Slashdot Mirror
Copy That Floppy? Go To Jahannum (Hell)
andrewdm writes "The Business Software Alliance has a new partner: the grand muftis at Al Azhar in Cairo. The New York Law Journal has an article explaining the new holy(?) alliance between the BSA and the highest religious authorities in the Egyptian Sunni Islam sect. The clerics issued a fatwa (holy edict) against piracy, saying it is "the worst type of theft and prohibited by Islam." What's next? The Pope denouncing mp3's as mortal sins?" The worst type of theft, indeed.
What's worse, the Pope is letting spammers steal from the Vatican -- the Vatican has an open relay, and I wouldn't be suprized that some of the preists are spamming themselves.
Proof? GoogleGroups search of news.admin.net-abuse.sightings for Vatican. Some only reference in the spam message, but you'll find a few relayed through.
--
# Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
$Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
This is not intended as a flame, but as an observation... At a time when the USA is threatened with "holy war" by organized Middle Eastern Islamic terrorists, the BSA induces Sunnite clergy to declare the same thing on copyright infringement?
But then, I consider the BSA a terrorist organization. Terror IS their weapon.
What's next, planes crashing into the homes of people who run LimeWire?
I'm sorry, but this to me is rather like Stalin giving Hitler's genocide policy an endorsement. These same Islamic clergy refuse to unequivocaly condemn the actions of Bin Laden.
=== The price of freedom is eternal vigilance
I have to admit this is probably the most horrible thing I've ever read. If anyone is going to hell its the members of Islam who would align themselves with such a terrible organization.
- This thing is immoral and wrong, and the church of islam frowns on it. (I.E., the "look, religions usually have associated value + morality systems" meaning)
- We are declaring holy war on this thing; in heaven, it is abhorred by the Lord and unholy over nigh all else, and on earth, the church is excommunicating those who partake in it; you may not do this, you may not consider this, you may not associate with anyone who does this, you may not associate with anyone you know to associate with other people who associate with other people who do this. (I.E., the "kill salman rushdie or anyone who harbors him" meaning)
So: given the political/religious environment in Egypt, and given the sort of person that the cleric who issued this fatwa, and given the degree of extremism that that form of islam tends to take in Egypt, what does this "Fatwa" mean? If it's closer to the reasonable first, i'm fine with that; there is DEFINITELY an entire spectrum of moral gray areas associated with intellectual property theft, but in the end people do have some sort of right to be compensated for art and technology they have given to their fellow humans. If it's closer to the foaming second, and if they are going to ignore any moral gray areas and take an RIAA party line without considering such things as "what is a DMCA", well, i'm a bit bothered.anyone know?
- super ugly ultraman
Since when is this robbing society of future discoveries. Think of all the people who will create art and invention from software they couldn't afford to buy but wanted to play with. Or will become insipired to listen to different music then mainstream and come up with new styles of music. I'm not saying piracy is good....its an element of society and will always be so...and i'd rather have someone rip off my MP3s then my stereo anyday
We've secretely replaced the Enterprise's dilithium crystals with Folgers crystals. Lets see if they notice.
Muslims are also not supposed to borrow money with interest, so some in the US have set up 'rent-to-own' companies to help Muslims who abide by this buy houses, cars, and other big-ticket items.
Being so adaptable, I presume good Muslims will just start investigating Free software.
Also, as I read these posts, I see a lot of flames against Islam. I am not a Muslim, but as one who was raised in a Christian church, I can see that many high authorities of Islam are like those of the Catholic and other Christian faiths: business people who live well while telling their followers to 'accept their lot in life,' which can mean poverty, paying $250 for an OS that crashes often, or having too many children because birth control is a sin.
Most of the top religious leaders represent their own interests first, just as the BSA represents the interests of software makers who want to cling to 'shrink-wrap' licensing model, and the RIAA represents those who want to be paid every time you hum a tune to yourself.
One should not automatically equate Islamic leaders' statements with the beliefs of all Muslims. Just as they condone or refuse to condemn some actions we find mighty upsetting, Western religions have condoned and remained silent on some nasty shit over the centuries (like, say, the Nazi war on Jews).
It does not surprise me that some Mullahs, or holy clerics, rebounded from being leaned on by the BSA with outrageous doctrines about IP theft. But what is in store for the poor, unfortunate users, when it comes time for their punishment? Remember, Sunni Islam still believes in an eye for eye, or in this case, they chop off your hand for being a thief. That would make touchtyping much slower, and second offenses are likely to leave you up the creek without anyway to paddle or type on your keyboard.
This could've gone the other way. If I remember my reading correctly there's at least one statement by the Prophet that it is unjust to earn money by means other than working. It would be easy to argue that charging high markups because you have a legal monopoly on distributing AZT/Britney Spears/Microsoft Office doesn't amount to an honest living under Islamic law.
Whether it would be a sound argument I don't know!
Is Office really overpriced when the whole of the software market is considered? Macromedia Flash is $499.00, Adobe Photoshop is $609.00, and 3ds Max is $3495.00. Hell, Times New Roman, that ubiquitous font, costs $95.99. I fail to see how a quality word processor, a tool as specialized as any of these others, should not cost as much. Furthermore, I can't help but wonder what the response would be if Microsoft sold Office for 30 bucks. Wouldn't they then be criticized for using their monopoly powers to sell their product, at a loss, such that they could further dominate the word processing market?
Pax Digitalia
It's sickening, isn't it? As a relatively conervative Christian, I can't believe that these "Christians" don't think for themselves. WWJD is replaced with WWMPD (What would my priest do?), at least with most of the Catholics I know.
My friends and I had always planned (but never got around to) making a "WWDLD?" bumper sticker or t-shirt or whatever (What Would the Dalai Lama Do?)
The idea would be that he's still around to ask (unlike Jesus) and is more likely to be a better role model than more than a few Catholic Priests (cough altarboys cough).
You can't change the Quran in any way or form. Even if you make a translation,
;-D
you are required to provide the "ayat" and "sura" numbers.
Muslims belief that the quran as genuine as when God uttered it. But keep in mind
that the Quran itself was put into writing about 20 years (I am guessing, It was written
during the ages of the 3rd Khalifa, Othman Bin Afan) after prophet
Mohamed's death. Before that, it was learnt through memorization. Mohamed (PBUH) himself
did not read or write (he was praised for being the illiterate who could read, and that is
the subject of the first "sura" in the Quran.)
Technically, the Quran hasn't changed since its first writing. There are discrete scriptures
from around 1200 years ago, and they bare the same format as today's. But all the punctuation
was added later, as arabic evolved into a written language and a grammar was developed.
OTOH, the oldest Quran books are not complete and bound. They are missing parts and decayed.
In islamic history, there were times when libraries and Mosques were burnt by the invaders
(the mongolians come to mind) and/or by warring factions. There was a time when the largest
islamic kingdom was not a sunni, as was the case with the "Fatimiyat's" in egypt; so, they
had the power to modify every Quran book in existance, to suit their needs.
The Amirs/Kings of distant Islamic colonies and tribes (away from the central empire) were also
known for misinterpreting and mistranslating the Quran to suit their needs (as was the case in some
parts of Pakistan, Morroco, and many tribes in "black" Africa.)
There you have it. The Quran is believed to be intact, Allah says -I paraphrase- "We sent you the Quran and We are responsible for keeping it".
But then, this Quote itself is from the Quran, and as you have seen, there are many reasons to suspect it undergoing change.
Cynics don't make good worshipers I guess
Well a couple of points:
Firstly a "Fatwa" is mearly an opinion it is not binding in any way. So if a cleric issues a Fatwa as a Muslim you are not bound to it if you do not agree with that opinion.
Secondly this Fatwa is actually wrong because in Islam copyrights and patents are not allowed, there are two reasons for this. The first being that it comes under "hoarding of wealth". The second is because in Islam you acknowledge that God is the creater of the universe, hence the holder of all knowledge and since you are part of that creation you can not claim to "own" any knowldege you gain as it is the result of your existance which of course you owe to God. Just imagine that God is the holder of all interlectual property.
Thirdly the head of the religious institions in countries like Egypt are appointed by the government and are basically puppets and are in no means regarded as authoritive figures with regards to the Koran. As a side note, one of the most respected Islamic scolars is an American who converted when he was 18.
Anyhow I hope that clears some things up, but basically this fatwa is bullshit.
This is exactly what the Church of Scientology does. All of their religeous documents are copyrighted and strictly controlled.
Future theologans should have a great time comparing pre-IP-law religions with post-IP-law ones.
vkg boldly declares: Working a job, doing research - some scholar may have called these Jihad and tried to make a justification for it, but the president (sic) is the life of Muhammad, isn't it?
And continues: Or do you have some entirely other explanation for the theology (i.e. directly going to heaven if killed in battle - common among religions, but present without a doubt in Islam) and rhetoric?
Go directly to heaven if killed in a just cause, or battle (the word which you unequivocally use). Killing civilians is a ticket the other way.
Expansion of the religion through war occurred after the life of the Prophet, and as long as the Caliphs were rightly guided, the "war" was conducted in such a way that preserved not only people's lives, but also their livelihoods (ie. their crops, orchards, etc.). During the life of the Prophet, early battles were fought in self defence, only when necessary (he even had all of his followers leave Mecca, due to persecution, rather than fight). Later episodes involved tribes which had signed agreements with the Prophet for protection (because tribal Arabia was a very dangerous place to live at the time, and a strong central power was very much needed to bring order -- one of the reasons why the time was right for someone such as him to gain power).
One such agreement was with a Jewish tribe, and it was one of mutual protection. But rather than protecting the Muslims, they double crossed them. After successfully defending themselves from the resultant attack, the Muslims attacked the tribe which had broken its agreement. To do otherwise would have been both dangerous and unwise. That is the precedent which I think you are speaking of. That is also what I would call a just cause.
And no, I am not Muslim, but I was once, and I am probably as cynical as you are (which is why I now prefer to say "I don't know" when people ask me about God). However, it should be realised that the history which I have given to you now is the one which Muslims learn, and that matters more than what is true. After all, neither of us can know for certain what happened 100 years ago, let alone 1400 years ago, but we do tend to act on what we learn or generally accept to be true. Regardless of the veracity (or lack thereof) of your statements about the Prophet, your statements do not reflect the history that Muslims learn, and your interpretation of the Prophet's life is not the precedent that Muslims follow.
I do carry one last vestige of belief from my days in Islam. I believe that people universally desire peace, and it is somehow inhuman to desire other than peace. That is why I still say "Salamu 'Alaikum," which means "peace be upon you," and is the universal greeting recognised and used by Muslims all over the world.
1st: The leader of the Azhar isn't selected by the religious organization's memebers. He is appointed by the president (since the 1960's I believe).
2nd: There are so many rumors in Egypt that the miraculus sun of the president made a multi-billion wealth starting from his own "daily allowance" and now owns at least 10% in every major company or factory, if not 100%. He gets the 10% in return for relieving the businesses from bureaucracy and red tape. This could include of course M$ Egypt.
3rd: In several ocassions the Azhar leader(s) complained of finding "statements" in newspapers attributed to them even though they never made it (mostly in favour of the government or newpaper views). The newspapers simply ignore requests to publish any denials of these statements.
4th: These leaders are technically ignorant and know nothing about the industry. They give you a statement based on the facts you present to them. If you give them twisted facts, they will give you wrong statements.
5th: The average family income in Egypt is $90 to $200 US dollars. Very few minority (may be less than 3%) has an income about that. Most families cannot afford to buy computers, let alone pay to support the poor US SW companies. If they ever manage to buy computers after paying for food, rent, gas, utilities, transportation, tuition, etc..., they won't be able to by SW or more rediculously (for them), pay to upgrade it.
Simply said, SW companies have to stop thinking about sucking money from poor countries because they will spend more than they will get, unless they simply want to deprive those poor countries from using their software altogether. They just should consider it "charitable contributions" to the poor.
$5 US (25 L.E.) is a big amount in egypt and can feed a family of 5 for 4~5 days (on inexpensive food). How much is M$ XP?
- terrorists are bombing innocents weekly
- innocents are starving to death world-wide
- Pakistan and India are on the brink of war
- any number of things more worthy of consideration
This is disgusting. Its like worrying if the icing on your cake is thick enough when you know your neighbor is starving.Why don't we see more stories about Muslim's that condem violence and terrorism?
Anarchists never rule
It should be said that actually, the issue is not really theft according to Islamic doctrine, but adhering to and accepting an agreement. Essentially, when an agreement i.e. EULA has been made, it must be honoured.
Not that theft is not a sin ofcourse.. but I think the part about not breaching contracts / keeping one's word / honesty is probably more accurate.