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.
How about Richard Stallman denouncing non-"free software" as the same?
Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
So the worst type of theft is the kind that causes the least physical loss.
THEY STOLE MY ELECTRONS!!!
"Derp de derp."
New EULA... Do you accept this agreement that if you pirate this you will burn in hell [ ] No I don't want to roast [ ]
Ryan T. Sammartino
"Ancora imparo"
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";
that religious Islamic fanatics are perhaps *more* moderate than the BSA.
:)
Maybe the new partnership with Egypt will help the BSA to tone down its image?
I think it's a sad day when I don't know which organization is more extreme
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
After nearly a decade of U.S. persuasion and $7 million in technical IP assistance, a new IP law is under debate in the Egypt parliament. The law's authors hope that it will pass before the People's Assembly begins its summer recess on June 30.
FOR SALE, 65 Million like new Egyptians. Good condition, hardly abused. $7,000,000 OBO.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
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.
I think the BSA should team up with the Boy Scouts of America. They could share an acronym, and add a few lines to the scout law:
A scout is-
Trustworthy
Loyal
Not a software pirate
Helpful
Friendly
Courteous
Willing to abide by legal licensing agreements
Kind
Obedient to the will of Microsoft
Cheerfully paying outrageous prices for MS Office
Thrifty
Brave
Clean - Hard Drive
Reverent
They call me the working man. I guess that's what I am.
Jesus, Mohammad, Buddah and Ra the Sun God have been elected to serve on the High Council of the RIAA.
Nicholas, Patron Saint of Thieves, has been strangely silent on the matter.
GMFTatsujin
- 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
The top of the list is something like this:
...
1. Software Piracy
2. Stealing from the Church
3. Stealing God's pants
4. Stealing someone's immortal soul
As you can see, the heirarchy starts at digital concerns, and gets to the lesser matters a bit later. Real forward thinking I must say.
- I love animals. I try to eat at least one a day.
What's next? The Pope denouncing mp3's as mortal sins?
Just because something is denounced doesn't automatically stop all people from doing it. Let's see...drugs, sex, smoking, copyright violations(!), etc. Sure, such a declaration may very well have impact on the devout, but I take these announcements more so as a political statement (which is fine) than anything else.
To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
The worst kind of theft? Even worse than the kind of theft that deprives the victim of the object you've taken? The stuff folks will believe...
The "cue the foo posts in 3, 2, 1..." posts will commence with no subsequent foo posts in 3, 2, 1...
Will the punishment for this worst sort of theft be in the traditional style of Islam?
Pirate software, we'll cut off the left side of your keyboard.
.sig? Get your own damn
"'Copyright is my right. Buy a license or you'll have trouble with the police,' croons Egyptian pop singer Shaban Abd el-Reheem on his latest album"
Great lyrics! Can you imagine Metallica singing:
"Respect respect respect our intellectual property!
If...
You...
Copy our music,
You'll be in trouble!
With the POLICE!
With the POLICE!
WITH THE POLICE!"
graspee
Ahh, this is too good - finally the future takes a twist even Bruce Sterling couldn't predict.
But seriously, this is actually pretty impressive: the weight of Islamic law behind software theft. I'm not familiar with the situation in Egypt, but in a lot of places (like Saudi Arabia) the penalty for theft is having your hand cut off. First left, then right.
You heard me right: people may be getting their hands cut off for pirating software.
As I've said before on the dot, our choices, in the long run, are
1> To comply with Copyright Law as it stands, whether we like it or not.
2> To change the law to something sane.
It's very much like the War On Drugs - Marijuana is simply not very harmful, grows everywhere, and our jails are full of people doing time for selling a dime bag: even an irrational, impossible-to-enforce law can still ruin lives.
Copyright is heading towards being this kind of an issue, and we need to take smart action to prevent it before we have college students going to jail for their MP3 collections.
And poor muslim bastards losing their hands over a pirated copy of Word.
Hexayurt - open source refugee shelter,
Yeah, only difference is Stallman isn't a dogmatic leader to 2 billion people (see here for statistics). You wouldn't believe how much power over the masses the Pope has. I've seen people flock to the streets and wait for 2-3 hours just to catch a glimpse of his holiness passing by (yes, 2 hours waiting for a 5-second sighting). And people absolutely refusing to compromise on ANY point the Pope has decided on, is totally frustrating.
Plus, RMS's views are definitely more open to debate than the Pope's (or the church's for that matter). No chance of me getting excomulgated for saying RMS is an asshole (which i don't think he is, but anyway).
This is an error message from law.com:
Browser Error
Sorry.You must have cookies enabled to enjoy this site. Please adjust this setting in your browser preferences. If you are using Internet Explorer, go to Tools, Internet Options, Security, Custom Level and select 'Enable Cookies'. If you are using Netscape, go to Edit, Preferences, Advanced and select 'Accept all Cookies' from your the options. Law.com uses cookies to provide better and more personalized service to you. For more detailed information regarding the use of cookies, see our Privacy Policy.
I don't understand why every web site needs to set/read cookie, for everything and for nothing. It's ridiculous. It's impossible to find any site that does not try to set cookie.
I'm using Mozilla (1.0RC3), and I think it's great that it can block cookies from those stupid sites.
Everyone should be using browser that can selectively block cookies!
And poor muslim bastards losing their hands over a pirated copy of Word.
;)
Now, just imagine how much money you'll make if you design a good one-handed keyboard...
Witness the awe inspiring, gore splattering, all out rumble! Endure the bone-shaking battle of the century! You will not believe what you see this weekend at the Rosemont Horison! The First Church Of Digital Grepping will pit it's strength against old-school Islam! Call now! Tickets limited!
std::disclaimer<std::legalese> sig=new std::disclaimer; sig->dump(); delete sig;
so let me get this straight...
A religious order has sold out to business interests probably for financial gain.
What's next on Slashdot...a story about the shocking corruption of college sports? LOL
The only thing different about this story is it's Muslims instead of Christians.
----------
ah honey, we're all resplendent - Bill Mallonee
The RIAA, The MPAA, The BSA, The Muslims, The Church of Scientology. . .
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
But, my guess is that the editors think we (the American/European majority here) should care because:
Don't blame me, I get all my opinions from my Ouija board.
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?
I am not a muslim but there is a big difference between Middle Eastern Islamic terrorists and Islam itself.
Islamic terrorists are a group of people who commits acts of terror in the name of Islam. True, they have the support of some members of the clergy but that doesn't make the religion itself evil.
Your analogy is more like saying the Pope is evil because there are anti-abortion terrorists who take his words about abortion being a sin very literally and commit acts of terror against people who don't behave according to their wishes.
So is GW evil for meeting with the Pope while visiting Europe? Is Italy guilty of harboring an evil terrorist?
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.
Are you sure of that? Do you have a source you can point me to which mentions the Egyptian Sunnite clergy and a refusal to condemn Bin Laden? Or did you just pull that out of your ass based on reports of some members of some clergy in some muslim country refusing to condemn Osama?
Mmmm.. Donuts
http://www.bbspot.com/News/2001/11/riaa.html
Calm down, it's *only* ones and zeroes.
I think that seatbelt laws are better example than Marijuana, but it's all the same thing. The wrong thing is being attacked. Same goes for the "War on Terror". We're attacking the end result of some serious problems. 'Terrorists' would not exist if it wasn't for crappy foreign policy that pisses people off. Killing the terrorists (which is what the war on terror is) doesn't do anything but kill people and piss them off more.
Same goes for seatbelts, we write tickets to people for not wearing seatbelts, instead of convincing people at a young age that wearing seatbelts and protecting your own life is a good idea, but that because in this country (the United States), and many others, you are free to do as you wish as long as it doesn't harm OTHERS, then you don't have to wear your seatbelt if you don't want to, but it is a good idea.
I think I lost my train of thought.
What?
As one of the tiny community of Christians here at Slashdot, let me point out that Jesus welcomes all, including black hat crackers and warez fiends, and that far from begrudgingly embracing the above parties as repentant sinners, His views on the morality of the mega-rich software vendors doing things such as sending goons to public schools to enforce the use of their products would probably call for those opposing said megacorps to receive the same esteem He granted to those on the fringes in His own time. (read up on some of the disciples)
On a related note, he would like us to know that Bill Gates is going to hell.(Matt 19:24)
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).
IANAM, but I wonder what would have happened if who ever actually bound and transcribed the first copies of the Qur'an had declared publishing rights and refused to allow the distribution of low cost copies or even public prayer.
If they had today's laws then the words might have passed into the public domain some 75 years or so after the Prophet rode to heaven, but presumably the actual author (Allah) isn't dead (Nietzsche aside) so they could try to hold on to it indefinitely.
Okay, that may be a silly way of looking at things, and I guess you could say that Allah or Muhammed would'nt have allowed this, but seriously, shouldn't religous scholars and men of god be more aware that ideas are not really property (or at least not the property of man)?
The concept of intellectual property is a (useful if done right) legal fiction constructed to encourage innovation (patents, copyrights) and reduce deception (trademarks). Even if you send people to jail I don't understand how breaking such artificial and clearly secular laws can be considered so fundamentally sinful.
My next sig will be ready soon, but friends can beat the rush!
This is a really sad thing. Religion has a very bad name in Western civilization due to the many atrocities and lesser injustices committed in its name. Please people: don't confuse the religion of Islam (or Christianity or Buddhism or ...) with these ridiculous petty power plays. If you are curious, look at any original religious texts and you will see a lot of reasonableness that just isn't reflected in the behavior of the clergy/priesthood/whatever. A really interesting statement about this problem is at: http://www.bahai.org/article-1-1-0-1.html - pick your language.
Helping with organizational effectiveness is our job.
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.
It is really not surprising. The Islamic faith has a definite political component. Muslims would like to live in a society where is Islamic Law is the law of the land. This is part of the political process. Egypt needs to comply with the WTO's TRIPS agreements (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights). This is just one way to help the government out. It is really a moral statement that is taking place in a political context. (Note that the Christian faith is much less connected to politics than Islam.)
I just had a long, emotional, drawn-out argument with the newsgroup rec.music.makers.songwriters over this very issue.
It's my opinion that piracy, murder, and theft are three very different, distinguishable offenses, and have to be treated as such. To call piracy an act of "theft" is just as dishonest as calling drug use an act of "terrorism".
The crime of theft has very definite implications. Theft always causes the victim to lose property. Property carries value, so value is always transferred from the victim to the perpetrator.
The mechanism of piracy is much different. Piracy does not act on existing property; it may or may not deprive the victim of future sales, or of the ability to make money in the future. There are acts of piracy which cause no financial harm at all; the pirate, for example, who illegally copies a piece of software, doesn't understand it, can't get it to install, and deletes it, can hardly have been said to have done harm to the company. Therefore, unlike theft, value is not always transferred from the victim to the perpetrator. The size of the victim's estate remains constant; the size of the perpetrator's estate grows.
Thievery is the act of illegal taking; piracy is the act of illegal copying; murder is the act of illegal killing. You can argue semantics and say that killing is the taking of life and copying is the taking of information, but I believe that to take - that is, to transfer ownership from one party to yourself - is very, very distinguishable from killing and copying.
Are there any real-world implications of this semantic debate? I think we're seeing them right here. This islamic cleric is issuing his fatwa against piracy not based on the harms of piracy, but based on the harms of theft. Falsely associating one concept with another prevents people from really reasoning out the implications of each concept. Let me put it this way: if piracy were legalized, much of corporate capitalism as we know it would be over. But if theft were legalized, society as we know it would be over.
There is a BIG ethical difference between stealing someone's real property, and refusing to acknowledge that a copyrighted work *is* real property. I'm not saying that one is ethical and the other isn't; I'm saying that there's a difference, and we'd better be prepared to tackle the two abstract concepts separately.
"Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he deems himself your master."
I'm not convinced that terrorism (or more correctly jihad) is really a product of our foreign policy - the wars between Muslims and Christians predate the foundation of the United States by around a millennium - and the issues have not changed much: control of the Holy Land.
Hexayurt - open source refugee shelter,
'Illegal Copying' or 'Piracy' kind of stretches the definition of theft a bit to doesnt it?
"The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else." - Bush 05
>>And poor muslim bastards losing their hands over a pirated copy of Word.
Another argument for open source software. Not only do you get the source code, you get to keep all your appendages! Free, modifiable and open to scrutiny, no risk of amputation -- OpenOffice, the complete solution.
Disclaimer: AINAM. Also, IANAL, but you knew that.
Some Muslims think that copyright is not a part of Islam.
Become a FSF associate member before the low #s are used
Unfortunately taxes I pay may well go to pay your hospital bills if you're badly injured or support your family if you're killed. In this situation, when you're going to be spending my money, I get to have a say in whether you wear a belt or not. Now, if you had a law that said you didn't have to wear a seat belt but if you didn't you had to pick up all of the tab for any injuries to yourself and you're dependents couldn't claim for support from taxpayers that's fine by me. You want this "right" you have to accept the responsibility.
development.lombardi.com
I'm certainly no expert in islamic law, but I can't think of any logical way a cleric could call IP infringement "the worst kind of theft". I realize that the article probably should have been titled "Egyptian Cleric Talks Out Ass", but is there any basis, even within the convoluted logic of sharia, that justifies this position?
-- your Web browser is Ronald Reagan
Copyright is heading towards being this kind of an issue, and we need to take smart action to prevent it before we have college students going to jail for their MP3 collections.
Impossible! How can that be? You mean, our american college students are stealing? Noooo way !
It's the fault of people outside US. I have the proof to show you:
In the music industry, piracy remains rampant -- virtually all international releases are pirated --
Now, blame it on the Brits, shall we? If you don't believe me, go to a Virgin music store in London, you can see all these pirated american CDs. All international releases are pirated. They said it, it's gotta be true.
Illegality is not part of the definition of terrorism. Terrorism is using tactics the promote fear in the general public to force leaders to do what you want. What the BSA does is promote fear in the minds of the leaders so they pass laws that force the public to do what they want.
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!
The question is not about following the law. It's about having the source code freely available or not. Before software became a consumer item, source code came along with software, you could modify it, according to your needs. Today, no matter how much you pay, very few companies will give you the source.
A specific example: I work for a communications company that owns and operates satellites. We want to know *exactly* what each bit is doing, because the slightest failure can (and sometimes does) mean the loss of a hundred million+ dollar spacecraft. Yet, companies that supply software for satellite control do not supply source code anymore. What are they thinking, that we would sell pirated CDs with software for controlling a Boeing HS376 satellite at a street corner somewhere? And it's not a security question either, if you know enough to use the software to control a satellite, you know how to destroy the satellite without using software.
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).
Shouldn't this be seen as the BSA encouraging the violation of human rights by other governments? They are trying to get a new law enacted that will have the effect of people being arrested and having their limbs amputated. Shouldn't the US State Department have something to say about this?
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
'Terrorists' would not exist if it wasn't for crappy foreign policy that pisses people off.
That sound's just like the wifebeater's claim that the "bitch" deserved a good beating.
So did the Blacks "piss off" the Klan and cause lynchings? Did the Jews "piss off" the Nazis and get what they deserved?
It's the same dumbass argument.
Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est
I thought the BSA considers warez and crackz to be piracy. Is there someplace where they clarify their position on this?
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
The level of political bias on slashdot is absurd.
Text from the original post:
"What's next, the pope banning mp3's?"
"The worst type of theft, indeed."
Not to mention various posts about how muslim clerics intend to mutilate/castrate those who pirate software, etc.
A strong argument can be made that pirating is immoral. Islam is a religion that absolutely forbids theft, and taking the product of someone's labor without paying them could easily be construed as theft. Instead of positing counter-arguments, the slashdotters make all kinds of statements as if the prohibition is crazy, fundamentalist, or insane.
Pirating software could be seen as immoral from many more standpoints than the fundamentalist one. Piracy clearly violates many philosophical principles of ethical behavior. For example, Kant's categorical imperative: the software industry could not exist if everyone pirated, therefore those that do pirate are hypocrites, because in order for them to pirate, they require other people to pay and support the industry.
Let me answer one or two objections that are very common on slashdot. I am not a lackey of the software industry, or a hireling for Bill Gates (my favorite), or a secret agent for the RIAA. Even if I were, it logically changes nothing.
There are dangers completely independent of software here. I mean, it's kind of nice to have the Sunni recognition of the present, but what scares me is the chopping off the hand thing. Unfortunately, a theft is a theft in fatwa's. There's no "degree" of theft. It's either theft or it's not theft.
While I admire the idea that the prevention of theft is a good thing, life has degrees, and fatwa's don't discriminate with degrees. Frankly, there's a big difference if you steal my G.I. Joe (even the one with the kung-fu grip) and you steal my car. You steal my car, and we have issues. You steal my G.I. Joe, and we may still end up making up some day.
Islam should be a religion, not a law. No religion should be a law, but then I come from a country that allows freedom of religion, so maybe it's just me.
Seems that verification would be the tricky bit here: Just because you're caught with a copy of a floppy doesn't mean it's not a backup. At purchase time the seller should tatoo the serial number on the licensee. Naturally the license would then be non-transferable, and people should be held liabel if someone else copies their serial number illicitly.
It stands to reason that people would have the 'SN-tat' ("Syntat") etched somewhere intimate, say on the inner thigh. Since an Islamic man should only be sleeping with his wife, theft shouldn't be a problem, as they share property and therefore his license is hers anyhow.
Just think, this new policy could reduce sins such as adultry as a side effect of people protecting their coveted serial numbers!
Kevin Fox
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.
As the poster further down says, copyright is not allowed officialy by islam. This is the case in Iran where basically there is none. Perhaps this has something this something to do with the "Axis of Evil" not paying for MS licences.
So copying a friend's King's Quest 5 floppy is going go give you eternal damnation, but suicide bombings against civilians in Israel and New York City get you 41 virgins and eternal paradise?
Perhaps, but nobody is getting thrown in jail for not wearing their seat belt. The worst that happens is you pay a fine, and even then only if you are pulled over for something else first. (around here, anyway)
in this country (the United States), and many others, you are free to do as you wish as long as it doesn't harm OTHERS
Just to play Devil's Advocate... Joe doesn't wear his seat belt, Joe gets badly hurt in an accident, Joe isn't insured, morality doesn't allow us to just write Joe off and leave him for dead, therefore society has to pay for his medical care. Isn't that harming others (by burdening them with an unecessary expense)?
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
If you call yourself a thief and all you do is pirate, you're a pretty piss poor thief, you should learn better kinds of theft.
-JDF
Quoth vkg: I'm not convinced that terrorism (or more correctly jihad) is really a product of our foreign policy - the wars between Muslims and Christians predate the foundation of the United States by around a millennium - and the issues have not changed much: control of the Holy Land.
You don't seem to know what you're talking about. Jihad is the struggle to improve one's condition, and there are two kinds. One is the lesser jihad, which is working to improve one's external condition by working or fighting just wars (which by definition do not include attacks on civilians). The greater jihad involves improving one's morals and personal conduct.
Terrorism is not supported by the Islamic creed in any way. Nor is there any way to "root out" the kind of terrorists which we are seeing these days. These are not plane hijackers looking for some money or a brand new 747. They are people who have been directly harmed by Western foreign policies, to the point where they have nothing to lose. They are literally like upset bees whose last assault results in their deaths. The terrorists that the USA is "rooting out" are dead. But don't worry: You can always make more terrorists by oppressing more people. A certain percentage will always fight back.
What does PBUH mean?
I am guessing "Praise Be Unto Him."
If you mean "dead from the neck up", plenty of times.
There is a thin line between genius and insanity. I have erased that line. -- Oscar Levant
Shouldn't the worst type of theft be something like, I dunno, stealing someone's SOUL?
Seriously though - wouldn't it make more sense for something like, oh, stealing food from a starving man, to be a 'worse' kind of theft than this? I seriously hope this is just a bad translation, and that the real meaning is more like 'one of the worst kinds of theft' - otherwise, those clerics need to go have a talk with thier drug dealer(s): because the stuff they're on has obviously gone bad.
man is machine
Um, tomorrow's June 1st, not April 1st. Come on, guys.
_______
2B1ASK1
Erm.... bullshit, repoleved. The Prophet Muhammad fought wars for Islam, and that is the tradition in which Jihad exists.
Working a job, doing research - some scholar may have called these Jihad and tried to make a justification for it, but the president is the life of Muhammad, isn't it?
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?
Jihad is a war for Islam, and nothing else.
Now certainly you could argue that bin Laden and co. have hijacked that concept and are in fact using the cry of Jihad to further their own aims, but let's not be unclear about what a Jihad is: a Jihad is a holy war to defend or promote Islam.
Right now, it's not our foreign policy which causes that war: it's our existence - fundamentalist forms of Islam are completely threatened by our secular, multi-faith society which is dominant in trade and arms.
The Islam of the trading empires, like the Ottoman and those which came before that, indeed, the Islam which defended the Jews against the Christian crusaders, would not be threatened by America except politically.
But the fundamentalists have hijacked your religion (I assume you are muslim) and redefining Jihad won't help a little bit.
Hexayurt - open source refugee shelter,
Unfortunately taxes I pay may well go to pay your hospital bills if you're badly injured or support your family if you're killed. In this situation, when you're going to be spending my money, I get to have a say in whether you wear a belt or not.
I don't like MY money being spent on other people's medical bills, but I also don't seat beat laws. Instead of requiring drivers to wear seat belts, who should require car manufacturers to install massive spikes in car dashboards. This strategy provides an incentive to wear seatbelts. Plus, those who freely choose not wear their seat belts won't waste MY money on medical bills after they are impaled on the massive spikes during their car collision.
cpeterso
Well as a software developer of both Open Source and Closed Source application. You do realize that software development shops need to make money to survice and pay for my paycheck. So joing with the BSA and have them play Bad Guy may be good for the company. Sure there will be a couple of them that will switch do an Open Source Equilivalant. But in the eyes of the buisness owners. They Didn't pay for the software in the first place so they didn't loose anything.
I normally will justify Piricy if you use the product like shareware to evaluate the software before you buy it. And many time piricy is good for a company. I onced pirited a vidio game and I really liked it so when the next game from that company came out I went and bought it. If I havent got a copy of that program I would never bought more stuff from the company. But I am not saying that Piricy should run rampant but in a small scale it is actually quite helpful
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Can be found here. The Rabbi also calls it a no-no, but isn't threatening anyone with hellfire.
There are many reasons to critice Islam:
You might say that - in tenet at least - it is intolerant of homosexuality. But then, last time I checked my Bible or a Torah, so were Christianity and Judaism.
But to accuse it, in general, of supporting Bin Laden is outrageous.
I am the first to say that the 'West' is too tolerant of intolerance in the name of tolerance.
But broadbrushed comparisons are outrageous and racist.
I would be laughed down if I said "If Hitler was a vegetarian, all vegetarians must be out to kill Jews, right?" But somehow, when it comes to Islam, the difference between the particular (a person) and the general (a set of religious beliefs, that - last time I checked - did not believe in the taking of innocent life).
Please, please, please... stop extrapolating from a label.
--- My dad's political betting
This has got to be one of the funniest stories I've ever read on /. :-)
-adnans
"In short: just say NO TO DRUGS, and maybe you won't end up like the Hurd people." --Linus Torvalds
In the event of an almost accident, where some skillful driving that includes the vehicle moving radically to one side of the road and then back very quickly or something like that, the driver's seatbelt keeps him or her firmly in place behind the wheel where they have a chance of maintaining control of the vehicle and avoiding a collision, and the passenger's seatbelt keeps him or her from landing in the driver's lap or obscuring the driver's vision by smashing the windshield into an almost opaque collage of little pieces of glass glued to a sheet of plastic. Accident avoided, everybody's money saved.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
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.
It's only a matter of time now before the BSA and Al Quedah join forces in an anti-piracy Jihad. Death to the infidel software pirates! Praise Billah!
== Paul Rickard, Editor of The Microsoft Boycott Campaign ====
Your taxes are more likely to pay for healthcare for smokers than for people not wearing seatbelts. Since smokers are a little older, a lot of them on medicare, etc., they are quite a drain on tax dollars. There's also this thing called second hand smoke, which means it is harmful to many other people than yourself. A public smoking ban is much more justified than requiring me to wear my seatbelt. It is the government's job to protect us from each other, but not to protect us from ourselves. That's our job.
The larger burden from people not wearing seatbelts is probably on insurance than taxes; but that's a different story all together.
What?
If I recall my history correctly, most of the wars between Christians and Muslims were started by Christians.
Islam does not preach war towards Christians and Jews. Just like Christianity doesn't preach violent crusades to convert unbelievers. Actually, Islam preaches tolerance to those that also believe in the one true god (according to them...remember that Jesus and Abraham are considered prophets in Islam, too).
Religion has been used to justify wars since the dawn of time. "Religion is the opiate of the masses".
--Be human.
I do have a deep regard for the muslim faith.
However, the interpretation of the life of Muhammad varies, I'm sure, as all other histories vary: depending on the time of the analysis, and those involved.
Warlike folks stress the wars fought against Mecca, others, the more peaceful and conciliatory aspects of the story.
It's clear to me that, for a long period, Muslim civilization was considerably ahead of European civilization in nearly all regards: arts, culture, even war - the rights of the individual, the rule of law, in science and in mathematics.
But that was when it was a trading culture, open to other nations and ways of life, when it protected diversity rather than attempting to crush it under the jackboot of fundamentalism.
Nothing wrong with the religion, but somebody left a bunch of idiots in charge.
Hexayurt - open source refugee shelter,
The clerics issued a fatwa (holy edict) against piracy, saying it is "the worst type of theft and prohibited by Islam."
:)
It seems that when they say "piracy" they're thinking in terms of the sort of theft that happens on the high seas - where generally pirates board ships, kill all the men, rape all the women (and then throw them overboard), take the children as slaves, and subsequently sell the ship and its accompanying valuables. This is indeed the worst kind of theft. Completely unlike breaking software licenses (and it's worth noting that when you buy software, you basically buy a box of air with the hopes that there's something inside that you can find useful - the contract that you sign by opening the box (?) negates even that.) by giving a copy away to a friend for free, annoying the company that made it because they counted their chickens before they hatched.
Clearly, there's been some kind of misunderstanding here.
"No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
When BSA members "steal" GPLed software, they are clear copyright violators. BSA member companies have very restrictive licenses they force on their users and almost never grant them the above mentioned freedoms, which is all that would be required for them to take advantage of the vast pool of superior software now available. It does not take much to comply, but BSA members are not known for doing much for their users.
Most people would call BSA member companies hypocrites for using GPLed code. Assides from calling the GPL unAmerican, Comunist and other silly things, the BSA likes to portray itself as the programer's friend. They say that software copyright complience is the only thing that creates a financial reward for the programer and that sofware would not exist without that reward. Their use of GPLed code shows the lie of all the billions of dollars of propaganda they generate every year. It would be great if BSA member companies would use the GPL and GPLed code, but they tell me other things.
As a former Boy Scout, yes in America, I can say that the BSA's policies have little to do with the Oath I took. That's why the original joke was funny. Self reliance was a Boy Scout core value. I don't complain about the BSA's attempts to make people comply with their goofey licenses. I don't need them or their crappy software.
Now, piss off.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Call it whatever you want, but the important bits of the GPL, that which differtiates it from the BSD-style licenses, are every bit as arbitrary as any other license. Both GPL and the proprietary packages that you deride are fundamentally based on the concept of intellectual property, whether or not RMS or his cohorts acknowledge it. In fact, they're both based on STRONG IP. I don't think anyone can reasonably argue that GPL's means (explicit code sharing each and every time) or its ends (the utopian vision that it is) would occur without a legal requirements for sharing. If I come across some code, I may very well choose to distribute binaries and not bother to share my code because I'm too lazy (or enjoy the competetive advantage). The fact that the GPL insists on this requirement says as much. What's more, I assert to you that the requirement for sharing of code is an odious one for many people. These people include software developers (who are denied code reuse...one of GPL's supposed visions), entrepreneurs, and even customers (those that might benefit from proprietary code that can be said to infringe an a GPL product).
No, the GPL is a license and it only differs from the other licenses in its particular form and the relative restrictiveness (in terms of verbosity--not necessarily, and often not, on the AGGREGATE). Your arguments for the GPL, that one can merely choose not to obey it and face "copyright law" can be used just as easily for proprietary software. What? You don't like our license? Fine don't obey it, we don't care. Oh yeah, and if you don't agree to it, well it's copyright law's fault that you can't use or copy my software. Totally disingenious.
If you don't care, then you wouldn't have the EXPLICIT requirement to do otherwise in the GPL. If you don't care, then you wouldn't whine and have your leader bark at and threaten anyone that is even IMPLIED to have violated the GPL's terms.
Oh my you are silly. The point isn't to do what they want, you simply remove the environment that allowed for them to exist in the first place. That environment is a direct result of our involvement in conflicts in the Middle East and other such things. Pushing our agenda in other parts of the world that don't like it, tends to piss people off enough that they will do crazy things. It's not appeasement, it's doing the right thing in the first place.
Your statement also doesn't make sense, since what they "want" is all of us dead. I don't see many ways to go about that without killing people.
What?
Heh.... trading nations, good, empires, usually bad.
One of the tragedies of Islam is that it did not get kicked out of government: Catholicism has got a chance to age disgracefully, falling into squalor without causing too much damage because the people running nations stopped taking orders from the church long ago.
Islam, to my eye, seems to be in a similar decline, but still has massive power in government: the result is a religion in decline has turned into a culture in decline which is turning into many millions of people with little hope.
I think that the star of organized religions is falling. I hope that the Muslim world has the sense not to go down with that sinking ship.
Hexayurt - open source refugee shelter,
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?
That those who fight piracy and die for it get ten virgin floppies?
Or are they soiled by the catholic church first?
Actually the wars in that region go back thru all of recorded history (since long before it was ever known as "the Holy Land), and have always had a great deal more to do with control over critical overland trade routes than with anyone's religious artifacts.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
- 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
Microsoft's empire is built on Word, not on Windows. It was Word that made Windows happen. Word, um, 2.0(??) for Windows 3 was wildly better than most of the other word processors at the time. It was fairly fast, quite easy, and very powerful. Its main competition was AmiPro (which was very nice but had a strange interface) and Wordperfect, which at the time hadn't yet been ported to Windows. WordPerfect was arguably technically better: it was much more stable, and you could write huge manuscripts with it. Word would choke past a certain point, but few people wrote documents that large, and it never became much of an issue. And WordPerfect's interface was abysmal.
Word cleaned their clocks, and sold A LOT of copies of Windows. Microsoft's later tendency to exploit their OS to muscle into new markets and extinguish any potential competitor is a relatively new development. At the time, they didn't have the market power to pull off that kind of move. It was Word that gave them that power.
People use Office because it is the standard, and it got to be the standard the old-fashioned way, by relatively fair competition in the marketplace. Microsoft has been coasting with Office for years now, but the original basis of their dominance isn't terribly shady. They won that battle fair and square.
Mind you, even back then, there were some undocumented functions being put into Windows that only Office could use.... but having been there at the time, it really felt like Word won through a MUCH superior interface and feature set, not because it ran a little faster. I was a mighty Wordperfect master, and also ran Word and Amipro regularly, and I honestly liked Word the best of the three.
I cannot argue, however, that their pricing is fair. It is monopoly-level pricing and is ridiculous. However they happened to get here, they're exploiting it ruthlessly now.
Nah, they'd remove your devices for replication...
Xix.
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
I know that. That's why I defined what terrorism was, and then pointed out that what the BSA does is something *different*. See?
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.
In the west, we take the place of faith and clergy for granted. Islam is not a "holiday and special occaision" religion like christianity (or even judaism), rather an all-encompassing life affirming practice.
:).
:)
:)
I think that it is good that this Sheik spoke out against piracy. I don't think that many westerners can relate, however, many of us could care less what our religous leaders think
As for this fellow belting out "I hate Israel"... We are all entitled to our opinions
God bless, which ever god or gods you may or may not believe in.
-jcw
BTW, not all fatwah's are taken seriously. A high ranking mullah from egypt also declared supermarkets as being against islam (One chain in particular had a major impact on commerce at a local bazaar) and Ayatollah Kahmeini (not Khomeini) in Iran declared that Coca-Cola was satanic... Both fatwah's were greeted with scepticism, especially the Ayatollah's.
Hell, Times New Roman, that ubiquitous font, costs $95.99.
Then how come Microsoft are offering it for free download? (Not that this affects your point.)
GROGGS: alive and well and living in
The mufti is appointed by the government. And the government here is not exactly, ahem, how shall I put this, a perfect representation of the people's will.
In any case, the mufti will say what the pols tell him to.
Add this up with the fact that MS has the IP police here all stitched up and you'll begin to see where I'm going.
The IP police get tipoffs directly from MS; they get addresses and expected number of licenses/machines that they can expect to find. And let's not call them tipoffs. Let's call them directions.
It can get pretty bad. We're working on setting up a small LUG round here, and I actually met with a contact in the MCIT (IT ministry) about getting them to consider linux. 2 weeks later, they signed a massive deal with MS, upgrading all their boxes to XP.
Do you have any idea how frustrating that is?
Are there any journalists willing to look into this? I hear that sleaze sells rags; plenty of that here.
Blearf. Blearf, I say.
The theory of Islam, the Koran, political power distributed via Imams and religious leaders is very good, in some ways better than christianity.
When Microsoft started marketing Windows 3.0 they said it offered unprecedented reliability, a universal platform upon which anyone could build a software application. I think we all agree that the actual implementation left a lot to be desired both technologically and idealogically.
I say in no uncertain terms the *implementation* of Islam is repressive and oppressive, can anybody name one predominantly Islamic country where pork is openly and widely available? Where alcohol is openly and widely available (despite the fact the Koran DOES NOT FORBID alcohol, just excessive drinking)? Where there aren't significant calls for Sharia Law? Malaysia, Indonesia, Cyprus, Chechnya, Bosnia. The faulty implementation of Islam is spreading like Microsoft Windows 3.0 with its co-operative scheduling.
I put it to all that the theory of Islam is pure and whole, but the actual implementation encourages terrorism and *yes* condones binLaden. Just look at Palestine, hundreds of binLadens committing suicide bombing. If binLaden is killed there are thousands to take his place willing to give their lives for their cause, like Palestinian suicide bombers.
Christianity is also quite pure in theory, but in implementation we have the KKK and David Koresh, but these violoations are nowhere near as widespread as Islam's implementation. So do we regard theory or implementation as more important? Looking at /. bashing Microsoft all the time it seems that implementation is far more important than theoretical ideals and marketing.
In summary, the theory of Islam is pure, the implementation is evil. To fix this implementation, how to you convince Windoze user to linux? Enlightenment is one way but only the elite would be intelligent enough to understand. How do you change the way of thinking of 1x10^8 Islamic Joe sixpacks? The only way is war.
A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
Ok, so this would be the last nail in their coffin of credibility, right?
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
A people which aspires to practice Islam properly will always desire Islamic government and Islamic jurisprudence.
Then I fear that Muslims are, at least until a different form of Sharia (right word?) comes to the fore, doomed to poverty and strife.
I mean this quite seriously: although I do believe that there are interpretations, forms of Islam which are well suited to the modern age, the forms of Islam which currently predominate are so out of step with the social, technological and political realities of the age that I fear the only way they can survive and remain internally consistent is war against time.
Any philosophy which relies on an "inside" and an "outside" is unsuited for the modern age: we are becoming one world, through trade and communication (beneficially) and through shared problems like the environment and AIDS (maelificly). The forms of Islam which sharply discriminate against non-believers have no future because, at the end of the day, most people are non-believers, and are not going to convert except by force.
So unless one can find a form of Islam which is open enough to modernity to cope with a multivalent, diverse society and culture - to cope with other systems of belief like science and the remains of the other world religions - and not just to cope with them but to join with them in a spirit of brotherhood, I think that Islam is eventually going to be destroyed as a political and social force.
A great proportion of the world's current conflicts are caused by just this problem: Islamic people trying to attain Islamic government in places which have a mixed population: what do you suggest is a good solution to this problem?
Should these Muslims emigrate to Muslim nations? What if their countrymen have no wish to live under Islamic law?
This is not an abstract question: this is a battle being fought all over the world, which has been fought in Indonesia, Morocco, Kashmir and so on.
This link between religion and political dominance is destroying Islam.
Hexayurt - open source refugee shelter,
Wonder if they'll start lopping people's hands off for copying MS Office or the latest Britney Spears album.
More about your last statement: That seems to push towards a funny area. Should we outlaw people on welfare from having babies because that harms the rest of us, and costs us money? It's a tough issue because of how it affects. 'Society' doesn't necessarily pay for medical care if I get in a car accident. My insurance company will, which my employer provides, so it will probably cost my employer money, etc, etc. But then you have to think, maybe I saved you money by getting in that car accident and dying, instead of living a full life and contracting a serious disease that costs millions and millions to take care of instead?
I don't think there is any clear cut way to approach the issue, it's just that seatbelt laws are so rarely considered controversial that when someone mentions it people are like "duh, seatbelts save lives, so who cares if they make you wear it or not", to which I say, what comes next? Eating healthy saves lives. Will I get a tick for eating a snickers, or something with a little too much grease and fat? In each case I cause physical harm to myself, not to mention if I smoke or drink, etc. That physical harm, in turn ends up costing other people a lot of money. I think smoking should be the first to go; since it does directly cause physical harm to others. Anyway, it kinda opens an ugly can of worms.
What?
That's a 'ticket' for eating snickers, unless you're in a heavily wooded area, then you might get a tick.
What?
Marijuana does less harm than alcohol, it's just illegal because of stigma, same as being gay used to be illegal. It took 50 years to destigmatise being gay and for those changes to propogate to the law.
A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
I've heard this so many times. Does anybody have a comprehensive list of what's wrong with US Foreign Policy or is it classified or censored and therefore unpostable on /. ? Especially for the sake of the younger ones among us. Let me start off the list:
The US support of Israel
The actions of the CIA before watergate
US troops in Saudi beating the crap out of Saudi cops
the list continues someone please...
A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
Wrong Piracy is theft. Specifically, theft upon the open sea. What you are calling piracy, is in fact, copyright violation. A copyright violation is a civil, not criminal matter. At least it is that way currently in the US. By continuing to call copyright violation, piracy; you are granting ground to those who oppose and oppress us. Stop it.
I've posted this before, but I'll post it again just for you.
Sorry, but Copyright violation is NOT solely a civil matter, and hasn't been since 1992. You are behind the times. It can be a federal felony offense.
http://www.cybercrime.gov/CFAleghist.htm [cybercrime.gov]
FEDERAL PROSECUTION OF
VIOLATIONS OF INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY RIGHTS
(COPYRIGHTS, TRADEMARKS AND TRADE SECRETS)
VI. APPENDICES
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY - COPYRIGHT FELONY ACT
H.R. Rep. No. 997, 102ND Cong., 2ND Sess. 1992, 1992 U.S.C.C.A.N. 3569,
P.L. 102-561, CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR COPYRIGHT
INFRINGEMENT
DATES OF CONSIDERATION AND PASSAGE
Senate: June 4, October 8, 1992
House: October 3, 1992
Senate Report (Judiciary Committee) No. 102-268,
Apr. 7, 1992 (To accompany S. 893)
House Report (Judiciary Committee) No. 102-997,
Oct. 3, 1992 (To accompany S. 893)
HOUSE REPORT NO. 102-997
October 3, 1992
[To accompany S. 893]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the Act (S. 893) to amend title 18, United States Code, to impose criminal sanctions for violation of software copyright, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with amendments and recommend that the Act as amended do pass.
The amendments are as follows:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof the following:
SECTION 1. CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT.
Section 2319(b) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
"(b) Any person who commits an offense under subsection (a) of this section-
"(1) shall be imprisoned not more than 5 years, or fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, if the offense consists of the reproduction or distribution, during any 180-day period, of at least 10 copies or phonorecords, of 1 or more copyrighted works, with a retail value of more than $2,500;
"(2) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, or fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, if the offense is a second or subsequent offense under paragraph (1); and
"(3) shall be imprisoned not more than 1 year, or fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, in any other case.".
Coming soon - pyrogyra
A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
Not sure if you are trolling or serious, but your points on history are reasonable and well taken.
The purpose of law, in my opinion, is to create a just structure for society and to minimize damage from certain types of behaviors to society as a whole. This is one of the reasons why fair use is protected under general interpretations of copyright law in the US-- that the harm to society from preventing fair use would undo the general benefits that the copyright system was designed to bring about (which include the enrichment of culture). When a type of harm is fundamentally different, its ethical implications are different, and also its systemic societal implications are different as well. These both stem from the different natures of the harms done.
Piracy has the potential do cause harm if it blocks enough revenue from the original creaters of the art to prevent future art from being created. One could argue that it has the potential to rob society of some enrichment, but the same is true of overly restrictive copyright laws.
Even most court decisions will point to an attitude that copyright and patent laws are designed to create an intellectual and artistic commons which can then be reused, and help to enrich our technological and cultural lives. That these laws fail to do this miserably with regard to software as the copyright terms have been extended again and again, and source code does not have to be filed with the government to qualify for protection (as unfortunately applied from the Bern conventions) are rarely taken into account.
There are ethical problems with software piracy. I see the largest ones being:
1: Piracy denies market-share to competition, thus leading to stronger monopolies and higher prices (every pirated copy of windows denies Linux a chance to compete, for example. Same goes for Photoshop, Office, etc.) because people tend to pirate industry standard software. Also in this light, anti-piracy efforts by Microsoft might be the best thing to happen to Linux.
2: Piracy perpetuates the same problems in the system with regard to the social harm of an unballanced copyright system. It is better to support Open Source than pirate if you do not agree with the concept of intellectual property as it is currently enforced.
In essence, theft causes harm to given individuals. But piracy causes harm to society in general, and not in any way limited to the "owner" whose claims his work is being "stolen." In fact, in many cases, it may actually help the "owner" eleminate competition by reducing their markets, and thus the real victim is not the "owner" but his competition. At the same time, the "owner" in insisting on the divine infallability of his intellectual property rights can cause the same or greater damage to society. It is here that theft and piracy are irreconcilably separate.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
India is a seccular multi-religous country with 51 languages and many different religions. When did you last hear about an extremist Hindu blowing himself up in the name of God? Heck the religion has 2 million Gods so he'll spend the rest of his life working out which God he is actually sacrificing himself for!
The same is true but to a lesser extent with Pakistan, despite being a dictatorship, Musharaff is a nice guy with a good personality and a nice smile. Actually scrub that nice smile part. Many of the citizens in its west are extremists (BTW the video of the execution of the American jewish journalist Daniel Pearl is now available for download on Kazaa courtesy of www.ogrish.com). Unfortunately the Pakistani troops on the ground as everybody knows can be bribed just like in the movie "Three Kings", no joke. All Osama binLaden has to do is give the Pakistani troops $10,000 and they'll look the other way.
Al Qaeada people still walk about in Pakistan as free men, the cops tip them off before they raid them or seize their bank accounts because the cops are their buddies. In many of the seized accounts the balance of the account was just $2, yeah America great victory against terrorist funding. Al Qaeda are like those popular jocks in US schools, everybody bends over backwards for them, no matter how much Musharraff jumps up and down. He has to fire his entire police force and CIA (SiS) but that ain't gonna happen 'cos of National pride. And so the vast majority of people arrested including Omar Sheikh responsible for the death of Daniel Pearl (above) get set free. Unfortunately total war is the only way to resolve such a level of injustice.
A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
What would my Priest do? What the hell is that? A bumper sticker for NAMBLA?
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
In my book the people that pick up the Koran and say "Hey this is cool, there's some profound stuff in here" are okay, if they accept the minor tweaks by tacitly eating pork or drinking alcohol but if their country of origin is a Pakistani madrasa then he has the culture built not around the Koran but around other crap (see above) ingrained in him, the type of guy that believes he's the second coming or something. If your Muslim friends refuse to denounce AL-HEDAYA Vol. II (Hanafi Manual) then they must kill people that don't pay the Jizyah as these people are no longer entitled to protection in an Islamic state.
However just as the mafia doesn't represent every Italian, extremists don't represent Koranic Islam, they represent a very warped Islam (Pakistan madrasa edition) which I say is unreservedly evil. Many say that Islam is spreading, but here's the secret - it's not Koranic Islam that's spreading.
A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
Talk about a man speaking the wisdom of a god.
If you were in Afghanistan then you *would* be dead for converting away from Islam. Last time I checked the United States didn't have Sharia law, it has weak beauracratic Christian law imposed by heavy-handed oppressive cops (why the heck were tanks used against WTO protestors I mean *tanks* if Tianneman square happens in the United States it's OK but not in China, hypocrites). The US is far from perfect, but still it's far closer than a *lot* of countries, like China massacring Tibetan monks, jailing Falun Gong Tai Chi practitioners (WTF??) and Brazil torturing and killing poor people for being well, poor, and you thought medicaid was bad. Do you believe the women on rawa who get shot for walking without their husband beside them => were whores could have said, "But I'm not muslim" as a defense. The countries that implement Osama binLaden-type Islam and need to be nuked: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, UAE. Read this
Now bear in mind that here in the UK the muslims of Bradford (where the Oldham riots took place) are calling for Sharia law. These are BAD arab-supported people and my gut tells me suicide bombing and sabotage of British military installations to be imminent, it's not that I know anything, it's damn common sense, just look at their website for God's sake, even the KKK isn't this ouvert, I'm ashamed that these people are in the UK. Have a *good* read of their entire website, listen to their audio, see their video, and read the fatwahs of this Sharia Court of the UK. Yes you heard me, these people have a Sharia Court in the UK. I've heard these people lecturing when they came to Ilford mosque, and their rhetoric is worse than Hitler's speeches. Muslims are free to enter churches and hindu temples, but when a non-muslim walks into a mosque especially on Friday I feel like someone's gonna kill me, I don't think even James Bond could infiltrate. Oh why why why does Islam always become like this when the propogation of the religion >80%?Which reminds me my neighbour from across teh street lived in Egypt 30 years ago. There was a crisis involving the Americans, I couldn't make out what it was because she broke down crying. All Americans and British were warned to leave the country, but the warning came too late. After Friday prayers, after a furious speech by the Imam, hundreds of muslims poured out of the mosque looking real pissed, a British man was in the wrong place at the wrong time, several muslims grabbed his right arm and leg, several more his left arm and leg. They pulled and tore him apart, severing his limbs. He died. She broke down crying again so it was difficult to make out, but it was something like because the mobs started looking for all the Brits and Americans so they broke into her flat with machettees looking for non-muslims to kill, but fortunately she had anticipated this and had sought refuge in her neighbour's flat. The next day she and her British husband left and claimed asylum in the UK.
More recently my friend whom I've known since I was 5 was supposed to go to India and Pakistan with his good good friend who was so nice to him called "Sheikh Omar" - yes that one, I know 2 people that went to the same school as Sheikh Omar. In India they were supposed to meet with my friend's Uncle, a Brigadier in the Indian army. There was a last minute cancellation and my friend couldn't make the flight. If he made that flight he'd be dead, and would be on the Daniel Pearl decapitation video (available for download on Kazaa). He's already informed the FBI and given a full report so this is on the up and up.
So the next time you suggest that I'm "just quoting from Google" you might want to think again. After all you have to know what you're looking for to find what you're looking for unless you try the "Are you feeling lucky?" button.
Many people on /. know people that died in WTC, well I indirectly know the people that actually did it. Small world, eh? I think think this makes me qualified enough to comment on the evils of Islam's most popular implementation.
As for who created these problems and the history of the Taliban, Mujihadeen, native American Indians, British, French and Spanish(wipe out the entire Mayan race WTF???) colonisation, yes it's an unfortunate truth that every colonial nation has committed heinous crimes against many others, except for Tibet, Hinduism and Buddhism, the three most dissed religions. Immigration has worked because the immigrants' religions were malleable, Hindus would go screw it and eat American beef steaks, Scottish immirants would forget haggis and eat Pizza Hut, multiculturalism was working so well... until Islam came along. In my office canteen a woman wearing a bhurka was sitting there saying I shouldn't eat pork, one of our managers replied, "If you don't like pork, the airport is that way". I'm glad to see the native culture is adapting to resist Islam in this way, the same way Picard treats a Klingon completely different than anyone else. Before the British divide and conquor techniques were used these types of militant muslims didn't exist. Ultimately Britain is to blame for WTC by segregating Hindus and Muslims in India by creating a feedback loop especially in the muslims by telling them they were "outnumbered and repressed". But then without Britain's colonistaion would America exist at all?
You speak about corporate rule, and yet the SEC knows that if it doesn't regulate them these corporates will destroy themselves, just look at Enron. Better the devil you know.
In WW2 Winston Churchill knew that the Japanese were going to attack Pearl harbour, but they didn't tell the US because they knew that the average US citizen doesn't know or care about anything unless NY gets nuked or something, so that's exactly what you got. This is why bad stuff keeps happening to the US, maybe you should have a complaints box at the white house which actually makes a difference, but then that's not possible because it'll never get more ratings than WWF. Don't believe me? Well OK where's the USS Nimitz right now? Where's the USS Kennedy? Where's the S. S. Essess? Which one's the odd one out? Heck I don't even know, the only time I'd notice a big international event is when somebody gets nuked or the world trade centre falls down, even now. This is why I'm pretty sure a lot more peope knew about WTC before it happened than are owning up now.
About 150,000 Afghanis, a handful of Americans (I don't remember exactly). Although the Afghanis do remember the B-52s NOT bombing I think Gardez city (I can't remember - the one before the Taliban fell back to Kandahar). 150,000 people is nothing, 2,500,000 Hindus were massacred in Pakistan, DO YOU HEAR THAT IN THE NEWS??? Because muslims speak out due to their religion being strong like Scientology, whereas hindus and buddhists are quiet and shy and just want to make money. Look at the actual poor people in Cambodia in the profoundly tragic Discovery channel filmreal documentary The Land of the Wandering Souls. What the heck happened to protecting the weak?Well Islam is strong and that's why people don't want to hurt it. Loads of Hindus die, who cares? CNN is blaming the Indian government for the dead people in Gujurat. How did this start? 2000 muslims surrounded a train and burnt everybody alive. How dare the international media tries to blame the hindus? That's like the (RI|MP)AA making computers illegal and then being surprised when there's a civil war. Oh yeah geeks are sissies like hindus so if computers are made illegal geeks'll just rant on /. and that'll be the end of it. If (RI|MP)AA kills RMS in an "accident" EFF will collapse, he's irreplacable, his moral viewpoint is unique. Only stupid people attack Klingons
I've proved my point, read the middle of this post. Heh maybe when this post is indexed by Google people will use *this* post as a reference. I'm not perfect, heck maybe if everything was perfect there would be stagnation like in the Japanese economy, 0% growth is nothing to be ashamed of in my book, but, well.... Maybe conflict and oppression is necessary otherwise we'd have unrealistic isolationism and decadence as in the movie Demolition Man.A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
I certainly don't think it's gotten that bad just yet.
The BSA went ot the clerics and pointed out that pirating of copurighted information, and bootlegging for profit, is a BAD thing. They realize it's a common thing now, and make a declaration that it's bad, just a reminder.
I don't think business and religion are mixed, and the clerics are free to disagree with the BSA, perhaps even declare a jihad on them, so I don't think they're in anyone's pocket.
There are laws on the books for bicycle helmets.
If you eat lots of twinkies then you didn't listen to federally funded research and FDA and AHA and AMA doctors.
If you get AIDS from unprotected sex than you have not paid attention to publiclly funded health classes in school, and free STD clinics that give out free condoms.
My taxpayer money goes out to all of those.
If you don't wear a seatbelt and die, first, you die(bad enough) second, your family would need the free counseling provided, and perhaps a welfare check every so often as now you can't earn money for your loved ones.
"Marijuana is simply not very harmful, grows everywhere, and our jails are full of people doing time for selling a dime bag: even an irrational, impossible-to-enforce law can still ruin lives."
Why open the can of worms?
Okay, let's not bring up the fact that it causes much much higher risks of lung cancer, let's ignore the fact that it's a "gateway drug" and CAN pull the user into harder stuff like coke. Let's also ignore the fact that it can cause permanent brain damage to the frontal lobes if you take it before you're 15. Let's also ignore the diminished ability to remember longterm things with prolonged use.
What I want to bring up is DUI. It's not a good idea to smoke pot and then drive. It has worse effects on your driving than a pitcher or two full of beer. Not only do you lose your braking reflexes, but I have friends who close their eyes while driving, other times trying to play "tag" with the other lane.
People have died because of this, and stoned drivers. If fatalities can be prevented by a nationwide ban, then so be it. After all, a human life or two or dozen is worth more than a bunch of people getting high, right?
A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
The guy who did the work on the islamic dinar is one of the most dangerous men alive, if you're a capitalist :-)
Seriously, I think you're very right about the possibility for an enlightened Islamic state: history has shown that Islam is capable of it, and god knows we need an alternative philosophy somewhere on the planet to hypercapitalism, which is as toxic a way of life as has yet to be found.
The state has to adapt to modernity; the church should be able to stand for eternity. I think this is why they must be separated.
Wa alakum al salaam!
Hexayurt - open source refugee shelter,
A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
Looks like the US Government agrees with me and has changed their policies to fingerprint people arriving from Arab nations.
A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?