Dolby Tells NetBSD Project: Don't Decode AC3

Mycroft writes: "There's a new entrant into the open source DVD legal battle: Dolby Laboratories. The NetBSD Project received this letter demanding that links to the open source ac3dec package be removed. What's next?" Probably what's next are yet more letters sent to every other project which enables decoding of content on platforms unsupported by the format licensors. Remember, you don't buy anything anymore -- you license it.

Comments

Jesus.

[kypper]

Remember, you don't buy anything anymore -- you license it.

In other news, the populace of the world collectively threw up their hands as Corporations began the patenting and licensing of water to the human race.

Russia commented this afternoon, stating that they didnt' give a flying fuck.

Hong Kong stated that they had been pirating that for years, and would continue to whether we liked it or not.

China closed all relations, stating that, "We may be brutal, but you guys are just plain insane."

Canada dropped all pretense and joined the US.

...before any canuks nail me, I am Canadian. :op But we're getting there.

Two Words

[jgerman]

Bite me... Just kidding, the two words are "Easy Fix". According to the DMCA which they are using to try and stop the distribution of the decoder, we can encode it so and only give permision to decode it to people who rescind all claims at lawsuits resulting from the viewing of the code. After the Dmitry fiasco we don't even have to encode it in anything strong. One misspelling should do. They're not allowed to decode it to see that we are doing anything illegal, and any evidence gained will be illegal and inadmissable in court.

The preceding paragraph was a tongue at cheek poke at the DMCA and attempt to render it as anything but is illegal according to the DMCA. Furthermore to take away any meaning from the paragraph that is not desired by the writer is expressly forbidden by the DMCA.

Furthermore the reading of the above disclaimer constitutes agreement to all rules outlined herein (and any I should make up in the future).

The preceding paragraph is legally binding according to the UCITA bill. Passed in Maryland where this post was written.

We interrupt this post to tell you that those responsible for the UCITA and the DMCA have been sacked.

Terribly sorry, this post is being interrupted again to tell you that we cannot according to the DMCA decode the english that the DMCA and UCITA bills are written in, in order to introduce them as evidence for rightful termination. Those who were to sack the resposible parties have been sacked.

Re:Two Words

[MyopicProwls]

That's a supreme idea. Take it the final step forward and write it up: submit to Slashdot the "Whitepaper on the 'PLAINTEXT' Encryption Scheme". Hell, I know all MY code is encoded using the PLAINTEXT Encryption Scheme, and yours probably is, too.

At the very least, it would be a great way to get a funny letter back from one of these big companies. Imagine them sending you a letter that said

"Stop distributing Code X. Under the DMCA, it is a circumvention device for our Product Y."

Send them back a letter saying

"Code X is distributed exclusively under the PLAINTEXT Encryption Scheme, which is covered under Title Z of the DMCA. Please explain how you determined our noncompliance with your intellectual property without breaking the PLAINTEXT Encryption Scheme (and thus violating the DMCA) and then we can talk."

What would you get back? They'd pretty much have to respond with "Fuck you". And you would respond back with "No, fuck YOU." In the end their lawyers would outlaw you, but the letters would be precious.

This sounds familiar...

[Silver222]

From the bottom of the first page:
Licenses are modeled on an adaptive basis relative to your business plan

Kinda like Vinny the local loanshark adapts your payment plan based on which body parts he's cracked with a Louisville Slugger in the last week.