Slashdot Mirror
BusinessWeek on Open Source and Copy Protection
prostoalex writes "An article starting with the words "Forget about Bill Gates, folks. The biggest enemy of free software may be Senator Ernest F. Hollings" historically had a little chance of being published in a recognized business publication. In this case, though, Business Week (no registration) runs a detailed but straightforward explanation of how the new copyright bills could threaten free software and open source movements."
Fuck Subscription!
J U N K B U S T E R
Just say NO to annoying StinkGeek banners and in-line 200x200 pixel "Do Y
OU have reliable [foo]...? Then you NEED SourceForge(TM) Enterpris
e 2002...! Order today."-esque ads.
CmdrTaco, Homos, Gayme, CowboiKneel, et. al...:GET REAL FUCKING JOBS!
Thank you.
sp sp sp. tp tp tp. fp fp fp. unf.
You will die alone.
the POSTUS with the MOSTUS. w0rd.
http://goatse.cx/
CmrdTaco is a homo
as such, Kathy Fent is a bull-dyke
kernel hackers == hydrophilliacs
pr0pz to my niggas in #newbies
Bill Gates
Senator Ernest F. Hollings
Business Week
They're all cocks, I ain't listening to that bs.
Open-source software could find itself locked out of a whole industry if the entertainment giants get their way on copyright protection
Forget about Bill Gates, folks. The biggest enemy of free software may be Senator Ernest F. Hollings. Legislation introduced in March, 2002, by the South Carolina Democrat to require that copyright-protection software be embedded in PCs, handheld computers, CD players -- and anything else that can play, record, or manipulate data -- could make open-source software such as the Linux operating system illegal.
Initially, the Hollings bill provoked a huge outcry mainly from consumer groups, plus makers of PCs and electronics gear (see BW Online, 3/27/02, "Guard Copyrights, Don't Jail Innovation"). Now that the measure's full implications have sunk in, the usually vocal open-source community is starting to react as well.
Linux guru and Hewlett-Packard consultant Bruce Perens says Hollings-style copyright protection schemes are "a high-level concern" for open-source advocates, a point he has made to Hollings' aides and to protechnology Representative Rick Boucher (D-Va.). Consumer-advocacy groups such as San Francisco's Electronic Frontier Foundation also are defending the open-source concept in negotiations between electronics manufacturers and entertainment companies that could result in new standards that outlaw the use of open-source components in new digital TV sets and tuners.
KEY ISSUE. Here's the crux of the issue: Hollywood studios and record labels want to encrypt their products with an algorithm of some sort, for which every piece of hardware or software that plays or displays their material must have a corresponding electronic key. (If the algorithm or the key is missing, the content won't play -- thus thwarting pirates.) For added protection, the established entertainment companies want Congress to pass a law requiring technology companies to build the key into their products. Thus, no DVD players, PCs, CD players, or operating systems would be legal without Hollywood-designed copyright protection.
The problem is, in their zeal to dictate how hardware and software makers build their equipment, the movie and music moguls would mess with matters that are none of their business, critics say. Embedding copyright-protection mechanisms into new PCs and other digital devices would mean inserting pieces of software code that are hidden, or locked down, and couldn't be altered. That would amount to nothing less than an assault on the open-source religion, which advocates sharing, collaboration, and free access to code.
A crucial feature of the Linux operating system -- the basic software that controls a computer -- is that any part of it can be modified by its users, as long as they agree to make the modification available, for free, to the world at large. Locking down Linux could destroy this dynamic, on which plenty of corporate software developers now depend, and also bar open-source programmers from the $80 billion consumer-electronics market.
SCRAMBLED AND UNSCRAMBLED. The Hollings bill's vague language makes it difficult to predict specifically how any new legislation would affect open-source software. Even so, the fears of the movement's junkies reflect more than paranoia. Just look at the controversy surrounding the encryption that's already embedded in DVD players. Six years after DVD players were introduced, no legal, "pure" (free of proprietary components) Linux DVD player is on the market.
The reason: Each approved DVD manufacturer has to sign a licensing deal with the DVD Copy Control Assn. It requires that each player contain the Content Scrambling System (CSS), which prevents, say, a French citizen from watching a Hollywood movie before it has been released in France, as well as inhibiting unauthorized copying and distribution (see BW Online, 1/16/02, "The French Have a Word For It: Hacking").
Since the licensing goes against the most basic open-source ground rules, no company that used Linux signed the license. Thus, Linux users are unable to to watch DVDs on their computers. "Hollywood doesn't just make movies, it controls how consumers can watch the movie," complains Larry Rosen, a Silicon Valley attorney and executive director of the Open Source Initiative, a nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting open-source software. "They make it impossible for a movie to be legally viewable on Linux -- or on any machine they don't approve of. Does that hurt Linux? It hurts everyone."
CRACKED CODE. The DVD example also illustrates something else: that even the best copyright-protection plan isn't foolproof. In mid-1999, 16-year-old Norwegian hacker Jon Johansen started to distribute a software program called DeCSS. It unscrambled the CSS encryption so DVDs would run on Linux. Once that was accomplished, DVDs could also be copied to hard drives and shared with Internet users, à la Napster.
Since then, five or six Linux DVD players have come to market, all of which Hollywood claims are illegal because they don't contain the CSS. So far, U.S. courts have backed the studios, though several cases are still pending. There's only one "approved" Linux player, LinDVD, from a company called Intervideo. But it contains some proprietary code -- and has received lukewarm reviews from Linux users.
Despite the breaches in CSS, copyright owners continue pursuing the idea of embedded copyright protection as a key weapon in their fight against piracy. They're now trying to create standards that could restrict the use of open-source software in the delivery of digital TV. Members of what's known as the Broadcast Protection Discussion Group (BPDG) confirm that closed-door talks between copyright owners and makers of consumer-electronics and PCs are focusing on securing veto power for Hollywood over technologies that could be used in future TV sets -- and open-source isn't on the O.K. list.
BAD CALLS. The BPDG's recommendation, which could be announced as early as May 17, outlines two possible approaches, according to the group's members. Either Hollywood studios will have to approve which technologies can be used to encode and decode digital broadcasts, or they'll be allowed to construct a list of criteria that technologies must meet to be considered for use. That list would then be used by an arbitrator to decide if a technology is secure enough to entrust using with digital content.
"No matter what, Hollywood has some control over the technologies manufacturers are allowed to support," says Seth Schoen, who is attending the BPDG meetings as an Electronic Frontier Foundation staffer. "And that limits consumer choice." A lawyer who works on behalf of the studios counters that Hollywood's position is right, adding: "It's their content that's at risk."
Granted, but Hollywood has proved uniquely unqualified to decide which technologies will benefit consumers -- even in its own industry.
THE VCR SCARE. In 1982, Jack Valenti, president of the Motion Picture Association of America, famously proclaimed that the videocassette recorder was as threatening to the movies as the Boston Strangler was to a woman walking alone. Twenty years later, video rentals account for 46% of studio revenues, vs. the 24% collected at the box office.
Open-source advocates say that's proof enough the market, not the entertainment industry, should decide which technologies prevail. But Hollywood's voice -- and dollars -- carry more weight on Capitol Hill than ideological arguments about the best way to develop good, cheap software. So, for now, open-source advocates face a tough battle just to make themselves heard.
This excerpt of an interviw with Fritz Hollings should prove informative. The full text can be found here.
:)
"I met Bridget at her college boarding house. We had a very interesting interview in her bedroom that was full of stuffed animals."
Kitty: You are 21 and a college coed, what is your major?
Bridget: I'm an Economics major. (I have mostly male professors! Mmmmmmmm
Kitty: When would you say you became sexually active?
Bridget: I started playing with myself when I was really young. I loved doing it, because it just felt so good. I first became sexually active when I was 14. I had been fooling around with a boy from school who was two years older than I was. He used to come over to my house when my mom was at work after school, and we would make out and he would let me suck his cock. Whenever I would go over to his house, I was always flirting with his older brother because he was so cute, and older men really turned me on!
One time when the boy who I had been fooling around with was sick, his brother came over to my house after school. We started kissing on my bed, and he slid his hand in between my legs and was rubbing my pussy. He took his big cock out and let me get on my knees in front of him and suck it! I was so turned on, I could feel myself getting so wet. He laid down on the bed, and I got on top of him. I slowly slid his cock into my pussy, and it hurt, but I kept with it, because I knew it would start feeling good after a little bit!
Kitty: You really like to play it up when you have sex. Do you have any favorite roles?
Bridget: Yes! I absolutely love playing Daddy's little girl! I love when Daddy comes into my room at night and I pretend to be asleep while he slides his hands underneath my little night-gown and starts stroking my bald pussy with his big strong hands. When he climbs into bed with me and whispers in my ear that he's going to take care of me and make me feel good, I get really excited! I know that while Mommy is sleeping in the other room, Daddy is going to fuck his little girl until he shoots his cum all over my little titties!
Kitty: You enjoy cross dressers, how do they sexually excite you?
Bridget: There's nothing like seeing a strong, secure man wearing a pretty pair of women's panties! Women's lingerie is so beautiful, and when a man shares with me that he wants me to dress him in stockings, garters, and heels, I get so excited. Knowing that he trusts me with this exciting fantasy, and the risks we take of getting caught makes me so wet!
Kitty: I ask all the operators this one last question and I think your answer is going to be great. What was your kinkiest sexual experience?
Bridget: Kitty, when I was in high school, I started seeing a 50-year-Daddy, who loved dominating me. He knew how much I wanted to play with another girl, and he knew a Mommy who really wanted to play with a little girl! So in a hotel one weekend, Mommy met Daddy and I, and we all went up to our hotel room. We played for quite a while! Mommy and I kissed while Daddy watched, and then Mommy and I shared Daddy's cock! I even got to fist Mommy, because my little hands were easier to get inside her than Daddy's. One of the really fun parts was when Daddy got out the strap-on and Mommy fucked me with the big hard cock! I got to wear it too, and fuck Mommy's ass and pussy while Daddy videotaped! Then Daddy got on his hands and knees on the bed, and while Mommy watched, I got to slide the cock into Daddy's ass! He was so hard and so turned on, that he shot his cum all over the bed! Then it was my turn to cum! Mommy had shaved my pussy earlier, and so she had me lay down on the bed, while she sucked and licked my little hairless pussy! Mommy's tongue felt so good inside me, that it made me cum all over her face! Daddy watched, and then told me it was my turn to make Mommy cum! I stayed on my back, and Mommy put her pussy right above my face! I licked her wet pussy, and by then, Daddy's cock was hard again. He slid his big cock inside me, hard, while I ate Mommy until she came! My pussy was so wet from cumming, that Daddy decided his cock was wet enough to put in my ass. I turned over on my hands and knees and Mommy spread my ass apart while Daddy slid his cock into my ass. It hurt because my ass was so tight, but I just begged Daddy to fuck me harder and harder because I wanted to make him happy! He rubbed my clit though, while he was doing it, and then I was more relaxed, so Daddy started fucking really hard. When I felt his warm cum shoot in my ass, I got so excited I came all over the bed!
"That was a great interview and I also found out Bridgett has a kinky bisexual side."