Slashdot Mirror
e-Denounce
Knacklappen writes: "A British organization named Federation Against Software Theft (FAST) will according to this article on Monday launch a plug-in for Internet Explorer that will put an 'F' button on a user's browser. Pressing the button, one can easily tipoff FAST about pirated software. The plug-in captures a live example of the site for evidence as well as other basic information about the site. Great idea, but why not mark the button with 'D' for 'denounce'?"
If you are surfing websites looking for warez (pronounced "war-ez" and not "wares" by the true junkies) ... Why the hell would you want to report it to a bunch of copyright police?
The average joe-shmoe will never run into a download for pirated software unless he is looking for it. So this "plugin" is pointless.... right?
x-empt
Ever need an online dictionary?
You would have to be crazy to even think about installing something like this on your system. If its sole intention is to rat on people, wouldn't you think it would monitor just a little bit more than what you volunteered to offer?
What's your damage, Heather?
Someone smart with a broad userbase, like AOL, got paid a large amount of money by the RIAA to release a FastTrack client with a little "F" button to its users, complete with instructions to press it whenever they see a copyrighted song. I think the likelihood of it working (rather than just backfiring and giving all AOL users access to stolen mp3s) is far higher than any of us would like to think...
This is a self-referential sig
Think about it. If a person even is able to find warez that is downloadable (as opposed to fake warez sites that simply advertise porn) then this person is on a mission NOT to stop warez from being available, but rather to download that warez for his/her own purposes. I highly doubt that after this very long pursuit for warez will give the user the need to say "I don't want this incredibly hard to find site to be up anymore! No more warez for me!" I mean, seriously folks
I'm getting this just to claim that every single page on the FAST website is pirated software.
Good point; they don't seem aware of crapflooding.
Also, how secure is the plugin? Why resort to a plugin when you can say "copy'n'paste the url in our webform"? You'd presume people able to install a plugin would be able to copy the offending url, open a new browser window, get www.fast.org.uk from the bookmarks, and paste it there...
This looks just like a publicity stunt to me.
-- No sig today
The true users of this software will be:
A) Self-appointed vigilantes with nothing better to do.
B) Immature little warez kiddies turning in sites that belong to "opposing" warez groups.
As a side note, how many times do you think The Underdogs will be turned in per day?
[PowerPoint] is a tool for capitalist presentation
The really scary part is this: (from the linked article):
The company makes money through corporate and industry membership fees. Companies like the international engineering, construction and services group, Balfour Beatty PLC, and Yorkshire Electricity Group PLC pay yearly fees beginning at $863, depending on the size of the company, to have FAST audit the company to ensure that all of the software the company is using is legal.
Seems like a bit of a conflict to me: sure, pay us to confirm that you don't have illegal software, and we won't tell ourselves.
It's like having to pay protection money, so they won't come and break our kneecaps.
If noone could pirate software, far more people would end up using free software. Think about it.
I would rather more people use free software because it is of higher quality than commerical software. I personally get a bit disturbed when people say, "I didn't want to pay lots of money, so I decided to use this." These are the first people who then bitch about stuff as if they are paying for support.
People who right free software are not just trying to write free - as in beer - stuff for the moochers of the net, they are trying to write quality software.
I don't use Linux because it's free in either sense of the word. I use it because it's better than Windows.
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));
Hey, what if that webcam captures some of the original stuff I put on the Web? Isn't that, in itself, copyright infringement? And does that mean I should click the "F" button while at their website?
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
They'll almost immediately filter out any IP that sends more than one button click every five minutes. It's trivial, really. I don't understand why people think it's so fun to pull the fire alarm.
Question: if you had an 'm' button to announce a mugging, or an 'r' button tell the police abouta rape, would that be OK?
There is a lot written about, is this turning us into an 'informing' society?
Perhaps the right question to ask is, what do we wish to count as illegal?
Is smoking dope illegal?
No. Fine.
What about selling copies of Microsoft Word?
Whatever.
What about copies of 'kiddie porn'?
Most crimes are 'solved' because someone told the authorities about them, not due to some Peter Wimsey-esque effort on behalf of the police.
Ask, what do I believe is the crime?
If you believe it is a crime, perhaps you should tell the powers-that-be.
*r
--- My dad's political betting
For fsck's sake people, software piracy is *bad*!
There are people out there who depend on software sales for a living. If you don't want to pay for software, you can use free as in beer software. Much of free as in beer software is also free as in speech.
I neither want to pay out hard cash, nor do I want to be restricted by legalese. So, I use GPL'd software where I can. Apache webserver, for example. Samba, instead of Windows network server. You know, stuff like that...
However, I also want to play Half-life, and Counterstrike. It took time and money to make these games. Yes, I could get pirate copies off Gnutella, but I want the *actual real copies* bought in a shop. So I have the right to own the proprietary software I use, and I have the right to use the free software I use.
Or an IT manager in a company may want to make sure his employer isn't inadvertently doing something illegal.
Yeah right. An IT manager who is not sure of that should look for another job. And if he doesn't have the balls (or whatever the PC equivalent for female managers is) to do that, chances are s/he won't rat on his/her employer either.
So it is rather safe to read this sentence as "Or a disgruntled IT manager who has an axe to grind with his employer".
We got ratted on a couple of years ago, had to burn several man months to prove our case, and we got a thank you note in the end because we had way too many licenses. No compensation for being fraudulently accused of theft, obviously. It hasn't crossed the minds of the lyncing mob that having, say, 1000 PC's, only 300 of them were licensed to run version X of a certain excuse for an OS, could mean that we would be legal if 700 of them ran an outdated but perfectly paid-up OS. Hmmm, running wasn't the word actually, we had a stockpile of 486's that we couldn't get rid of because they were technical write-offs, but financially on the books.
Bert Driehuis -- All I asked was a friggin' rotatin' chair. Throw me a bone here, people.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I've been using Spamcop for the last year or so, and have been very happy with it. Unfortunately though, although it works great as a spam filter, reporting all my spam has not reduced the quantity of spam I get. It is rather gratifying to get a reply from a sysadmin saying the user has been dealt with, but the spam just keeps coming. The few minutes it takes to report it just doesn't seem worth it anymore. :-(
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;