Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

News.com Links to DeCSS Program

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the whats-the-dilly-yo dept.

zorglubxx writes "In less than a week News.com has published 2 articles ([Oct 3] and [Oct 7]) talking about copyright law and the DMCA where they LINK to DeCSS. Not source but compiled Windows version called DeCSS.exe. News.com know that 2600 lost their fight for linking to DeCSS so I wonder why they are doing this. Trying to make a point? Civil disobedience? An honest mistake?" Update: 10/08 02:51 GMT by T : An anonymous reader writes "In the time between when I read the first and second referenced articles, the links were updated to point the DeCSS gallery rather than DeCSS.exe"

6 of 249 comments (clear)

  1. Probably an exercise of first amedment rights? by haplo21112 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It is civil disobience, via exercise of the 1st amendment people. Its one publisher supporting another. If every new organization does the same whats gonna happen...I doubt everyone one of them is going to court.
    AT least I hope thats what their link is all about. I suppose we shall see if it disappears later or not.
    Hey does /. become an acessory because they link to a story that links to DECSS?

    --
    Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
  2. Re:3 reasons by neuroticia · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I doubt that News.com encourages their writers to break laws, even stupid ones like the DMCA. No company wants a writer who is a liability.

    I think it's most likely that the author didn't know better. I mean- hey. How many people can keep up with what is and is not a permissable link? You'd think that an author writing about something like that would know, but... Stranger things have happened.

    Another possibility is that Author emails article in to work, article is handed off to low-level drudge HTML markup person who enters it into the system and link-ifies anything that looks like it could be a link. Sees "DeCSS.exe" and thinks "Oh. what's that?" does a search for it on Google, finds a link, and enters the link.

    I mean... Most authors can't even handle their own proofreading. Who says they create their own links?

    -Sara

  3. Not a mistake by Betelgeuse · · Score: 4, Interesting

    An honest mistake?

    I think it's pretty clear that there is one thing this is not: a mistake. Even if they only did this once, I don't see how it could be a mistake. I mean, when was the last time you saw a news story from a legitimate news outlet that linked DIRECTLY to an executable file?

    News.com is, perhaps, setting up for a court battle ('cause they want to challenge the DMCA) or this guy is trying to make some sort of point.

    --
    I couldn't tell if you were experimenting with poor-man's cryogenics or looking for the orange sherbet.
  4. DeCSS is Just a Symbol by ksw2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    DeCSS is just proof of concept code. libdvdcss accomplishes the same end-result, and it actually works. It's embarassing how many people involved in the DeCSS issue don't realize this fact. libdvdcss is just as illegal (according to the MPAA's gestapo) as DeCSS was/is. Maybe it's a good thing that nobody realizes it...

  5. Re:Exploiting Different Standards? by RealAlaskan · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Remember, the RIAA is well-funded by all the CDs they overprice, and all the artists they rip off.

    It's silly nitpicking, I suppose, but you're wrong. The RIAA is well-funded by all the fools who buy the over-priced CDs. The distinction seems important, because it shows where to attack their funding: not by going after the CDs or the ``artists'', but by educating the fools.

    HAH! So much for hope on that front ...

    --
    See what I've been reading.
  6. Re:Exploiting Different Standards? by blakestah · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Could it be that news.com is simply pointing out the obvious double standard given to "hacker" sites like 2600.com and "reputable news sites" like news.com?

    Absolutely. The judge in the 2600 case said as much. 2600.com was not viewed as disseminating free press, or providing a link point for people interested in fair use, or providing a service for linux people who wanted to view DVDs on their computers.

    Instead, the judge saw them as anarchists who thought movies should not be protectable simply because someone somewhere cracked the crypto. He then ruled accordingly.

    Defendants, on the other hand, are adherents of a movement that believes that information should be available without charge to anyone clever enough to break into the computer systems or data storage media in which it is located. Less radically, they have raised a legitimate concern about the possible impact on traditional fair use of access control measures in the digital era.
    Lewis A. Kaplan
    United States District Judge