HP Backs Off DMCA Threat
Bruce Perens wrote with this interesting reversal: "News.com reports HP has backed off of its DMCA threat." Which makes SNOsoft's official response thankfully beside the point now. Update: 08/02 05:37 GMT by T : Declan McCullagh points out this CNET story, which includes words from HP, Snosoft, and Bruce Perens. Writes Declan: "HP blames the snafu on... their lawyers!"
Well, it's quite simple. Someone says something trollish about it, and then some of the insightful people argue with him. Then we have some insightful posts, and others argue with them. Mark my words, we'll soon have another set of insightful anti-DMCA diatribes, some disappointment that we didn't get to try the DMCA against such a stupid case, and a bunch of people claiming that HP, as a corporation, has done this in their own self-interest. :)
BRUCE: I'm going to violate the DMCA on stage
:)
HP: Please don't. It would sortof reflect badly on us, and could cause trouble.
BRUCE: Well... OK.
HP: We're going to sue the pants off of anyone who reveals Tru64 vulnerabilities using the DMCA!
BRUCE: Please don't. This reflects badly on us, and could cause all sorts of trouble.
HP: Well... OK.
Good to know everyone's getting along.
Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.
they started to make a mistake, then corrected themselves...so that makes them better than Epson ? or Lexmark ? wheres the logic ?
they didnt do anything POSITIVE, they just didnt do something NEGATIVE
We're all glad HP backed down, but what scares me is that the "Responsible Disclosure" FUD continues. On Bugtraq people write that CERT and SecurtyFocus are "established parties" and everyone who does not give them their so-called "0days" is irresponsible (at least CERT is known to sell 0days). I personally won't give them my 0days early.
The "Responsible Disclosure" draft continues to get advertised, though it was not approved by the IETF .
Why do people think about giving away the right of free speech just because of some FUD?
Even in the unlikely case if this bad RFC passes, does it mean that that people are safer when they disclose problems - I definitely don't think so personally.
So the facts are: some companies can't write secure code, and it is more expensive to write code securely.
Just check "Help -> About" on Windows before using the word "responsibility".
The easiest solution is to shoot the messenger and to outlaw saying the emperor has no clothes. But this won't fix the problem in the real world. Such regulations will only alienate a lot of people and will make things worse.
Good going HP - my next printer will be from you.
I bet you hit yourself in the head with a hammer, because it feels good when you stop.
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.