Europe
The GPL, open source freedoms and the Cold War

This last article has this classic quote:

The small minority of geeks who adhere to the cultish mindset of the GPL and Linux will definitely take offense to this, but there is no reasoning with someone who blindly follows the precepts of open source and the GPL ...those people will never understand why the NSA would reject the GPL. For rational people, I can sum up exactly why the GPL is not and in its current form will never be useful for the NSA or any similar enterprise: "Open" is the exact opposite of "secure."

New Linux virus creates peer-to-peer terror network
HP finally fires their anti-business business strategist for Linux
Disbanding the RIAA will turn the music scene into 17th Century Europe
The GPL, open source freedoms and the Cold War

This last article has this classic quote:

The small minority of geeks who adhere to the cultish mindset of the GPL and Linux will definitely take offense to this, but there is no reasoning with someone who blindly follows the precepts of open source and the GPL ...those people will never understand why the NSA would reject the GPL. For rational people, I can sum up exactly why the GPL is not and in its current form will never be useful for the NSA or any similar enterprise: "Open" is the exact opposite of "secure."

The EFF and the thieves on Kaazaa, Napster, Grokster and Morpheus are a subset of people that only see the world in the hypocritical way they wish it was rather than the way it really is. These are the people that build midnight basketball courts in an inner city neighborhood worrying about gangs, prostitutes and drugs; only to give drug dealers, diseased whores and violent gangs a well lit meeting place open 24 hours a day in the center of the afflicted neighborhood.

It's all cool 'til it happens to you...

"The paradoxical notion is that allowing anyone and everyone to see secret data creates greater security. The NSA releasing SE-Linux under the General Public License did not increase cyber-security worldwide. The exact opposite effect has been noted by the NSA regarding SE-Linux. Unwittingly, the NSA has fallen into the same trap that the traitorous American scientists who gave the Soviets nuclear secrets in the late-40s/early-50s fell into. The taxpayer-purchased SE-Linux 'enhancements' by the NSA and released worldwide under the GPL have made everything less secure for everyone in the world."

IBM announced to the Securities and Exchange Commission yesterday that their services revenue was down and they will be laying off some 14,000+ employees from their money-losing services division. Services like those intended to support IBM's new $1 billion investment in Linux. Oddly enough, IBM told the SEC in August 2002 that they would be taking a $1.4 billion charge for the financial quarter because of the restructuring needed to offset the loss of profits in the services division. If a company that generates a lot of its revenue off of services loses $1.4 billion in one quarter partly on services tied to a technology they hyped, it tends to cheapen the $1 billion the company spent a year ago to hype said technology and the value of services for that technology.

But as soon as YOUR big evil Linux corporation starts lobbying, your fists are all in the air giving the "All hail!" Why? What happened to keeping politics out of it? What happened to the righteous morality of it all? You guys finally figure out your NOT open minded anarcho-libertarians and just big government, myopic, environmentalist "share the wealth" bureaucrats after all?

VA Software (parent evil corporation of Slashdot.org), Red Hat Linux and others are gonna write plenty of laws to stifle choice. Yet that's okay because you want the ONLY choice to be Linux.

Cast the beam out thine own eyes, hypocrites...

Linux has been free-as-in-beer for ten years. Ten years ago, MS-DOS sold for $20-$30. How much is WinXP Pro? How much is Win2K Datacenter?

How long will it take for the Linux cult to finally wise up, wrap their best tech up into a neat package, sell it for a fair price and actually COMPETE rather than whining like twelve year-old girls whose moms won't let them go to a N'Sync concert?

I noticed that /. forgot to report that studies released by NPD Intellect and IDC analysts on Tuesday said that Linux has decreased in both market share and in revenue generation during 2001. I guess /.'s version of free speech only applies to the good news about open source.

Oh, I forgot about the incredibly blatant conflict of interest /. has when it comes to Linux since they're owned by VA Software (formerly VA Linux, who had to change their name in an effort to make people forget about their shady stock IPO deal with Credit Suisse Boston).

Never mind, that explains everything...

Helix is to Real as:

A) Steven Tyler is to Mick Jagger
B) Fred Flintstone is to Ralph Cramden
C) Mozilla is to Netscape

The answer is "C." Mozilla killed Netscape and Helix is gonna kill Real.

The Netscape example sounds a lot like RealNetwork's Helix gamble: Netscape was at the top of the market, Microsoft came out with an inferior competing product, Netscape ignored the threat, Microsoft improved the inferior product, knocked Netscape off of the top and Netscape was forced to open source their software development in a desperate attempt to regain market share.

How many of you will try replying to this comment with some lame "No, the _REAL_ answer is 'D) None of the above' because information wants to be and must be free" garbage? Probably quite a few. I wonder how many of you tried that same write-in answer garbage on your SAT exams?

Helix is to Real as:

A) Steven Tyler is to Mick Jagger B) Fred Flintstone is to Ralph Cramden C) Mozilla is to Netscape

The answer is "C" because Mozilla killed Netscape and Helix is gonna kill Real.

The Netscape example sounds a lot like RealNetwork's Helix gamble: Netscape was at the top of the market, Microsoft came out with an inferior competing product, Netscape ignored the threat, Microsoft improved the inferior product, knocked Netscape off of the top and Netscape was forced to open source their software development in a desperate attempt to regain market share.

Wow, Scott McCollum! Fancy meeting you here...

The best part from a libertarian standpoint is that action like this doesn't really require Congress to debate for months and pass a lot of new laws to do it. For obvious reasons, it's already against the law to cheat investors, so we can modify the standard punishments meted out by judges for these corporate thieves to be comparable to drug lords and other scum that ruin people's lives.

Let's get tough and let's be consistent. Let's be consistent in our punishments against criminals that harm the lives of millions. No more slaps on the wrists, pay a fine and walk, right? Something that the most politically conservative person and frothing socialist hippie can agree on is that there should be consistent and fair punishment to the greedy corporate cads. We all agree, right? Good, it's settled then:

Throw all the commercial software pirates, file-swapping thieves and bandwidth parasites into the nearest Federal penitentiary.

http://www.worldtechtribune.com/worldtechtribune/a sparticles/buzz/bz07092002.asp

Link

"Don't forget, it just so happens that all of those countries have nothing to lose and everything to gain by simply copying American drug patents. Third World countries, who are often run by tyrants and thieves, have nothing now nor on the visible horizon. Some countries who aren't considered Third World but are bankrupt and cheap will embrace open source pharmaceuticals (and open source computer systems). Others will embrace this kind of theft against 'The Great Satan' out of spite. Unfortunately an 'eye-for-an-eye' reaction policy (they steal our stuff; we steal theirs) doesn't work for the West because the countries that take from the West don't have anything worth taking."

http://www.worldtechtribune.com/worldtechtribune/a sparticles/buzz/bz07082002.asp

http://www.worldtechtribune.com/worldtechtribune/a sparticles/buzz/bz07082002.asp

http://www.worldtechtribune.com/worldtechtribune/a sparticles/buzz/bz07022002.asp

"Finley Peter Dunne, a Chicago journalist in the early 20th Century, noted that a journalist was to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. To most journalists, Microsoft, with billions of dollars in the bank and millions of customers, is viewed as comfortable. Open source software, a development dogma steeped in European socialism with few success stories to its credit, is viewed as afflicted. This kind of pragmatism is nothing new to journalists: In the eyes of most elite tech media journalists, it's more 'fair' to afflict the comfortable Microsoft than it is to beat up on the poor, afflicted Apache developers."

http://www.worldtechtribune.com/worldtechtribune/a sparticles/buzz/bz07022002.asp

"Finley Peter Dunne, a Chicago journalist in the early 20th Century, noted that a journalist was to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. To most journalists, Microsoft, with billions of dollars in the bank and millions of customers, is viewed as comfortable. Open source software, a development dogma steeped in European socialism with few success stories to its credit, is viewed as afflicted. This kind of pragmatism is nothing new to journalists: In the eyes of most elite tech media journalists, it's more 'fair' to afflict the comfortable Microsoft than it is to beat up on the poor, afflicted Apache developers."

I hate the lack of freedom imposed on the world by Mico$loth, but the worst thing would be if Apache turned into some kind of lying, closed, corporate slug! How can we in the Open Source community say we love free speech if we are going to hide or cover up issues? We must remain open at all costs to show the closed sourcers we won't stoop to their level.

A P2P "advocate" will tell you that he's sharing the new Star Wars video game he bought at Best Buy for $45 on Morpheus because George Lucas has plenty of money and that's within the "advocate's" Constitutionally-protected fair use rights. It's a false but politically-astute statement, because telling people that he wanted to steal enough intellectual property from Lucasfilm Limited so that a 48 year-old single grandmother working at the LucasFilm Limited reception desk will lose her $22,000 a year job due to a corporate budget shortfall would prove that he really doesn't give a damn about so-called fair use rights after all.