Slashdot Mirror
Emmanuel Goldstein Profiled
Danny Ra sent us a link to a really interesting story about 2600's Emmanuel Goldstein. It's mostly about him, and his involvement with the recent DeCSS hoopla, and it's definitely worth a read since his case stands to change the face of the Net. The worst case scenario is of course the banning of links.
but as much as i dont like the guy, he needs to be given credit where its due. He has the balls to stand up to the MPAA and fight for the rights of all DeCSS users. Plus he's taken on the SS, the FBI, the court system, etc etc. Part of me thinks of him as a media whore, but yet he still has done alot to contribute to the electronic community and protect us from the bass-ackwards view that the media and society has on 'hackers'.
"sex on tv is bad, you might fall off..."
I lost my concept of community when my community lost all concept of me.
Apart from the fact that it is completely futile to ban links, its probably time for a website to host a links database - just thousands and thousands of URLs, anyone can submit a link,no testing would be done to even ensure it was a link. then instead of saying `get your decss source here` you`d say `check out link #139523 from the links site`. the site would be mirrored, and you could submit the same site multiple times.
Anyone see any problems with this? It could be mirrored easily, would compress reasonably well, and i cant see how it could be the subject of a legal threat. `Your honour, we found the defendant openly passing on a single, 32-bit number!`
Personally, what I would do would be to put 2600 in the hands of someone else, much as Bill Gates did with Microsoft. He can still be as involved with the magazine itself, just not fiscally.
I may be completely wrong about all this since I am not a politician, lawyer, accountant, or some other form of scumbag. :o)
Mas vale cholo, que mal acompañado.
This is the first story I've read about this since the decision. I must say I'm very glad to see it. I was beginning to wonder if the appeal was going to happen or not. I'm also extremely happy that someone like Mr. Corely is willing to actually go to court to back up what he believes in. Would I have the guts to do the same if I were in his position? I don't know. I would hope so, but you just never know until you're actually in the situation.
Side note: Anyone else find it ironic (or maybe just an odd coincidence) that the author of this article's name is just a couple of letters off from that of the friend-to-artists-and-consumers-alike Hillary Rosen?
Free Hans!
Yet he refuses to give up.
Aside from owing 8 million dollars and change for court costs on the side of the MPAA, what else is going to happen to him? I some how doubt that the couch change of a community of hackers is going to do much good - and the EFF certainly doesn't have that kind of money.
I don't know... his situation seems pretty shitty to me - these massive risks, the uphill battle. Should those who feel threatened by the MPAA find a different strategy to beat the nasty licensing (and other various attrocities) that the MPAA are looking to impose?
Whew! For half a second, I thought the article was written by Hillary *Rosen*... then I stopped hearing Twilight Zone music and learned to read.
Is today Monday? anywhere? It sure feels like it.
Eric
basically he is trying to make it possible to copy DVDs.
Wrong. He is trying to make it possible to watch DVD's. Also, in any case, if it were about copying DVD's, it is something we are allowed to do as long as we don't do it to make a profit. The DMCA, which was passed by politicians that are in the pockets of the entertainment industries, are against that, but since we have clashing laws now, it is up to the courts to decide.
obviously it just means that someone (or many) will use the code to remove the encryption and pirate DVDs
Yes. And to continue with your logic I will make the following statement: obviously it just means that someone (or many) will use automobiles to go over the speed limit and run over people. The primary use of cars is not so you can speed and run over people, but to get you from point A to point B. The primary purpose of deCSS is so you can make a software DVD player, such as one for linux. Just because it is potentially possible to use something wrong sometimes does not make it bad.
Also, it seems this guy is just doing it for a laugh, trying to become famous in some high level law case.
Yes...haha...those silly things such as freedom of speech and such...what a laugh. Who needs those silly dangerous things? Next some jerk like Goldstein will come say we should learn to think for ourselves! What a joke!
I'd bet quite a bit of money on him not winning - I'd say he has no chance.
Yeah, there's a big chance of him not winning, since the country is run by a bunch of corporate whores.
Freedom of speech and freedom to do what the hell you want (which is basically what he stands for), is all very well, but the film makers have to have some rights too - i.e. to make money from their efforts, and not be ripped off by crackers trying to make a swift profit out of piracy.
Well, freedom of speech is a RIGHT given by the constitution. There is no right to make a profit, and the intellectual property laws that are currently on the books are a joke. There is no intellectual property to sell, despite what we are told. You either perform a service, or provide a product. The original idea of I.P. was to encourage people to make things to sell, and give them an artificial monopoly for a short amount of time. However, it has become something completely different. Noone has the right to make money, only the right to try.
And, by how you ended it, it is clear that you still know nothing about this court case. It is not about piracy, but about freedom. Not the freedom to do "Whatever the hell you want" but the freedom to do what the law says we can do according to fair use. Some people say that it's about free speech, I don't have a complete opinion about that yet so I won't say anything more about it. However, this definitely is not about piracy, but about consumers rights. In that respect, Goldstein and Nader should be teaming up. :o)
Mas vale cholo, que mal acompañado.
Linking is transitive...that's the whole point of the Web. If it is illegal to link to illegal material, then the page that contains that link is itself illegal material, and any pages that link to it, and any pages that link to those pages, and so on.
If what these people say is to be believed (and since they are under oath, it presumably is), then it could be taken as proof of their complete incompetence, and thus they should be removed from their positions of power and replaced by someone who at least knows what planet they are on. The fact that this doesn't happen just goes to show everone knows their supposedly sworn testimony is complete bullshit.
Just once I'd love to see some really powerful person who thinks they're above the law get nailed for giving Reagan-esque testimony. They answer "I don't know" to some question, and the defense produces a tape of them talking about said subject, proving that they do know. That person goes to jail for perjury, and everyone lives happily ever after!
Free Hans!