Slashdot Mirror
NYTimes, DeCSSm EFF, DVD, And Other Acronyms
mudpup writes: "The NY Times has a nice story about Martin Garbus a well-known New York trial lawyer and First Amendment specialist, who was brought on board recently to assist the Electronic Frontier Foundation in the DVD case.
My question is will The Motion Picture Association of America now be filing suit against the Times for linking to 2600's catalog of DeCSS mirror sites? Or will that Link disappear sometime before/after the West Coast wakes up this morning? "
Can't wait for Emmanuel to rant and rave on about this.
MPAA: NY Times, your being sued for "hyperlinking" to a "hyperlink" collection of illegal hyperlinks!
When will all this stupid crap end and just let DVD be open before it becomes obsolete :-)
------- What exactly is real?
Talk about your free speech battles.
When someone yells "Stop" or goes limp, or taps out, the fight is over.
really interesting. If the MPAA really tries to do anything, there is a chance that the NYT will see this as a method of getting very positive publicity as valiant fighters for free speech and follow through with the issue...
The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
--Henry Kissinger
You've discovered the MPAA's secret plan: They want to eliminate DVDs even before they're obsolete!
They that quote Benjamin Franklin on liberty and safety deserve neither.
In what we see as an important show of support from a major force in journalism, the New York Times has linked directly to our list of sites which currently house the DeCSS code.
The links have been a source of contention in recent weeks, as the MPAA and eight Hollywood film studios have sought to force us to remove them, claiming the links are the same as having the code published on our own site. We see it differently - while they may have been able to get a federal court to order the material off of our site, forbidding us from telling the world what other sites still have it would be a very ominous precedent to set.
Read the rest of their news item Here.
Read it here.
because the NY times has deep pockets. Intimidation doesn't work as well against a major corporation as it does against an individual with little money. There is really no threat of jail time against a corporation as there is with an individual, and any monetary penalties won't amount to much. The MPAA's plan of attack so far has been mostly to use playground-bully type tactics anyway.
If anything the NY times can use this as free advertising if the MPAA tried any lawsuits or other "tactics".
My quesion is will the MPAA sue /. for linking to a story that links to a site that links to sites that have the program??
- So, you cannot run ads as a business making false claims like "we say our cigarettes do not give you cancer"; that speech can be censored.
- However, a newspaper would be allowed to report "they say their cigarettes do not give you cancer"; that speech cannot be censored.
... under U.S. law, that is. I would presume that the dispute with 2600 would be along these lines.Now what's up with this judge? In the preliminary hearing he ruled:
How stupid is this? This criminalizes a form of reverse engineering. Now if I were reverse engineering for criminal intent, would I announce to the whole world what I had done? No! I'd freakin circumvent the bozotech in secret. The act of open-sourcing the exploit should clear any doubts of an engineer's non-criminal intent. Duh! But nooo, that ain't how it is. We have to criminalize the tech sharers, so the bozos in the bureaucracy can milk the corporate establishment for favors... y'know, some Senator calls his Federal Judge Law School buddy and asks him for a favor: "psst, hey skippy, let this injunction stand 'kay? just think of it as payback for when I took you to the hospital and waited while you got your stomach pumped."
Sometimes the law is so stupid it makes want to stick hot pokers in my eyeballs.
I took this from the article linked to. DeCSS does not increase the threat of movie piracy and here is why. DeCSS is being argued that you can copy a movie onto your hard drive and thus can post it on the internet. You can get an MPEG-2 of a DVD movie from some of the players that are on Windows. If all you wanted to do was post an MPEG-2 you could either set up a huge buffer for the movie in the player or use on of the utilities out there taking advantage of the player. In fact most would see it as more of a pain in the ass to compile DeCSS then to just use the tools already out there. That nulls the comment above because if DeCSS is a tool for piracy it is nothing more then a redundancy.
Molog
So Linus, what are we doing tonight?
So Linus, what are we going to do tonight?
The same thing we do every night Tux. Try to take over the world!
f the judge's view is correct, Benkler said, then the Digital Millennium Copyright Act "does something no copyright law has ever done -- it extinguishes fair use," he said.
Fair use, after all is the crux of this case, regardless of what the MPAA would have you believe. I am confident that jurors will understand that this basic right cannot be abrigded.
Hates people who have stupid little sigs
04/28/00
In what we see as an important show of support from a major force in journalism, the New York Times has linked directly to our list of sites which currently house the DeCSS code.
The links have been a source of contention in recent weeks, as the MPAA and eight Hollywood film studios have sought to force us to remove them, claiming the links are the same as having the code published on our own site. We see it differently - while they may have been able to get a federal court to order the material off of our site, forbidding us from telling the world what other sites still have it would be a very ominous precedent to set.
The action by the Times comes in an article in today's electronic edition. What makes it particularly significant is this paragraph in which our attorney, Martin Garbus, is quoted:
At the bottom of the page, they do precisely that, linking not only to 2600, but to "2600's catalog of DeCSS mirror sites".
MPAA: NY Times, your being sued for "hyperlinking" to a "hyperlink" collection of illegal hyperlinks!
Well, gee, if that can happen, wouldn't places like Yahoo, Google and many others be in a lot of hot water?
BlackNova Traders
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.
Anonymous Luddite: "What do you think of the dehumanizing effects of the Internet?"
Andy Grove: "Not Much."
The creaters of the hyperlink committed the same crime! Now the public can view copyrighted web pages.... this means anyone with a web site can sue anyone with a browser! ::chuckle:: If this isn't a dumb law, I don't know what is... oh wait, yes I do.... encryption export limits.
As everyone knows, on the internet you are always only three clicks away from a lesbian chat room. Everything is linked to everything. The MPAA is bascially trying to outlaw the entire internet. Don't think they are going to do it. Can't wait for my apex DVD player to come in!
And of course, what about Slashdot, linking to the NYC article that links to the 2600 page with links to DeCSS?
And what about .....
Jason
So I cant listen to mp3's, I can't watch dvd's. I'll just have to sit here and let the microsoft paper clip entertain me. when is some body gonna sue slashdot?..everyone else is being sued.
Do Not Read Burgatronics... It's Evil
linking by words to slashdot, the nyc article, 2600's pages, and DeCSS?
. . . . . . .
may u!sh 2 sm!le at dz!z bad nn.!m!tat!ion
So far they haven't picked it up yet, but in several stories about this subject in the past Cnn.com has linked to 2600's site. Now I may be mistaken, but I believe that Time Warner is one of the major players in the MPAA. Does that mean they'll have to sue themselves?
Take a hypothetical case, he said: If a major newspaper that operated an online news site wrote an article saying that somebody had broken the DVD encryption code, and it linked to a site that had the code on it, "I think they'd have absolutely every right to do that."
And now they did it. Go NY Times! They took that very hypothetical case and made it completely real. I think the MPAA will have to think very, very hard about this one....
----
Brazil has decided you're cute.
I did... ok, it was only $35, but it makes a difference. Perhaps it's time to slashdot the EFF again? Join here, or contribute directly to the DVD Defense Fund here. "Make a special gift to help EFF defend against the movie industry's attempt to criminalize open-source coding."
They've got a point...
---
In addition to joining the EFF, you can also contribute directly to their DVD defense fund, to help pay for lawyers like Mr. Garbus. If you can, put your money where your mouth is! The page is here.
---
dig @138.195.138.195 goret.org. axfr | grep '^c..\..*A' | sort | cut -b5-36 | perl -e 'while(){print pack("H32",$_)}' | gzip -d
a friend emailed that to me...a little more interesting than a page of hyperlinked mirrors...
Somehow I see this as a much more serious crime than copying a DVD.
Don't go along with the abuse of the word "piracy" to mean "copying something made by A Very Big And Important Company, Inc."
If you do, you're helping their mind control strategy, to get people to see the sharing of information as a horrendous crime.
Then they can do what they want, and if anyone breaks the new encryption, they can put them in jail.
All the creatures will die, And all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai. (Jubai, 1605)
I proved it yesterday at work when one of my coworkers asked me how should he properly handle a case of a form submission that has to take some time on the server side to verify customer credit information. How do you force the user to not click on that 'Submit' button twice, how do you prevent partial form submission? So I suggested that user needs some form of confirmation that his request has being submitted. I told him to create an intermediary page that would be populated from the submission of the first page and have a message on it asking user to wait for a while at the same time posting the HTTP request from this intermediary page to the server.
However, my coworker somehow did not understand me from the beginning, so I told him to watch me, I opened my UltraEdit text editor and typed in a couple of HTML pages with forms and submission mechanisms and all that.
While I was doing it he understood better what I actually meant to do.
Does this sound to you just like any other form of communication? I mean, if I could express myself more clearly in one language than in another one, why shouldn't I use the other one if the person I am talking to also understands that language.
What is the difference between English, Chineese, Russian, Esperanto, Assembly, Prolog, C, C++, Java, Perl, VB, Pascal, Fortran, PL1, Cobol, Ada, Lisp, Scheme, ML etc etc etc etc Greek?
Computer code is just another language and must be protected under the First Amendment and have the same rights as free speech has.
You can't handle the truth.
"Under section 1201(a)(2) of the DMCA, Judge Kaplan said, it is illegal for anyone to offer technology intended to circumvent a technological measure that controls access to a work protected under the act." (NYTimes)
In fact, Kaplan had not read the law thoroughly. An exception to the clause making distro of circumvention tech illegal exists in 1201(f)(2) and (3) - (3) in particular says that circulation of a circumention tech measure (read "DeCSS") IS legal when it is solely intended for RE. 2600 originally posted the story as an example of RE. Look it up everyone!! :)
Hopefully, next time around in court Kaplan will be made aware of these exceptions.
---
Hey! Why did they post this but decline my submission weeks earlier that had a link to a similar article from Scientific American?
NYT Lawyer: We are a Big Media Company!
This is really funny. I was at Tuesday's symposium, and Carl Kaplan was the moderator for the panel discussion that included Greg Goeckner, and at one point in the discussion he directly asked Goeckner, "Would the MPAA sue if the New York Times linked to DeCSS?" The audience was amused; after the laugh died down, Goeckner waffled.
Looks like it's gonna get put to the test now. :-)
This article discusses a joint venture of Microsoft and Xerox into "copyright protection software". Does anyone have any idea what kind of technology is involved here? If I can see it on the screen or hear it on the speakers, can you really make it impossible to copy? Inconvenient, yes, but I don't see how you can do better (or worse, I should say).
Does this mean that if they lose (and this linking to other sites with deCSS is not allowed), that JamesSharman has just screwed /. by posting the link to the 2600 catalog here as well? ;-)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
wookin' pa nub in all the wrong pwaces
Already Links directly to the DeCSS code itself.
m e_searchbox&sv=IS&lk=noframes
e _searchbox&sv=IS&lk=noframes
What is the big deal?
Don't believe me? Follow these steps.
Start at their page www.mpaa.org
Click on members
Click on Walt Disney - which takes you to disney.go.com
The dropdown box that has "Where to Go" in the upper left corner contains go.com. Click that.
Click through to the Go Network.
Type DeCSS in the search area.
http://www.go.com/Titles?col=WC&qt=DeCSS&svx=ho
That's the URL I got. Looks like DeCSS code to me.
Of course, if linking to 2600.com is the problem, just type 2600 in the search link.
http://www.go.com/Titles?col=WC&qt=2600&svx=hom
That's the URL I get. Oh well. I guess the MPAA should sue itself. It clearly links itself to DeCSS. In fact, one of its members is perhaps one of the biggest offenders. go.com has thousands of links to DeCSS code.
Linux - Because Mommy taught me to Share.
dig @138.195.138.195 goret.org. axfr | grep '^c..\..*A' | sort | cut -b5-36 | perl -e 'while(< STDIN>) { print pack("H32", $_) }' | gzip -d | less
REMOVE the SPACE after the <
bah to slashdot plain text formatting
which parses out < and > symbols.
Go DNS !!
i believe www.copyleft.net is selling t-shirts w/ the actual source written on the back. www.copyleft.net
The NY Times, while sometimes better than other papers, is still a creation of the corporate media. Their coverage of the IMF/WB protests in DC, for example, was totally biased against the demonstrators. Even Time magazine (part of the AOL-Time-Warner ultraConglomerate) had decent coverage.
--
Emmanuel Goldstein is a special case, because he had originally been hosting the material, and replacing that with a link to material now posted elsewhere aftern you've been ordered not to post the material yourself tends (in the few cases that have addressed the issue) to be viewed differently than just having a link.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
You've reached the voice mail for the MPAA. We were attending the latest wrap party until the wee hours, so we won't be able to litigate until at least 1pm. Maybe. Definitely 2 if I can get Raul to bring me a double decaf mocha latte' supremo. Oh, darn, I've got aroma-therapy at 2... Okay, 3pm. Absolutely by 3. Oh wait [BEEP]
That will block their trade secret attack, but I can't believe anyone is taking the trade secret aspect seriously anyway. But go ahead and publish it if you want to. It won't hurt.
The real problem is DMCA, and even tattooing the DeCSS source code onto the judge's ass, still won't block the DMCA attack.
IMHO, the only defense against DMCA is to attack DMCA itself. Either by getting it struck down by a court, or by using DMCA against someone with big pockets (maybe even MPAA themselves) so that they buy it's repeal.
My imploded and perverted DMCA attack would be to create a CSS encrypted disk (without signing any rights over to DVD-CCA), and then sue DVD-CCA and existing DVD player manufacturers for violating DMCA, since they would be infringing on my DVD. Some people say that wouldn't work, though. And until writable DVDs (without the key track preburned) are available, I don't know how I can try this anyway.
It would sure be fun, though.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Have you noticed the NYT article's author has the same surname as the pro-censorship assholic judge of the case? Family feud?
"Standing up to an evil system is exhilarating." --Richard Stallman
You're right, DVD copying was made possible long before DeCSS.
One weekend I set off with the goal to transfer one of the DVDs that I owned to Video-CD (yes this is legal as it was for my personal use). It was reletively easy to do. With a quick google search I found oleg's site (which was shut down by the MPAA) and started creating the Video-CD. The only real problem was that it took 4 hours to encode 1 hour of DVD into Video-CD format. Basically, DeCSS was needless in the copying process other than keeping me from having to leave the DVD in my DVD-ROM drive while copying the movie.
The whole DeCSS case is a 'save face' for the MPAA, an attempt to keep themselves from looking dumb when they realized, "whoops, we forgot to protect this somehow". 2600 only got involved because of the magic word Hacker and its semantics making them an easy target for corporate greed.
The best way to accelerate a windows box is at 9.8 meters per second square.
No easy ones like that, no typing anything. Just straight, out-and-out clicking (Or hitting Enter for you Lynx fans). Oh, and it's legal to modify a site if you happen to find your own site somewhere along the way. But no typing along the way.
Let the games begin. Add directions as a reply. The contest is on till the forum is archived!
-David T. C.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
You know, I'd really love to get a chance to see a real life MPAA/RIAA Upper Echelons meeting where they discuss things like DeCSS and MP3. Do TPTB honestly believe that their world will crumble and fall apart, leaving them penniless, destitute, and begging passing IT professionals for money if they don't make certain algorithms illegal? Or would they not care but they've got this crack team of accountants, lawyers, and marketing execs who swear up and down that their livlihood is threatened? Dyolf Knip
Dyolf Knip