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."
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 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
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
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).
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...
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.
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."
>>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.
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
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.
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.
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?
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
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
~ wavy lines as I shift into a new timeline ~
9/11/2022: 19 terrorists, operating with the support of Osama Bin Valenti and Yasser Rosen (well, at least the Israelis and Palestinians sorted out their differences ;-), defeated security checkpoints, boarded, and took control of, four 747-class unmanned-aerial-freighters (UAFs) containing full loads of Celine Dion CDs and Pauly Shore DVDs, and flew the aircraft directly into the chip fabs of Intel, AMD, the main offices of the Free Software Foundation.
The fourth aircraft, its target unknown, was downed harmlessly over water when a skilled hacker on the ground figured out what was going on, and managed to succesfully reverse-engineer, decrypt, and override the terrorists' jamming signal, regaining partial control of the aircraft using nothing but a CB radio, a Pringles can, a laptop, and an old 802.11b card. "Yeah, it was scary, but thanks to the fact that I was able to pick up on the basics of programming by kindergarten, and I had to reverse-engineer some arbitrary code samples for my high school entrance exams, it wasn't too hard to figure out how to take the plane back. Thank God they repealed the DMCA, or I'd have never had the chance to develop these skills. I only had a couple of watts of transmitter power, and I didn't have enough time to set up a distributed computing network to crack the entire protocol, so all I could do was point it over water and send it down before my batteries ran down. They can't win. All their base are belong to us!"
The 20th hijacker, Zaccarias Eisner, is still at large. Authorities in the previous administration had, in fact, detained him in 2013, but had been forced to released him under direct order of Attorney General Hollings.
The final transmission from one of the doomed freighter aircraft was recorded as "I say to you that the universal Turing machine is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston Taliban Stranglers are to women home alone without their burkhas! Free Software has made our industry bleed and bleed and hemorrage! We shall not stop our jihad against the Great Satan of fair use!"
Noam Chomsky, commenting on CNN from the Shady Hippy Retirement Home, said "[...]we have to look past the destruction of our information technology industry and find the root cause of the cycle of violence - the Supreme Court's 2004 declaration of the DMCA as unconstitutional, and Congress' failure to pass the CBDTPA or any of its variants by 2005 - followed by the rapid rollout of broadband wireless P2P meshes networks, all led to the collapse of the Hollywood's business model, the consequent radicalization of members of the Hollywood media elite, ultimately leading to the tragic events of 2022. It's all still America's fault."
President Stallman and Vice President Raymond, along with Senate Majority Leader Torvalds, (they settled their differences in 2009, as Mozilla 1.0 finally shipped as part of the "Really Really Unified Distro" :-) broadcasting from an undisclosed location, issued a joint statement: "You are either with us or you are with the Hollywood Cartel."
House Minority Leader Gates, and Senate Minority Leader Ballmer issued a joint statement: "Although we differ from the administration on the point of free software, we agree with them on the fundamental issue - the trillion-dollar technology industry cannot allow itself to bow down to the $60B entertainment industry. Sure, we'd prefer you be using .WMA instead of .MP3 or .OGG, but today is no day for partisan games. The bottom line is that if you don't download your indie music for free -- if you're still paying $29.99 for copy-protected Britney Spears and Celine Dion WAV files -- then the terrorists have won."
~ wavylines ~
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
- 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