Slashdot Mirror
More DeCSS Time-Warner Hypocrisy
Sethb writes "Scripting News has the scoop about CNN linking to the source code for DeCSS. CNN is a subsidiary of Time-Warner, so in effect they're suing 2600 and others for something that they are doing themselves!" Update: 08/26 02:05 AM by michael : CNN has deleted the link from their story after reporters asked about it. But the screenshots are out there.
WTF?
The HYPOCRISY is in that 2600 was doing the same thing. They are a journalistic site, but on the fringe. So it's all right for a news site to post as long as their NOT on the fringe, and owned by the plaintiffs? It's just as sleazy for T-W to force any reporting group to pull an article, whether that group is one they own or not.
If CNN had been the one to "break" DeCSS, and not 2600, there wouldn't have been any court case.. precisely because T-W owns CNN.
I'm pretty sure that there are no specific "freedom of the press laws," just the familiar "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;...". Can anyone supply a reference that says the press have greater protections on their speech than private individuals? Even if there were such protections, I don't believe it should matter. From my point of view, 2600 is as much a news entity as CNN. Besides, the DMCA is explicit about DeCSS being illegal; if it can violate the freedom of speech clause, why not the freedom of the press clause?
/. told CNN to pull the link. More likely, an eager reader wrote CNN a mocking email and pointed out the illegality of the link.
Walt
P.S. I'm not sure that people watching
While minorly ironic, don't plan on this toppling the giant....
I think this is great. It shows that a division of Time/Warner that proposes itself as a news organization can stand up and show the news without getting squashed by the corporate office.
Just because one part of an organization has taken the wrong stance on an issue does not mean that every other part of the organization is necessarily tainted to the point of not being able to report this accurately. It certainly does not mean that everyone working there has to agree with the corporate position is that wasn't totally obvious.
ACK
The point he is trying to make is neither party represents him at all, nor do they represent me in any way shape or form. I'm not represented, not because I don't vote, I'm not represented because "NONE", let me repeat that "NONE" of the candidates even come close agreeing with me on any issue that is important to me. Lets face it, Republicans and the Democrates are virtually the same party, they only disagree on a very narrow list of issues.
So what is the solution? I could vote for a 3rd party or I could vote for myself as a write in, but isn't that just throwing my vote away? Is this better than not voting at all? Is effect is the same ?
Numbersyx
Jesus died for sombodies sins, but not mine.
"Our products just aren't engineered for security,"
-Brian Valentine,VP in charge of MS Windows Development
Try converting the DeCSS source code (generously posted by an anon coward here) into English. Write an article about it. Make it a story. Sure, converting those array's of hex values into some sort of coherent story won't be simple, but if you're creative, it could be cool.
Make it so if I read the story, I could easily write the source file - just don't publish the source verbatim. Wouldn't this be like outlining how to build explosives? or how to prepare meatloaf? lose weight? murder someone?
Crime novels and true crime stories regularily contain ideas on how to go about breaking the law. Where do you think copycat killers get their ideas? Obviously, it's illegal to go kill someone, but it's certainly not illegal to outline how to do it.
Pushing this kind of limit would be a helluva test, I think. If I had some time, I'd convert it to story form, but maybe someone with better writing talent is up to the challenge?
Maybe this will make compelling evidence to show that source code and writing are equivalent =)
Woz
Hi Scott. Don't forget Seagrams was recently bought out by Vivendi, which got its start as a sewage utility company, which now therefore also owns Universal Studios. So it's finally come full circle: hollywood shit is now being produced by a shit-hauling company. It might also make you think twice about cracking that bottle of rum.
(And this is on topic, since it's precisely these sorts of insane corporate interdependencies that produce irrational behavior like what CNN's exhibited.)
That, sir, is a syllogism. Money can be used for good AND for bad. For instance, you can give money to charity, which IMHO is a good thing.
-legolas
i've looked at love from both sides now. from win and lose, and still somehow...
- http://www.warnerbros.com/event.ng/Type=clic k&ProfileID=4434&RunID=16324&AdID=7738&TagValues=
1 99.256.273.3072.3073.3074.3139&FamilyID= 1117&GroupID=463&Redirect=http:%2F%2Fwww.2600.dk%2 Fmirrors%2Fcss%2Ffiles%2FDeCSS.zip
- http://www.mca.com/globalnav/gnf.pl?url=http:%2F%
2 Fwww.2600.dk%2Fmirrors%2 Fcss%2Ffiles%2FDeCSS.zip
- http://disney.go.com/event.ng/Type=click& RunID=11143&ProfileID=2828&AdID=8588&GroupID=481&
F amilyID=1934&TagValues=2635.2638.2641.27 42.3148.3194.3198.3306&Redirect=http:%2F%2Fwww.260 0.dk%2Fmirrors%2Fcss%2Ffiles%2FDeCSS.zip
On an unrelated topic, from my understanding the reverse engineering of CSS was originally deemed illegal because presumably Jon Johansen clicked a button which indicated he complied with a license that said he wouldn't reverse engineer Xing's DVD player. My question is: don't the laws of Norway require you to be legal age (18) to enter into a contract?Nice =)
;)
If I follow suit, would you say I'm being a rebel or bowing to peer pressure?
Woz
Lets face it, Republicans and the Democrates are virtually the same party, they only disagree on a very narrow list of issues.
I always hear this, but I never see it. Republicans and Democrats disagree on most major issues. Watch C-SPAN; they vote along different lines consistently.
--
17 USC 1201, part of the DMCA, says the following:
to ''circumvent a technological measure'' means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner
Circumvention is illegal, no exception for fair use or even for access by those writing the encryption (the phrase "without the authority of the copyright owner" is very strict, it does take into account authority to access a work under the fair use provisions of Title 17 or any other law.)
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
why the slashdot article itself seems to have been pulled from the front page of slashdot?
This is off topic, but who knew cnn was owned by time warner? I would like to see some tree type organizational structure that details how these mega corporations are tied together.
I live in an area with a high student population which tends to be educated and more environmentally conscientious. The gas station down the street is called the freedom station, which just happens to be owned by exxon.
I want to people to be easily able to see that phillip morris owns miller, marlboro, and kraft. Is this information available on the net. If you are going to boycott time warner you need to know what companies to avoid. This information is public record, but it seems that much is done to keep it from being public knowledge.
Are there any web sites that chronicle this type of information? Is there any easy(consumer friendly) way of finding this out?
We have the best government that money can buy.
CNN, like 2600, is a news organization, staffed by journalists. As journalists, they have the natural and logical instinct that source code is Free Speech, and as such, is covered under the First Amendment. I'm sure that whoever posted the link was unaware of the issue at hand. As I type this, the link has already been removed, but the point remains. Surely, CNN will not be sued, molested, or otherwise punished for this, which says to me that what I've believed all along is true: this lawsuit is not as much about DeCSS as it is an attack on the hacker community as a whole. 2600 was picked because of who they are, not because of what they did, and CNN will be left alone for the same reason. What has it come to that we now live in a society that applies laws differently to each person based on someone's perception of the person in general rather than the legitimacy of the charges? This makes me sick. I'm a security professional, and as such, a big part of what I do is security audits of products. What this ruling means to me is that if some large corporate entity decides they don't like me because I discovered a security hole in a product of theirs, they can sue me to death, but if they did the same thing to me, I would have no recourse. Well, I guess I have only one response to this, "http://magic.hurrah.com/~fireball/dvd/". I'm not linking to anything here, I'm just typing a URL, which surely will be illegal tomorrow, along with quoting the phrase "For Dummies", and writing a disassembler, because after all, I could use it to circumvent copy protection...
Basically I dont think it would matter much besides all the bitching and moaning, if CNN would have removed the link to DeCSS or not. Fact of the matter is they are going to bulldoze over basic Constitutional rights and we are going to sit on our asses and cry about it. I think it would be funny if like 1 week before the elections that the canidates real finacial records were some how "hacked" and posted for every one to see. That would be one hell of an election!
Presumably, CNN and Time-Warner are free to link to it as they see fit.
If I couldn't tell my ass from my head, I'd say that 2600 got sued because they didn't believe in copyright law, and Eric's mother dressed him funny (two facts which have about the same relevance to the case, except for the fact that since I can't tell my head from my ass, I can choose ignore the sworn testimony of the defendants to the contrary)... and that CNN/Time-Warner shouldn't be sued because, after all, they're respectable law-abiding organizations that promulgate goodthought.
As others have pointed out, this is a first amendment case - if linking to source code is legally actionable under DMCA, we're all suffering from a chilling effect, because it's reasonable to assume that MPAA is much more likely to sue "one of us" than it is CNN/Time-Warner.
This is also an antitrust case - going offtopic for a moment: since CSS does (as a matter of simple fact) not prevent DVDs from being pirated (the encrypted streams can be copied with suitable equipment), about the only function it serves is to protect a licensing cartel between MPAA and the hardware manufacturers. DeCSS isn't required for DVD piracy. Indeed, the only thing DeCSS does is allow an end user to decrypt and play back the encrypted video stream on hardware not licensed by the aforementioned MPAA/hardware-manufacturer cartel.
I doubt it. More likely, someone flamed them for the hypocrisy (or politely pointed it out :]).
-------
We want some answers and all that we get
Some kind of shit about a terrorist threat
- Ministry
Microsoft sued MSN for linking to Windows piracy sites
A few years back, NBC was criticized for not running a story critical of Microsoft, who owns a chunk of them.
Vote Naked 2000
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Which brings up an interesting point (possibly OT).
/. not legitimate source? What issues might /. have with posting DeCSS references and links?
What defines a legitimate news source on the Net? Readership? Accountability? Gross negligence? =)
Is
The double-standards are irritating.
Oh, DeCSS...
purpose so provocative!
CNN was hacked
anti-digerati auntie-digerati ante-digerati NT-digerati
or are CNN and ZDNet breaking the law because they routinely link to SlashDot? :)
um... not very good reasoning. consider that lot's of types of evidence are falsifiable, yet those types of evidence are still accepted and falsification is still illegal.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/articles/0,3266, 50590,00.html
Ok, Now I did not chase the link and see if the movies were on the site. If I did this I would be breaking the law, correct? I also hope I am not slandering scour.com. If I am I sorry. I also do not mean to imply that scour is primarly in existance for this purpose. It may have denounced the files and rooted them out. I can't even look at the site so how would I know.
The lawyers are chasing me. Help! help!
I will vote when I don't feel that I'm choosing between the lesser of two evils. Let my voter apathy be my vote. None of the above.
Abstaining does nothing except reinforce the system that you seem to hate. The DMCA and similiar laws don't pass because too many people vote. They pass because not enough voters make themselves heard on the issue. Vote for Ralph Nader (or write in John McCain) if you want to vote against corporate influence in politics.
--
Hellow fellow americans. I would like for formally apolagize for being such a "dill-weed" over the course of the DeCSS trial. Unfortunately, i didn't realize that the implications of my ruling would basically fuck everything good about the internet.
For example. Did you know, that because of my ruling, one could practically infer that linking to a site that links to a site containing DeCSS source code is illegal. A)Because that site linked to is now illegal, which makes the linking site illegal - therefore violation the DMCA or something. and B)Because i've got my head shoved so far up my ass that i can see my stomach digesting the bullshit that the MPAA fed me. Of course, this means that a link to a link to a link to a link is now illegal...and since %99.9 of all websites contain "hyperlinks" - they're all illegal because they, invariably, lead somehow to DeCSS source.
on a lighter note: i think i'll just continue to hook my DVD player up to my computer and rip DVD's to mpeg.
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
Why is it this is only wrong if it's hypocritical? I realize we can poke fun at CNN because they're owned by Time-Warner, but if they weren't, would it make it any more right?
icqqm [ICQ:11952102]
Okay, they do disagree on major issues such as where to spend my money. The Republicans want to take my money and give it to the rich and the Democrates want to take my money and give it to the poor. The Republicans want to take my money and feed the bloated military budget, the Democrates want to take my money and feed the bloated social reform budget. The Republicans want to take away my freedom to choose Atheism, the Democrates want to take away my freedom not choose Atheism. The Republicans want to lower taxes and raise the deficeit, the Democrates want to riase taxes and lower the deficeit. The list goes on and on like this, the two parties agree that I should pay taxes, they just can't agree on how to spend it. The agree they should be limiting my freedom, they just can't agree on which freedoms I'm not responsible enough to have. At the end of the day it doesn't matter which party is in power, because I still am not represented, I still get 30% of my income taken away from me, nothing changes and every day I have a few less freedoms than I had the day before. They look an awful lot alike to me.
Numbersyx
Jesus died for sombodies sins, but not mine.
"Our products just aren't engineered for security,"
-Brian Valentine,VP in charge of MS Windows Development
I guess they have to sue themselves now. But of course CNN is covered by the freedom of the press laws becouse they are a "legitimate" news source.
I guess Imperial Corporate Judge Kaplan really ruled that if your company's net worth is $1 billion or more you have freedom of speech.
In 2000 America, is a non-lawyer truly free?
In theire latest court filing, the DVDCCA really rips at Matthew Pavlovich and LIVID. Here's the opening:
Defendant Pavlovich is a leader in the so-called "open source" movement, which is dedicated to the proposition that material, copyrighted or not, should be made available over the Internet for free.
The DeCSS fight is a fight that must be won, and supporting LiVid and getting a polished open source DVD player for Linux is a prerequisite for Linux ever dominating the desktop. Everyone please do what they can to support this fight.
The link the in question seems to have dissappeared. The fourth link is now to Harvard University, not to a DeCSS mirror.
Someone at CNN/Time-Warner must have noticed.
** Sig-a-licious **
http://www.cnn.com/feedback/
.02
My
Quux26
My
Quux26
www.crashspace.net
Do as I say, not as I do.
Vote Naked 2000
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
> Money may not be the root of all that's evil but
*sigh*
Can you at please quote properly:
"The *love* of money is the root of all evil"
Money is an inanimate object. It is neither good nor bad.
-------
We want some answers and all that we get
Some kind of shit about a terrorist threat
- Ministry
The Microsoft trial showed that doctored videotapes are admissible, so why not screenshots?
Unless of course this whole thing's a hoax. But Scripting News doesn't seem to be the type of site that would bother with a hoax like this.
-----
Moderate HerrNewton's post up; this is a good point. I remember Babylon 5 executive producer talking about the levels of infighting between different entertainment arms of Time Warner (TNT vs. Warner Bros. Domestic Television vs. Warner Home Video...). I would not be at all surprised to see folks in the editorial side of CNN who are completely at odds with the supression of DeCSS on First Amendment principles.
Come to think of it, you could draw an anology to Nullsoft's release of the original Gnutella and AOL's aghast reaction.
Looks like they already did [1].. There's a
screenshot showing the link before it was removed [2].
[1] - Well, the link at least
[2] - assuming it wasn't photoshop'd in in the 1st place.
--
A mind is a terrible thing to taste.
"A mind is a terrible thing to taste."
I can't recall an instance of CNN lacking journalistic integrity with regard to its parent company,
/. removing an article or post at Andover's request also mind you. Witness an international news agency roll over like a dog in heat.
Well, seeing as how it took them all of two minutes to remove that link, I think we may have witnessed the first. This is much greater a compromise than say
Fist Prost
"We're talking about a planet of helpdesks."
-Jaron Lanier
I'm affraid I don't agree with that...As unjust as a law may be, disregarding it because one may think it is "unjust" is an invitation to anarchy.
The system is designed such that laws of questionable nature would get weeded out by the courts by various parties litigating for and against it. Examples of flagrantly "unjust" laws would be (rather fitting IMHO) the Sedition act from early in US history (sorry, the exact date escapes me); and perhaps the Prohibition laws; which weren't repealed for many years after they were passed. It took years before all of us Americans could again enjoy alcohol...the repealing of that law did not happen overnight.
Other examples of "unjust" things that took forever to be made "just:" Women's voting rights, Civil rights laws of the 60's, etc. We fought a war over slavery (OK, actually that war was really over who has the right to interpret the Constitution and how, which is exactly where we are now).
The question then becomes, "when is it right to disobey a law?" Martin Luther King was considered a criminal; now he is revered as a hero. Now we're faced with a situation where we must chose what is right; whether this issue is of great enough importance to stand up and declare we don't agree. This of course is already happening...but to simply outright say that any unjust law should be broken is outright madness. If I was alive during Prohibition, and didnt already drink alcohol, then me suddenly beginning consumption simply to protest the law is downright absurd.
I think that some people go just a tad too far with their resistance on issues like this. Unfortunately issues like this are in the horrid grey mess between black and white...everyone has an opinion and its almost impossible to say exactly what is "right" and what is "wrong."
Therefore it is necessary to choose peaceful venues of protesting laws (although I would find it amusing to see a bunch of programmers clash with riot police)...by doing things like supporting those who pay the legal bills. It's certainly not wise to simply jump up and stop traffic on a roadway to protest the whole matter...any resistance must be carefully calculated and planned (I think WWI is a good example of what happens when you jump up and run without thinking)...anything else is just simply not wise.
My 2 cents worth.
-Colin McKinney
Inter arma enim silent leges (In time of war, the law falls silent) -Cicero
[this is going to be a treat]...
Can you give us a few examples?
.02
My
Quux26
My
Quux26
www.crashspace.net
That's the impression I've gotten of the Time-Warner conglomerate from other sources. In particular, when "Babylon 5" was looking for a home at the collapse of PTEN (a Warner Brothers producer of programs for syndication) it seemed obvious to say "Hey, Warner Brothers has their own network. How about that?"
J. Michael Straczynski said at the time that the WB network was a different part of Warner Brothers than the part that had provided a home for Babylon 5, and that the two parts of the company were such bitter rivals that B5's association with PTEN was utter poison, as far as any possiblity of moving it to the WB Network was concerned.
Seems like a stupid way to run a business to me, but they haven't gone bankrupt yet.
I'm just hoping that the link was placed there very deliberately by someone who understood the issue and CNN's link with TimeWarner, and wanted to make a statement and/or help 2600. No threat to CNN - the link is gone hours later, but a fantasic way to protest.
:-)
Whoever you are, working in the depths of CNN, great stuff! And extra kudos to you if my conspiracy theory on your motive comes close to the mark
Perhaps not everyone is a drone.
ZD net , that GREAT impartial tech news site is now supporting decss.
Tooling around on the zd page (I have spair time, i use linux). I found this link. It seems they have the descrable code on their webpage. Wow, those are really some cool,hip guys.
Web bugs can be bigger than 1x1. The website's logo can in theory be a web bug.
The subject contains (OT). If you moderate me as Offtopic, I'll metamoderate you as Redundant.<O
( \
XGNOME vs. KDE: the game!
Will I retire or break 10K?
"This trend toward greater integration of the media into the market system has been accelerated by the loosening of rules limiting media concentration, cross-ownership, and control by non-media companies*. There has also been an abandonment of restrictions -- previously quite feeble anyway -- on radio-TV commercials, entertainment-mayhem programming, and "fairness doctrine" threats, opening the door to the unrestrained commercial use of the airwaves."
- Edward S. Herman & Noam Chomsky
Manufacturing Consent © 1988
* The Reagan administration strengthened the control of existing holders of television-station licenses by increasnig their term from three to five years, and its FCC made renewals essentially automatic. The FCC also greatly facilitated speculation and trading in television properties by a rule change reducing the required holding period before sale of a newly acquired property from three years to one year.
The reagan era FCC and Department of Justice also refused to challenge mergers and takeover bids that would signifaantly increase the concentration of power (GE-RCA) or media concentration (Capital Cities-ABC). Furthermore, beginning April 2, 1985, media owners could own as many as twelve televison stations, as long as their total audience didn't exceed 25 percent of the nation's televison households; and they could also hold twelve AM and twelve FM stations, as in the 1953 "7-7-7 rule" was replaced with a "12-12-12 rule." See Herbert H. Howard, "Group and Cross-Media Ownership of Televion Stations: 1985" (Washington: National Association of Broadcasters 1985).
Do the words MSNBC mean anything to you? (the original poster, not the AC)
.02
My
Quux26
My
Quux26
www.crashspace.net
Even if money is an inanimate object, the purpose for which it was invented is wrong, so I guess we could say that "money is bad".
There is an interesting article at Upside on this whole situation. In my opinion, the most chilling part of this situation is found at the end of the article. LinuxWorld was the original source of the link and Upside has their editor-in-chief saying that they are considering whether or not to remove the link. Personally, I think some letters-to-the-editor at LinuxWorld are in order, since I think this reconsideration will not go over well with LinuxWorld's readership. For those who are curious, LinuxWorld is owned by IDG Communications, which (amazingly?) is not owned by an MPAA member. They do, however, partner with subsidiaries of MPAA members like CNN.
Full disclosure: I'm one of the people that got this ball rolling since I mentioned the link on discuss.userland.com where Dave Winer picked it up for Scripting News.
Man, I compose my own post whilst there are none yet I can see, and after I do, I see this!
In my post I said "people would complain loudly," so perhaps we ought to, for all the good it would do.
A bit off the topic of this thread, but something about CNN I noticed recently that is interesting and which I forgot about until just this second, is a broken link to an article about the break-in that ended up leaking the "Survivor" winner.
From here you can follow a link named Web site flub said to leak 'Survivor' winner that is broken.
I can't even remember finding a broken link at CNN's web site before, so I wonder if Time-Warner/CNN felt some pressure to remove it. hmmm... but I don't know anything really about that break-in, so I'm not sure if it was real or not (if it was, it seems to me to have been repressed pretty well).
But isn't the point that the judge ruled that it is illegal to link to the DeCSS source code? If it's illegal, it's illegal, news or not. CNN shouldn't get a pass if 2600 doesn't.
It's like saying a group of kids making a newsletter can't tell others the address for e.g. a gun wholesaler, but a newspaper can (which a kid could then read...)
-----
D. Fischer
ShoutingMan.com
-
pretty blisteringly fast. So, here's a thought: They're watching everything closely.
Maybe they are not watching everything closely.Maybe they just watching Slashdot closely.
Where else does a lazy journalist keep up to date with the latest IT news?
Oops!
Little problem. Jack, we need more lawyers!
I say fixed, because it is unlikely that the person designing that screenshot realized then onmouseover with IE turns text red, then when you take a screenshot in win32 the mouse will disappear. That is why that screenshot link is red and not underlined.
Also the window footer contains "http://www.zpok.demon.co.uk/decss/" (oops I just linked it) which indeed would happen when the mouse is over.
So I doubt this is a fake, but indeed it was fixed pretty rapidly.
Ever need an online dictionary?
I don't think that the linking is the crime here, it's the linking without permission. Somehow, as ironic as this seems, I don't think that CNN would have problems obtaining permission from itself to post it's own trade secrets.
Duh.
(but then again, why did they delete the link later? Obviously a case of the right hand not knowing who the left hand was jacking off.)
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Maybe they thought that by using CSS to link to DeCSS, the two would cancel each other out, and they could therefore maintain a "neutral" stance?
2600 is just as "valid" as CNN as far as being an organ of the press... both can have really stupid stories, neither ever has really earth-shattering scoops, and nevertheless both have their junkies. In fact, 2600 should have a more tangible claim, since it started out in print, and CNN started out on TV.
---
click a button, feed a hungry person!
Get off my launchpad!
Just convert them into regular integers. Then, incorporate those integers into a story (9 dogs went to eat 7 bowls of dogfood. Then, they played 20 questions, etc...)
The article is still there, but no link from the front page or the technology page. Here's the link.
/* this is where the sig goes */
We're all for it! After all, these pages are cached locally complete with the links.
Ooh, aren't we all naughty.
Judge Kaplan linking to DECSS? You got it here's my original post.
Kaplan braking the law?
This is not the way to build a lasting empire.
I always wanted my own copy of DeCSS. Thank you, so very much.
We should really thank these bozos mightily. The EFF really needs to leap on this and get a motion for a stay filed. I think an appeals court judge or two could readily see the problem. You?
Let Jack Valenti once again that he doesn't know jack and try to spin his way out of this one.
In space, no one can hear you moo.
The system, still better than any I've studied, is ill designed. We allow political parties to nominate the candidates, then have a campaign financing strategy which favors those two candidates. There are more voters who consider themselves independent than belonging to a party, yet in many states they are required to chose which primary they want to vote in, not being allowed to pick and choose the best people for the job.
Also, in the primary season, the candidates are selected before even a majority of the states have had a chance to cast their votes. Sure a majority of the people have spoken, but this majority comes from regions of the country that have interests contrary to mine. Even though I live in Illinois, my passion will always be for my homestate of Montana. Montana votes don't count, ever, because of the lack of population. And too many candidates drop out of the race by the time the Illinois primary rolls around that it isn't even worth my time to go to the polls.
George Washington in his farewell address told us to not to create political parties. Boy, I'm glad we took that advice.
I'm glad they system represents you. The system does not represent me and I refuse to participate in it so it can say "see, look Luminous voted and thus he agrees that this process works so there is no need to change it." By not voting, those people running for congress (state and federal) need to come to me (and have) and ask me what they need to do to earn my vote. I tell them simply that my vote will go to the person who takes a real role in leading fundamental reform in how the system works. That person doesn't need to even be in office, just a member of one of the two major political parties who realizes they are not representing 50% of the country but more like 30%, so pretending they can speak for a vast constituency is pure bs.
This is not the way to build a lasting empire.
Actually, abstaining takes legitimacy away from the system. There is a reason why voter turn out is important in democratic institutions. By not voting, you are saying that you are not going to legitimize a system that isn't representing you.
This is not the way to build a lasting empire.
Agreed. Except that we're not helping corporations get their way. They've had their way for ages now. The reason they do, is that an Average Joe like you or me can no longer hope to defend himself in court without extraordinary funds.
I'd love to see a court system where a cap was placed on attorney fees spent by EITHER side. Of course the lawyers in this country would shit a brick but oh well. At least there'd be some semblance of a fair trial.
Give me a system like that and I'll show all the civil disobedience you want.
Considering how easy it is to fake a screenshot of absolutely anything, I suspect not. (Certainly if anyone ever charged *me* with anything based on a screenshot, I'd just do a little demo for the judge and jury: "How to falsify evidence in ten minutes or less using a sub-$1000 laptop.")
-- Some things are to be believed, though not susceptible to rational proof.
A company isn't a single hive-mind or something. It is perfectly possible when dealing with that many people who don't all have EXACTLY the same goal, for them to do things that are in conflict with one another. If the link isn't removed immediately, though, I can see how the company's lawyers could be called hypocrites.
/*
, 0x36,0x2b,0x6e,0x2e,0x66,0x7b,
, 0xd6,0x0b,0x4e,0x0e,0x46,0x9b,
, 0x52,0x8f,0xca,0x8a,0xc2,0x1f,
, 0xd0,0x01,0x48,0x08,0x40,0x91,
, 0x34,0x25,0x6c,0x2c,0x64,0x75,
, 0xd4,0x05,0x4c,0x0c,0x44,0x95,
, 0x50,0x81,0xc8,0x88,0xc0,0x11,
, 0xd2,0x0f,0x4a,0x0a,0x42,0x9f,
, 0x56,0x8b,0xce,0x8e,0xc6,0x1b,
, 0xb6,0xab,0xee,0xae,0xe6,0xfb,
, 0x32,0x2f,0x6a,0x2a,0x62,0x7f,
, 0xb0,0xa1,0xe8,0xa8,0xe0,0xf1,
, 0x54,0x85,0xcc,0x8c,0xc4,0x15,
, 0xb4,0xa5,0xec,0xac,0xe4,0xf5,
, 0x30,0x21,0x68,0x28,0x60,0x71,
, 0xb2,0xaf,0xea,0xaa,0xe2,0xff
, 0x0b,0x0a,0x0d,0x0c,0x0f,0x0e,
, 0x19,0x18,0x1f,0x1e,0x1d,0x1c,
, 0x2f,0x2e,0x29,0x28,0x2b,0x2a,
, 0x3d,0x3c,0x3b,0x3a,0x39,0x38,
, 0x42,0x43,0x44,0x45,0x46,0x47,
, 0x50,0x51,0x56,0x57,0x54,0x55,
, 0x66,0x67,0x60,0x61,0x62,0x63,
, 0x74,0x75,0x72,0x73,0x70,0x71,
, 0x99,0x98,0x9f,0x9e,0x9d,0x9c,
, 0x8b,0x8a,0x8d,0x8c,0x8f,0x8e,
, 0xbd,0xbc,0xbb,0xba,0xb9,0xb8,
, 0xaf,0xae,0xa9,0xa8,0xab,0xaa,
, 0xd0,0xd1,0xd6,0xd7,0xd4,0xd5,
, 0xc2,0xc3,0xc4,0xc5,0xc6,0xc7,
, 0xf4,0xf5,0xf2,0xf3,0xf0,0xf1,
, 0xe6,0xe7,0xe0,0xe1,0xe2,0xe3
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,
, 0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff
, 0x50,0xd0,0x30,0xb0,0x70,0xf0,
, 0x58,0xd8,0x38,0xb8,0x78,0xf8,
, 0x54,0xd4,0x34,0xb4,0x74,0xf4,
, 0x5c,0xdc,0x3c,0xbc,0x7c,0xfc,
, 0x52,0xd2,0x32,0xb2,0x72,0xf2,
, 0x5a,0xda,0x3a,0xba,0x7a,0xfa,
, 0x56,0xd6,0x36,0xb6,0x76,0xf6,
, 0x5e,0xde,0x3e,0xbe,0x7e,0xfe,
, 0x51,0xd1,0x31,0xb1,0x71,0xf1,
, 0x59,0xd9,0x39,0xb9,0x79,0xf9,
, 0x55,0xd5,0x35,0xb5,0x75,0xf5,
, 0x5d,0xdd,0x3d,0xbd,0x7d,0xfd,
, 0x53,0xd3,0x33,0xb3,0x73,0xf3,
, 0x5b,0xdb,0x3b,0xbb,0x7b,0xfb,
, 0x57,0xd7,0x37,0xb7,0x77,0xf7,
, 0x5f,0xdf,0x3f,0xbf,0x7f,0xff
/*o_lfsr0 = (lfsr0>>7)^(lfsr0>>10)^(lfsr0>>11)^(lfsr0>>19);*/
;
/*o_lfsr0 = (lfsr0>>7)^(lfsr0>>10)^(lfsr0>>11)^(lfsr0>>19);*/
;
* css_descramble.c
*
* Released under the version 2 of the GPL.
*
* Copyright 1999 Derek Fawcus
*
* This file contains functions to descramble CSS encrypted DVD content
*
*/
/*
* Still in progress: Remove the use of the bit_reverse[] table by recoding
* the generation of LFSR1. Finish combining this with
* the css authentication code.
*
*/
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include "css-descramble.h"
typedef unsigned char byte;
/*
*
* some tables used for descrambling sectors and/or decrypting title keys
*
*/
static byte csstab1[256]=
{
0x33,0x73,0x3b,0x26,0x63,0x23,0x6b,0x76,0x3e,0x7e
0xd3,0x93,0xdb,0x06,0x43,0x03,0x4b,0x96,0xde,0x9e
0x57,0x17,0x5f,0x82,0xc7,0x87,0xcf,0x12,0x5a,0x1a
0xd9,0x99,0xd1,0x00,0x49,0x09,0x41,0x90,0xd8,0x98
0x3d,0x7d,0x35,0x24,0x6d,0x2d,0x65,0x74,0x3c,0x7c
0xdd,0x9d,0xd5,0x04,0x4d,0x0d,0x45,0x94,0xdc,0x9c
0x59,0x19,0x51,0x80,0xc9,0x89,0xc1,0x10,0x58,0x18
0xd7,0x97,0xdf,0x02,0x47,0x07,0x4f,0x92,0xda,0x9a
0x53,0x13,0x5b,0x86,0xc3,0x83,0xcb,0x16,0x5e,0x1e
0xb3,0xf3,0xbb,0xa6,0xe3,0xa3,0xeb,0xf6,0xbe,0xfe
0x37,0x77,0x3f,0x22,0x67,0x27,0x6f,0x72,0x3a,0x7a
0xb9,0xf9,0xb1,0xa0,0xe9,0xa9,0xe1,0xf0,0xb8,0xf8
0x5d,0x1d,0x55,0x84,0xcd,0x8d,0xc5,0x14,0x5c,0x1c
0xbd,0xfd,0xb5,0xa4,0xed,0xad,0xe5,0xf4,0xbc,0xfc
0x39,0x79,0x31,0x20,0x69,0x29,0x61,0x70,0x38,0x78
0xb7,0xf7,0xbf,0xa2,0xe7,0xa7,0xef,0xf2,0xba,0xfa
};
static byte lfsr1_bits0[256]=
{
0x00,0x01,0x02,0x03,0x04,0x05,0x06,0x07,0x09,0x08
0x12,0x13,0x10,0x11,0x16,0x17,0x14,0x15,0x1b,0x1a
0x24,0x25,0x26,0x27,0x20,0x21,0x22,0x23,0x2d,0x2c
0x36,0x37,0x34,0x35,0x32,0x33,0x30,0x31,0x3f,0x3e
0x49,0x48,0x4b,0x4a,0x4d,0x4c,0x4f,0x4e,0x40,0x41
0x5b,0x5a,0x59,0x58,0x5f,0x5e,0x5d,0x5c,0x52,0x53
0x6d,0x6c,0x6f,0x6e,0x69,0x68,0x6b,0x6a,0x64,0x65
0x7f,0x7e,0x7d,0x7c,0x7b,0x7a,0x79,0x78,0x76,0x77
0x92,0x93,0x90,0x91,0x96,0x97,0x94,0x95,0x9b,0x9a
0x80,0x81,0x82,0x83,0x84,0x85,0x86,0x87,0x89,0x88
0xb6,0xb7,0xb4,0xb5,0xb2,0xb3,0xb0,0xb1,0xbf,0xbe
0xa4,0xa5,0xa6,0xa7,0xa0,0xa1,0xa2,0xa3,0xad,0xac
0xdb,0xda,0xd9,0xd8,0xdf,0xde,0xdd,0xdc,0xd2,0xd3
0xc9,0xc8,0xcb,0xca,0xcd,0xcc,0xcf,0xce,0xc0,0xc1
0xff,0xfe,0xfd,0xfc,0xfb,0xfa,0xf9,0xf8,0xf6,0xf7
0xed,0xec,0xef,0xee,0xe9,0xe8,0xeb,0xea,0xe4,0xe5
};
static byte lfsr1_bits1[512]=
{
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
};
/* Reverse the order of the bits within a byte.
*/
static byte bit_reverse[256]=
{
0x00,0x80,0x40,0xc0,0x20,0xa0,0x60,0xe0,0x10,0x90
0x08,0x88,0x48,0xc8,0x28,0xa8,0x68,0xe8,0x18,0x98
0x04,0x84,0x44,0xc4,0x24,0xa4,0x64,0xe4,0x14,0x94
0x0c,0x8c,0x4c,0xcc,0x2c,0xac,0x6c,0xec,0x1c,0x9c
0x02,0x82,0x42,0xc2,0x22,0xa2,0x62,0xe2,0x12,0x92
0x0a,0x8a,0x4a,0xca,0x2a,0xaa,0x6a,0xea,0x1a,0x9a
0x06,0x86,0x46,0xc6,0x26,0xa6,0x66,0xe6,0x16,0x96
0x0e,0x8e,0x4e,0xce,0x2e,0xae,0x6e,0xee,0x1e,0x9e
0x01,0x81,0x41,0xc1,0x21,0xa1,0x61,0xe1,0x11,0x91
0x09,0x89,0x49,0xc9,0x29,0xa9,0x69,0xe9,0x19,0x99
0x05,0x85,0x45,0xc5,0x25,0xa5,0x65,0xe5,0x15,0x95
0x0d,0x8d,0x4d,0xcd,0x2d,0xad,0x6d,0xed,0x1d,0x9d
0x03,0x83,0x43,0xc3,0x23,0xa3,0x63,0xe3,0x13,0x93
0x0b,0x8b,0x4b,0xcb,0x2b,0xab,0x6b,0xeb,0x1b,0x9b
0x07,0x87,0x47,0xc7,0x27,0xa7,0x67,0xe7,0x17,0x97
0x0f,0x8f,0x4f,0xcf,0x2f,0xaf,0x6f,0xef,0x1f,0x9f
};
/*
*
* this function is only used internally when decrypting title key
*
*/
static void css_titlekey(byte *key, byte *im, byte invert)
{
unsigned int lfsr1_lo,lfsr1_hi,lfsr0,combined;
byte o_lfsr0, o_lfsr1;
byte k[5];
int i;
lfsr1_lo = im[0] | 0x100;
lfsr1_hi = im[1];
lfsr0 = ((im[4] << 17) | (im[3] << 9) | (im[2] << 1)) + 8 - (im[2]&7);
lfsr0 = (bit_reverse[lfsr0&0xff]<<24) | (bit_reverse[(lfsr0>>8)&0xff] << 16)
| (bit_reverse[(lfsr0>>16)&0xff]<<8) | bit_reverse[(lfsr0>>24)&0xff];
combined = 0;
for (i = 0; i < 5; ++i) {
o_lfsr1 = lfsr1_bits0[lfsr1_hi] ^ lfsr1_bits1[lfsr1_lo];
lfsr1_hi = lfsr1_lo>>1;
lfsr1_lo = ((lfsr1_lo&1)<<8) ^ o_lfsr1;
o_lfsr1 = bit_reverse[o_lfsr1];
o_lfsr0 = (((((((lfsr0>>8)^lfsr0)>>1)^lfsr0)>>3)^lfsr0)>>7)
lfsr0 = (lfsr0>>8)|(o_lfsr0<<24);
combined += (o_lfsr0 ^ invert) + o_lfsr1;
k[i] = combined & 0xff;
combined >>= 8;
}
key[4]=k[4]^csstab1[key[4]]^key[3];
key[3]=k[3]^csstab1[key[3]]^key[2];
key[2]=k[2]^csstab1[key[2]]^key[1];
key[1]=k[1]^csstab1[key[1]]^key[0];
key[0]=k[0]^csstab1[key[0]]^key[4];
key[4]=k[4]^csstab1[key[4]]^key[3];
key[3]=k[3]^csstab1[key[3]]^key[2];
key[2]=k[2]^csstab1[key[2]]^key[1];
key[1]=k[1]^csstab1[key[1]]^key[0];
key[0]=k[0]^csstab1[key[0]];
}
/*
*
* this function decrypts a title key with the specified disk key
*
* tkey: the unobfuscated title key (XORed with BusKey)
* dkey: the unobfuscated disk key (XORed with BusKey)
* 2048 bytes in length (though only 5 bytes are needed, see below)
* pkey: array of pointers to player keys and disk key offsets
*
*
* use the result returned in tkey with css_descramble
*
*/
int css_decrypttitlekey(byte *tkey, byte *dkey, struct playkey **pkey)
{
byte test[5], pretkey[5];
int i = 0;
for (; *pkey; ++pkey, ++i) {
memcpy(pretkey, dkey + (*pkey)->offset, 5);
css_titlekey(pretkey, (*pkey)->key, 0);
memcpy(test, dkey, 5);
css_titlekey(test, pretkey, 0);
if (memcmp(test, pretkey, 5) == 0) {
fprintf(stderr, "Using Key %d\n", i+1);
break;
}
}
if (!*pkey) {
fprintf(stderr, "Shit - Need Key %d\n", i+1);
return 0;
}
css_titlekey(tkey, pretkey, 0xff);
return 1;
}
/*
*
* this function does the actual descrambling
*
* sec: encrypted sector (2048 bytes)
* key: decrypted title key obtained from css_decrypttitlekey
*
*/
void css_descramble(byte *sec,byte *key)
{
unsigned int lfsr1_lo,lfsr1_hi,lfsr0,combined;
unsigned char o_lfsr0, o_lfsr1;
unsigned char *end = sec + 0x800;
#define SALTED(i) (key[i] ^ sec[0x54 + (i)])
lfsr1_lo = SALTED(0) | 0x100;
lfsr1_hi = SALTED(1);
lfsr0 = ((SALTED(4) << 17) | (SALTED(3) << 9) | (SALTED(2) << 1)) + 8 - (SALTED(2)&7);
lfsr0 = (bit_reverse[lfsr0&0xff]<<24) | (bit_reverse[(lfsr0>>8)&0xff] << 16)
| (bit_reverse[(lfsr0>>16)&0xff]<<8) | bit_reverse[(lfsr0>>24)&0xff];
sec+=0x80;
combined = 0;
while (sec != end) {
o_lfsr1 = lfsr1_bits0[lfsr1_hi] ^ lfsr1_bits1[lfsr1_lo];
lfsr1_hi = lfsr1_lo>>1;
lfsr1_lo = ((lfsr1_lo&1)<<8) ^ o_lfsr1;
o_lfsr1 = bit_reverse[o_lfsr1];
o_lfsr0 = (((((((lfsr0>>8)^lfsr0)>>1)^lfsr0)>>3)^lfsr0)>>7)
lfsr0 = (lfsr0>>8)|(o_lfsr0<<24);
combined += o_lfsr0 + (byte)~o_lfsr1;
*sec++ = csstab1[*sec] ^ (combined&0xff);
combined >>= 8;
}
}
An MPAA Monologue. Starring TWAOL.
Boy, that splinter in your eye looks stupid. Why don't you pull that splinter from your eye? If you leave that splinter in, it's going to fester. What were you, born in a barn? Take that splinter out! If I have to tell you again to take that splinter out, there's going to be trouble. All right, you asked for it. Sic 'em, Lewis.
In best Marty Feldman voice: What log?
I see no diff. they're bigger and more well known but news is news. if they can link to it, I should be able to.
--
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
The story, and the links themselves, was written by someone from IDG, and was simply reposted on CNN.com. They also have some litle disclaimer: "External sites are not endorsed by CNN Interactive", blah, blah, blah. That famous Time-Warner media synergy finally kicked in and link appears to be gone now. This was probably just the doing of some retarded news script that doesn't understand the hypocrisy it just commited on behalf of its owners.
Ah, but I seem to remember the injunction only applying to anyone in concert with 2600.
Now, let us proceed to debate whether or not CNN, as a "subsidiary" of the plaintiff, is thusly acting in concert with CNN.....
Because, if they did display some pornographic content (especially child porn) it would be considered illegal.
This doesn't make much sense...
I-wish-I-were-a-news-agency,
- MayorQ
That's an interesting point, considering the link has now been removed from CNN's site.
:)
Was the report and image a fabrication?
Is CNN hypocritical?
Did they just decide that link wasn't really part of the "whole story"?
Or were they *really* short on hard-drive space?
-----
D. Fischer
ShoutingMan.com
The reason CNN is allowed to link to it is because they are not trying to distribute it.
Why this should be legal when it is identical behaviour to something which is illegal is another matter, which suggests that the ruling was stupid. Now, there's a new viewpoint.
Nah, it's too late by then. They're the media -- they know what you're thinking...
... I wonder what my big national concern will be as the election draws nearer ...
Of course they know what you're thinking. They induced you to think it. They probably had it in their business plan months ago.
So, in linking to a page of DeCSS mirrors, CNN was not violating the judge's order. (It may have been violating the wishes of its parent company through its MPAA suit.)
While the judge's ruling is a dangerous precedent, it's not necessarily as bad as it looks. You can still link to pages that might contain DeCSS - just not directly to the file.
--
C'mon, baby, kiss The King.
Such as?
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
If we all take 5 minutes to put the files on our sites and rip off the basic HTML to serve it, it could spread indefinitely.
Nothing gets done when we just don't like something and bitch about it. The lemmings keep marching forward until the point is moot and you have to decide to turn hermit or tell yourself you won't let it happen next time, then get back in the pack. You walk in line long enough and eventually you come to the conclusion that it's futile to complain and just look the other way when tanks are rolling over those who didn't take the hint.
If you disagree then it must be overrated, redundant or trolling.
Don't call it "hypocrisy" just yet. There is a long tradition in "legitimate" journalism of a wall of separation between the editorial (content) and business (financial) sides of news organizations.
The hypocracy would be on Time Warner's part, not CNN's. Of course, removing the link does cast a negative light on CNN since it didn't even require a court order.
Dr David Touretzky of Carnegie Mellon University, who testified on the 2600 case and was commended by the Court for his "lucid explication" and "candour", has a Gallery of CSS Descramblers, including an English prose version.
His site's a real treasure trove. Great for truffling up odd facts. Like this gem buried in the DMCA:Incidentally, reading Touretzky's wonderfully eloquent and stirring defence of what effectively amounts to civil disobedience, a sudden irony bludgeoned me unconscious like a baby seal: one day this somewhat clichéd story of the little guy taking on the faceless dehumanising monolith and prevailing through resourcefulness and passion will be made into a Hollywood Movie starring Robin Williams as Touretzky, that kid from Jerry Maguire as Jon Johansen, and Alanis Morisette as The American Constitution.
The tagline on the DVD (just above the Oscar garlands)? 'Information Wants to Be Free.'
One of my favorite quotes is this:
"One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws." -- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Many people seem to forget that laws aren't absolute, the fact of jury nullifcation illustrates this well..
"Drug related crime" is a misnomer, "prohibition related crime" is the more accurate and correct phrase.
I can support the right to play legally aquired media (legit CDs, MP3s made of those CDs by that citizen, DVDs, etc) on anything a citizen owns in their own home.
But there is no right to share over the internet someone else's copyrighted works like songs and moview. One can share DVDs by sharing the physical medium, but the borrower may not legally make a copy of it and keep it.
Even the founding fathers saw fit to make a copyright system. Yes, it is extended too far, but there is no need to abolish it totally.
I realize that some of the founding fathers also supported wrong things such as slavery, etc, but that was unjust and there was clear disagreement within the group, but I don't see any disagreement concerning copyrights and intellectual property.
By all laws I can tell, DeCSS is legal but sharing movies and music you don't own the copyright to is not.
That's funny! (see sig)
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
For stories syndicated from IDG publications, the 'related sites' are typically added by the IDG member editors, and added to or edited by IDG.net editors.
Only then is it passed on to CNN.com, where it's processed and published. There's an editing process there, too, but apparently the link got overlooked. Sorry, no conspiracy afoot here. As with most "Media Conspiracies," it's just your basic "oops."
There is a journalism-wide lack of scope regarding the DeCSS issue. Part of it is a genuine lack of understanding on the part of reporters, and part of it is the Eternal Problem of Technology Reporting -- making it understandable to the masses, while still not wrong. The byproduct of that is that it's typically not exactly what the Slashdot-types want to see. But then again, that's why the speciality media exists.
And just so y'all don't think I'm just making all this up, I'm the former Technology Editor at CNN.com. A scant few months ago, it would have been my ass in the fire for what happened today. Timing's everything, I guess.
I doubt the courts, or Congress, will adequately address this issue of linking. After all, sites think they're doing pretty well as long as they run the disclaimer next to internal links -- for those not savvy enough to note that they've left the publication's site. But now, even that's not enough.
Might as well make the shameless plug of a lurker... feel free to e-mail me with story tips. Now I'm the Washington tech writer for The Associated Press.
- Ian.
News organizations, first of all, never report with impartiality. Sometimes they try, but most often they don't even make an effort to be impartial--reporters are people, and people are inherently biased and inclined to express those biases, even if only subconsciously.
The problem I see is that news organizations these days try to *appear* impartial to the public, while in reality infusing their stories with either a liberal or conservative bias depending on the people running the show. Thus, the public thinks what they're hearing is impartial "fact" when the reality is that they're hearing subtle political propaganda.
In the old days, newspapers came right out and proudly proclaimed their political beliefs. Think of the rampant jingoism of a Hurst (Hearst? sorry, my mind is asleep and I'm too lazy to go to Google to check) news organization. That was honesty about being biased. But now news organizations just lie about their biases, and that's dangerous: it indoctrinates the citizenry to have the same bias, through subtle manipulation of facts, instead of teaching them to form their own opinion.
If you want an example, just look at the huge mistake CNN made when they ran the story two years ago about American forces using CS gas against civilians during the Vietnam War. It was a lie based on the ramblings of an unstable person with a bad memory, who when questioned by others couldn't even remember who some of his commanding officers were. There was no corroborating evidence at all, but they ran the story as if it were gospel truth. No one thought of pulling the plug, because everyone there had an inherent bias. Journalism is just a dangerous illusion--no one in the profession is impartial.
Aside from which, if it were illegal to link to DeCSS code or binaries, CNN would be committing a crime by doing so just as if a private citizen were to do the same. I dare say that's doubtless why the link has been removed. A news person cannot break the law to get a story or in reporting a story. For example, a journalist who freelanced and did contract pieces for NPR and other organizations was arrested for child pornography when he was investigating it for a piece, because he retransmitted an image which he'd downloaded in a chat room (he got the image from a Fed shill, BTW--doesn't our government have better things to do than distribute child pornography? Entrapment, anyone?)...
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."--Tacitus, *The Annals*
Yep, Ixnert, you are right. My post was a knee-jerk without considering all the facts, especially the fact that even linking to it was ruled by a "judge" (heh) to be illegal. How on earth did I forget that?
Anyway, thanks.
The really sleazy thing would be for Time Warner to force an impartial news service like CNN to pull the article!
And hardly a new idea. There are a number of laws on the books governing who can own media and how much, this to prevent undue influence and partiality upon news. But, hell, if I really want to know what's going on in the world, I just read the foreign press. It's not all filtered through the State Dept. or the uberdummies in the media.
Vote Naked 2000
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
The writer may have thought that since they are not a direct plaintiff there was no need to disclose. But IMO, that should have been in the first paragraph.
-------
We want some answers and all that we get
Some kind of shit about a terrorist threat
- Ministry
Because I wrote the text for this link, I own 100% of the rights to it and you cannot click it. I will file in court against you as soon as you click this link, so don't click it.
Ever need an online dictionary?
You just showed that those non-obvious points are known by people. Thus, the image creator could have know that too, and added all the right details to perfect the deception.
A good hoax must be well done. Otherwise, what's the point?
This of course raises bigger questions, like, "Can we trust images as evidence?" or, "How do you collect evidence in a digital investigation?" It's illegal to destroy incriminating evidence. But if there is no evidence of that evidence ever existing, how can it be shown that it was deleted?
Finally, in a more philosophical bent, "What is the sound of one hacker hacking?"
-----
D. Fischer
ShoutingMan.com
clickity click ... slurp ... click click clickity click ... muahahaha
Apparently there was an image directory on the survivor stats page that had each character's picture with a red line through it, except for one (Gervase). As the contestants left the island they replaced the normal picture with the red line one. That was actually pretty funny considering how many people I know who lost money playing that (mis)info.
Fist Prost
"We're talking about a planet of helpdesks."
-Jaron Lanier
I've been waiting for some insightful commentary on this, but I think everyone is laughing too hard.
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
We all know news services have to have freedom to report impartially, so while this is a funny anecdote I don't see it by any means as a sign of hypocrisy. CNN must be able to report news regardless of Time-Warner's allegiances just like Slashdot needs to have the freedom to report things that even Andover.net doesn't like.
The really sleazy thing would be for Time Warner to force an impartial news service like CNN to pull the article!
Founder's Camp
Founder's Camp
News for non-Nerds. Stuff that matters.
cnn hires geeks too...
eudas
Blessed is he who expects the worst, for he shall not be disappointed.
I can't recall an instance of CNN lacking journalistic integrity with regard to its parent company, personally. If others have references, please point them out.
Cool sig. Who's P.J.O.?
...or any site on the web can be made to be violators: very long link (btw, its considered bad form not to parse out html in user entered fields :)
Maybe they will sue LookSmart now?
Wow, they're quick. 2 comments here on Slashdot.org, and the CNN story that was supposedly carrying the link has been changed. That's pretty blisteringly fast. So, here's a thought: They're watching everything closely. Remember that. If you have a thought, maybe a plan, that could *really* work, maybe you should contact the proper authorities(maybe the EFF or something) privately.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
While I am not arguing the legality fo the DeCSS code. The point of free speech isn't totally free of argument. No one would argue that distributing copies of some copyrighted novel by someone other than the owner of the copyright would be legal or just. Of course the problem is that DeCSS was not written by the people suing using it's copyright. The copyright holder of DeCSS is the one who owns the rights. The question is who owns DeCSS.
Mad Software: Rantings on Developing So
Damit, I'm so sick of all this decss crap. Everyone on /. knows how full of it the MPAA people are, and how right 2600 is. But all I ever see here is /. people telling other /. people about new developments that support pre-existing ideas. It doesn't matter what we say if we're just preaching to the choir, and I haven't seen any impact at all against the mpaa with all the "public awareness" we've supposed to have been raising for the past 9 months. We gotta quit just telling each other about it and start making a geater impact on other people's opinions. AARRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!! Stupid Pescimism!
So quick with fear you tiny fools!
On the other hand, this is more than likely the questionable judgement of some mid-level HTML coder working deep within the Time-Warner machine. As the link seems to be gone, I think its safe to deduce that someone at CNN reads Slashdot! :)
Last night I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas I'll never know.
The quotes author is P. J. O'Rourke.
"Drug related crime" is a misnomer, "prohibition related crime" is the more accurate and correct phrase.
Sure, CNN links to DeCSS. But, this is the WEB, folks, which (arguably) has more links than content. So, what if CNN linked to Slashdot? Slashdot has links to DeCSS. I'm sure that CNN links to other sites which link to DeCSS (and maybe through several levels of indirection).
...
By the transitive law of equality (does that apply on the net?), CNN has links to probably a dozen copies of DeCSS.
And every actor, living or dead, has a Kevin Bacon Number. But, I digress
If link-crime is taken to hysterical limits, then you couldn't link ANYWHERE, for fear of inadvertently creating a link chain to something nasty or (de jure) illegal.
> the purpose for which it was invented is wrong, so I guess we could say that "money is bad".
Oh really?
You work for 8 hours, and you get little pieces of paper in exchange. So are you saying "you're time" is bad? (You own your time, and you exchange it for money, hence the contract of a "job)
Because *that* is what money is: It is a compression of time that has a value.
Has a really great article on the AOL-Time-Warner merger that specifically discusses Time-Warner's coporate culture of basically ongoing civil warfare between the departments. The crux of the issue is that it's gotten so damned big relatively quickly---even without the added factor of AOL---that its internal sectors might as well be separate companies. Lots of power struggles and penis measuring contests, apparently.
Good read. Not online yet, as Wired doesn't post current magazine content, but for posterity, http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.09/ Definitely pick it up off the newstand for a bit of insight into intracorporate warfare.
----
----
Am I the only one who thinks Microsoft is a misnomer? Perhaps Macrosoft would be a better fit?
The lesser of two evils? Do you somehow buy the argument that you must vote either Republican or Democrat? Why not Libertarian? Or Green? Or for the UFO party, or for any of the hundreds of presidential candidates that don't get free publicity on the major media news?
You don't have a choice of two evils, you have probably a dozen or so evils and hundreds of goods. Vote third party if you're not happy with either of the two majors. As Bill Hicks put it, most people in America see politics as two puppets on a stage 'I like the puppet on the left.' 'Well I think the puppet on the right is more to my liking.' 'Hey, did anybody notice it was the same guy holding both puppets?'
Now can we get back to the story?
I'm a citizen, not a consumer, thank you.
--
Abstaining does nothing except reinforce the system that you seem to hate. The DMCA and similiar laws don't pass because too many people vote. They pass because not enough voters make themselves heard on the issue. Vote for Ralph Nader (or write in John McCain) if you want to vote against corporate influence in politics.
Voting does nothing except give legitimacy to a system that no longer works, and whose replacement is long overdue (I`m talking about that sacred cow Democracy here). The DMCA and similar laws don`t pass because too few people cast their opinion in the popularity contests. They pass because politicians` roll is too general - no politician has time to become an expert on all issues, thus "experts" (lobbyists) get to write laws to present to legislatures as an expert`s solution to the problem at hand. Don`t vote if you want to vote against corporate influence in politics. Support an alternative form of "government", such as Demarchy, a system where a group of citizens are chosen at random to examine an issue and come to an ideal solution.
oh shit, just killed slashdot's sacred cow.. where's the flamesuit when you need it?
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com
How big does a newspaper have to be to be legitimate? Just because 2600 isn't funded by some multibillion dollar conglomerate doesn't make it an illegitimate news source. The press is the fourth arm of the government. We should all read more independant news magazines. Then maybe we may have a clue.
Geeknik.net has a link to the source code posted here. And I guess now Slashdot has a link to the code as well and could be sued. Oh fscking well. Life goes on. :)
----( the real bob hax0r )----
If you haven't figured it out - I work for the Turner Broadcasting System. I don't know what the heck is going on in every part of the company - if I tried to actually keep up on it, I'd never do any work, I'd just be studying the company.
Now, add on top of that Time Warner, which is even a bigger company, with all sorts of entertainment and news media divisions. That's right - one hand doesn't know what the other is doing, it would be next to impossible to even try.
It is not hypocritical for CNN to report the news, regardless of what it is, and they have enough integrity (no, I don't work for CNN) to mention, in each and every article where something like this is concerned, when Time Warner is mentioned, that Time Warner is the parent company to CNN. Time Warner, at least right now, does NOT control what gets shown on CNN (or displayed on the website).
If the link is gone now, the only difference is that instead of a cease and desist letter, the legal department contacted CNN directly and told them to remove it because of legal issues, not because someone didn't like it. Believe me, CNN has shown both AOL and Time Warner in negative light on more than one occasion. Nobody gets fired or threatened for telling it like it is.
----------
Stupid sexy Flanders.
I guess it's too late for my idea, but I was going to suggest that everyone link to the cnn page that had the decss link instead of linking to DeCSS itself. Too bad too, because what would they do then? I guess they could make all linking illegal, but that defeats the whole purpose of the internet!
Here goes the whole Napster debate again, we are trying to put blame on the person linking to the data rather than the person who is posting the data. When will they learn?
S.E.S.S.D.E.N.E.E.NW from west end of hall of mists
Troll?! I thought it was a rather clever since the post was linking to something that hadn't been posted yet... What crack are the moderators on this week? And where can I get some? ;)
Microsoft doesn't own any part of GE (who owns NBC). MS and NBC have a joint venture called MSNBC, but that is not the same thing as MS having ownership in NBC.
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
What's even scarier than CNN linking to this (presumably under journalistic freedom) is that Time-Warner-AOL got them to remove the link!
The nick is a joke! Really!
GPL Deconstructed
But can't we work Kevin Bacon into the picture somewhere? It's the fundamental problem with the anti-linking bullshit: there are few parts of the web that you can't get to from another arbitrary starting point.
...but they still look like idiots. The story has a screenshot of the link, plain as day, with the URL intact.
On a side note, can screenshots be presented as legal evidence?
Mike
"I would kill everyone in this room for a drop of sweet beer."
Yeah, why is it that small news sites are always illegitimate, while the big ones are supposedly so big that corporate interests wouldn't make a dent in their reputation? Is it that small news agency's are perceived as easy to bully becauase of their diminuative size? Or just becausae people don't really use their brains all that often, and forget to breathe on a consistent basis?
lf.o
1) The LOVE of money is the root of all evil, not money itself. Moreover money is not the root of all power in the US - the arguments to this are too many to even be considered a logical statement. Those with money have power, but it doesn't mean money or power are inherantly evil.
2)The average citizen wasn't swayed by adds or add campaigns, the average citizen just didn't give a rats ass. The number of citizens that even bothered to offer an opinion one way or the other before it passed didn't even register as a fraction of a percent. That's apathy, not ignorance (although the two are not mutually exclusive).
3)Your stance on voting is the way we got into this in the first place. Nice job.
Ctimes2
My cube. My friend. My solace. My prison.
http://www.goingware.com/decss
When a law is unjust, it is just to disobey the law. Also, court judgements can only be made based on actual cases; the U.S. court system does not render "advisory opinions", so if you believe that your rights have been violated by Judge Kaplan's decision, it is your duty to mirror DeCSS too.
-- Could you use my software consulting serv
I guess we all know now that CNN reads Slashdot. Article goes up, couple posts later, CNN alters their page. So much for journalistic integrity. Then again, journalistic integrity is something CNN hasn't been blamed of having since it turned the Gulf War into a big video game.
Burn Hollywood Burn
Yes, I work for Turner Broadcasting System, but no, I do not work for CNN, nor do I know anyone who does. It's a big company. We have felt very little (and only good things) of the Time Warner presence. I'm on your side: I think DeCSS should be allowed to exist, and I think people should be allowed to link to whatever the hell they want to, as long as it's clear what they're linking to. I won't be fired for saying that. People at CNN are free to report the news as they see proper.
----------
Stupid sexy Flanders.
As long as politicians and judges can be swayed by money, laws will always be biased. Money may not be the root of all that's evil but it is the root of all power in the US.
When the average citizen can be swayed quite easily by high cost political adds and corporations provide the money to fuel those advertising campaigns, we get laws like the DMCA.
I will vote when I don't feel that I'm choosing between the lesser of two evils. Let my voter apathy be my vote. None of the above.
Environmentalists are their own worst enemy. ~tricklenews.com
scratch that...should be in concert with 2600.com.
This brings up an interesting question. Correct me if I'm wrong (I have not degree in law) but by giving their own news company (CNN) 'exclusive' rights to report on a particular subject matter (DeCSS), isn't Time Warner participating in unfair business practices (legally)?
This is the one disadvantage of electronic news, is that it can be changed 'after the fact', and it's almost impossible to prove which was the origional one.
If this was a paper newspaper, they couldn't retroactively alter the past in this way, but because this is electronic, they can.
I don't like this ability.to change the past, it is WAY too much like 1984.
Thanks for the quote. I added it to the page and added a few words of my own on why I think this is important:
-- Could you use my software consulting serv
CNN's pretty good about alerting its viewers to Time-Warner's ownership of them when they run a story on Time-Warner. I especially got a chuckle a few months back when CNN reported about Ted Turner's separation from Jane Fonda -- as if it would be news-worthy if Ted didn't own the network.
Don't call it "hypocrisy" just yet. There is a long tradition in "legitimate" journalism of a wall of separation between the editorial (content) and business (financial) sides of news organizations. This wall is admittedly getting some chunks knocked out of it in today's corporate-driven media, but there are many journalists who will be damned if they'll let the suits spike their story.
I wouldn't be surprised if some folks in the news division at CNN.com, or IDG, or LinuxWorld -- whoever's responsible -- included the link on the same basis as they would any other external link. Maybe they even thought that highlighting this worldwide list was important in driving a point home. They made their journalistic point. Then the lawyers for the Suits noticed; rather than have that inconsistency noted for all and sundry to see (too late -- thanks, Scripting News), and to keep themselves from violating the law as interpreted by Kaplan, the suits pulled the plug.
Microsoft sued MSN for linking to Windows piracy sites
Geeky.org