Slashdot Mirror
DMCA Limited by Sixth Circuit Appeals Court
katharsis83 writes "Ars Technica and others are reporting that the Sixth Circuit Court has ruled against Lexmark in their lawsuit against a generic ink manufacturer. Here is a link to the ruling (EFF Website)."
DUPE?????
Atleast someone is using their head :)
I really dont know why a printer manufacturer should have exclusive rights on producing ink that work with their printers.
That is like giving sony exclusive rights on the frequencies on their remote controls
The system had the verbosity of HTML combined with all the readability of compiled assembly viewed as bitmap images
It's about time the "give them the razors, sell them the blades" approach the printer companies have taken gets a kick in the shorts. They'll still make zillions from selling cartridges but at least one may have the option of refilling or buying 3rd party cartridges.
Think about it: why do some printer cartridges cost more than a cheap DVD player?
Trolling is a art,
Yeah, it's only two stories down in the YRO section.
Promising Ruling In Lexmark DMCA Case
Maybe this will make things such as region lockout on videogame consoles, cell phone unlocking services, etc, legal.
Then again, if you start taking the analogy this far, then you get into a paradox with DVD region encoding.
Thoughts?
is a struck down DMCA, but this is a start.
Don't save Windows XP! http://www.petitiononline.com/jjw1xp/petition.html
I've purchased a lot of games like Battlefield 1942 and Vietnam. The problem is you have to put a CD in the drive to play. This really slows down the game and is inconvenient. I'm sure it also adds wear and tear to your CD/DVD drive. Removing the CD check for a legal use is common sense. I bought the game, I'm entitled to use it.
I'm not interested in piracy. I think it costs more to pirate the game if you factor in time then it would just to buy it.
At least this ruling would deter (mis)application of the DMCA on objects that the consumers actually own.
Still won't help with the current situation of entertainment media or software though.
Not only the right decision, but one that quotes Lawrence Lessig. How cool is that?
Carousel is a lie!
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
A judge with his head screwed on right?
What's next?
Dogs and cats living together?
North America having more than two presidential candidates?
Duke Nuken Forever going gold? And GPL'd?
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Oh...oh my god people....LEXMARK is involved...OH! Ink EVERYWHERE!! Sweet mary moses O'malloy....I...this...just give me a minute. Just give me a...a minute. Wow. Okay, I think I'm ready to handle this. THOSE CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES!! WHYY!!!! Why...how could they do this...this day and age...oh, Slashdot, what does this mean....what does it mean....
oh no, no, no, no....i need a cup of coffee....mooannn..
vicious, untreated political sewage...niche entertainment for the spiritually unattractive...worshipless pap
I always thought the Lexmark case was one of the worst abuses of the DMCA ever. They might as well be trying to make proprietary PAPER. And frankly, those damn ink cartridges cost a mint.
/., too much by far.
Hopefully we'll see some high quality knock offs and the price will go down.
This is my 666th post. Too much
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
Technically speaking, you bought the CD, box and manuals, plus you paid for a license for use of the game, subject to copyright restrictions.
No conveyance of ownership is included.
Sorry.
FPO
When I heard about this ink/printer suit and the garage door opener I couldn't believe such a law would exist long. However, I'm concerned this ruling does not address the problems with the law itself, and possibly supports it. We need this law struck down, not just ruled against. Get out there and support the EFF and anti-dmca.org. We need the law repealed before they stick the law in your BIOS and linux becomes and outlaw OS.
Of course it's always pleasing when a ruling goes against the DMCA, but we do need to see this small victory in context. Personally I would see this as "one lawsuit too far" in DMCA terms, and the judge has (rightly) nipped it in the bud. But that's a far cry from stemming the tide and actually starting to reverse the creation of the DMCA, which is what we are ultimately pursuing, isn't it?
So Wahey for this result, and hopefully burning Lexmark's fingers should keep a few of their fellow printer manufacturers away from similar lawsuits. But nevertheless, let's be realistic: this is only a small step in the right direction.
apterous.org
The article and ruleing go into the fact they at defating the control for interopartion is legal. So if I need a mod chip to boot linux or play my home brew game doesnt that make the mod chip its self legal. INAL but the opionon appears to be opening the door and leading to that the DMCA is vulnerable on several other grounds. Can this be leveraged to for mod chips, tivo hacks, maybe even the broadcast flag it self. Look at me Im drunk with power in burning the DMCA
This is why the judicial branch is my favorite. Sure, they don't always rule the way we geeks would like but at least they try to think instead of just doing what will get them re-elected.
Executive is the figurehead, legestlative is the mob, judicial is the sanity. Sometimes.
HP was selling a line of inkjet printers called "Apollo". They actually had them in the front of grocery stores for a short time here (SF Bay Area). They were only $30, but the catch was that the cartridge was only about 1/2 or 2/3rds filled with ink. So when the ink went out, you would spend as much on ink as you did on the printer :-p. I don't if any other company had tried this though.
This also resolves a long-standing problem with game consoles. In order for disks for certain consoles to boot, they must contain copyrighted code and trademarked logos on the disk, which are then displayed on the screen... This should resolve that issue.
Not that this matters anyway, as all consoles from this point on will go the way of the Xbox and use public-key digital signatures.
Melissa
You just gotta love reading this ruling, it actually makes me feel intelligent.
Before the printer runs the Toner Loading Program, it performs a "checksum operation," a "commonly used technique" to ensure the "integrity" of the data downloaded from the toner cartridge microchip.
Of course, you don't have to "understand" every piece of information presented in the ruling, but "understanding" what is written is a very "commonly used technique" to insure the "integrity" of communicating in the English language.
How does this decision relate to the bnetd case?
from the page's decision quote: "companies like Lexmark cannot use the DMCA in conjunction with copyright law to create monopolies of manufactured goods for themselves just by tweaking the facts of this case: by, for example, creating a Toner Loading Program that is more complex and "creative" than the one here, or by cutting off other access to the Printer Engine Program."
It says specifically "manufactured goods", but overall bnetd seems to have been the same thing.
Just Four Hours Forty Five minutes since this was first posted.
I understand a Dupe from 5 months ago, but come on now.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
This case is pretty clear, in my opinion, and I doubt the Supreme Court would hear it even if Lexmark does appeal, which I don't think they will.
But the DMCA won't really be tested until it's challenged in front of the Supreme Court, which has a tendency of leaning towards business interests in property disputes.
One glimmer of hope is that the sixth circuit is 2/3 conservative, more resembling the high court then the liberal Ninth or Neo-Con Fourth. That might explain why it has the second best overturn record in the past 10 years, and it might mean that there's hope for our cause after all.
This is one more reason the election next week matters. One more republican-appointed justice and you will see a sea change in our nations judiciary. Roe v. Wade (The right to have an abortion) gets most the press, but things like DCMA will be affected just as much.
Lexmark doing crap like this has caused them to lose some sales. I switched over to Epson because of crap like this and so have others I do work for.
You can't read the link in your browser's status bar to see what it is before you click it?
Anyone else read the partially dissenting opinion?
Judge Feikens claimed that, because Lexmark admitted that there was a "magic bit" that would turn off the TLP sequence, that SCC should have found it.
This really presumes that they knew that there even was a "magic bit" in the first place.
This is, IMO, insane. Without apriori knowledge of the existance of a bit even existing, how were they supposed to have found it?!?
Other people might look at this as a victory against the DMCA, but I, for one, don't think that the judge who could have written that dissenting opinion still being a seated judge, able to hear future DMCA cases, using the same flawed logic, counts as a victory.
Unfortunately, the position is appointed and not elected, so it's not like we're going to get rid of him as easily as voting someone else into office instead.
-- Terry
Does that mean I'm allowed to circumvent game console lockouts and regional lockouts legally and produce my own content?
A shrubbery
Istall the TargetAlert extension for Firefox.
http://www.bolinfest.com/targetalert/That would have shown you a small pdf icon after the url.
CAPS LOCK IS LIKE CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL!
I only work from my computer screen.
Someone wants a hardcopy? I email it to them. "It's faster this way, don't you think?"
Fax request? I use a fax-modem.
I love passing the printing buck to someone else.
This:
Posted by michael on 10-26-04 16:45
from the morning-in-america dept.
EvanKai writes "Jason Schultz writes, "This just in --- Static Control Corp. has won its appeal against Lexmark over the right to produce after-market replacement cartridges for Lexmark printers." You can find a PDF of the ruling here and more about the case on EFF's site." It's important to note that the case is not even close to finished; this was just a ruling on whether Static Control would be enjoined (prevented) from selling their replacement cartridges while the suit proceeded. The original court issued an injunction, and the Appellate Court felt that Static Control had a good chance of success in court and overturned the injunction. The case will proceed and in the end, either side may win.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
...so that I can't read it.
Seriously. Yahoo's web filter blocks EFF.org. And a slate of others that it shouldn't block(such as the Libertarian Party's website).
OH NOES!!! IT APPEARS YUO DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO PAY FOR DIS HERE PIZZA! WAHT EVER ARE YOU GOING TO DO!?!?
I would print that opinion out, but the ink would cost more than my Lexmark printer.
--
make install -not war
Unfortunately, the position is appointed and not elected, so it's not like we're going to get rid of him as easily as voting someone else into office instead.
Are you serious? The fact that it's an appointed position is the only reason the whole bank of judges wasn't as incompetent has him. At least judges have time to at least read what they're working on. The people who pass these laws are so busy keeping their eyes on the polls that they make this guy look enlightened.
Taking the logic of the decision one step further, any copyright or DCMA protections a manufacturer of a device like the Xbox or the PS2 to lock the owners of those devices into only buying games with the manufacturer's protections in them are not valid either.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
The DMCA was "Copyright fix in the Internet Age, version 1". I expect Version 2 will be coming around shortly. There is a lot of pressure for action:
-
The patent system is broken, so people are trying to use copyright law in its place
-
The RIAA, MPAA, et al want piracy made a capital felony (it seems)
-
The blogs are taking over the role of news source from the mainscam media
-
Courts are getting smarter
-
Open Source principles are at work in business, as the dotcom bubble has given way to the network age
-
Politicians see the power of free information, especially in the way it affects their ability to campaign
In short, we're all more sophisticated and just more used to the impact of technology than when the DMCA was made law in the late 90's. We'll probably be just as short-sighted next time around, but at least this batch of problems will be addressed. I hope.sigs, as if you care.
Had to steal a deviation of it. :P
All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
I refuse to purchase a printer that requires ink cartridges that cost over $5. Ink is not that expensive. The cartridges are not that expensive. They're just charging you that much because you don't have a choice if you want to use your printer again. If that rules out all printers (and so far it has) so be it. They're not getting my money. I was disgusted to find that the last printer I bought was $50 and the cardtridges were $30. No one should need an explaination to see that this is just wrong.
Question everything
I'm reading thru all these comments seeing that a lot of people are surprised by the fact this lawsuit even happend. In the day and age where you can sue McDonalds because your FAT, and companines are trying to squeeze every last penny out of us that your really surprised?
This ruling is about the ability of people to replace the ink in their printers with ink made by people other than the printers' orgional manufacturers. DMCA may be in the title but this has nothing to do with pirating.
This post written under Gentoo-linux with an SCO IP license.
It looks like these judges have an exceptional grasp of the technology stifling possibilities inherent in the DMCA. If you look in the concurring opinion you will find this passage:
I write separately to emphasize that our holding should not be limited to the narrow facts surrounding either the Toner Loading Program or the Printer Engine Program. We should make clear that in the future companies like Lexmark cannot use the DMCA in conjunction with copyright law to create monopolies of manufactured goods for themselves just by tweaking the facts of this case: by, for example, creating a Toner Loading Program that is more complex and "creative" than the one here, or by cutting off other access to the Printer Engine Program. The crucial point is that the DMCA forbids anyone from trafficking in any technology that "is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a [protected] work." 17 U.S.C. 1201(2)(A) (emphasis added). The key question is the "purpose" of the circumvention technology. The microchip in SCC's toner cartridges is intended not to reap any benefit from the Toner Loading Program - SCC's microchip is not designed to measure toner levels - but only for the purpose of making SCC's competing toner cartridges work with printers manufactured by Lexmark.Not only did they smack down Lexmark in this abuse of the DMCA's (and copyright's) provisions, but they go so far as to state that the DMCA should be read to not apply to companies aiming to create a monopoly not supported by law.
I only wish this was a SCOTUS ruling instead of a Circuit ruling. Apparently there are now conflicts with other Circuit rulings.
Technically speaking, you bought the CD
You bought the CD from Wal-Mart and are thus the owner of a lawfully made copy of a copyrighted computer program. And if you patch your installation to make it work on a machine without a working CD drive, U.S. copyright law doesn't consider that an infringement (17 USC 117). Yeah, infringement is orthogonal to circumvention, but as this article points out, judges are still hammering out the scope of the DMCA's circumvention ban.
I'm really waiting for them to give up. Let's face it, if people want to steal it they're going to steal it. Copy protection isn't going to stop them, and it only hinders the people who pay for the game and want to play it.
Apple seems to take this philosophy with their software. I've never had to enter a CD key for any software I've bought. Of course, we all know Apple makes most of its money off its computers, and you're guaranteed to be "buying" at least one copy of OS X with your computer.
I think that game publishers won't have it, though. I assume that it has to have copy protection or it won't be shipped.
The space unintentionally left unblank.
How does this decision relate to the bnetd case?
Has the bnetd case made it to a federal court of appeals yet? Which circuit is the Eastern District of Missouri in? Perhaps Americans need conflicting opinions in the different appeals circuits so that the Supremes will feel obliged to step in and clarify the DMCA.
Combine this with the 9th Circuit ruling in Sega v. Accolade , and you have a pretty good case.
I went to my friends house one day and he had a *STACK* of lexmark printers new in the box. I said, "what the hell could you possibly do with 5 printers?" he replies, "I got them on sale for 19.99 each. Thats half the price of ink." He just chucked the printers in the trash after he used the ink they came with.
It's about time companies started getting charged the true cost of raw materials. A $19.99 printer couldn't exist if it weren't being subsidized by a) far poorer nations an b) the planet itself. We'll all pay for it in the end.
So what our saying is security through obscurity works?
can't have it both ways.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
I've been following this case and glad to hear this. SCC has been prevented from selling their product for about 8 months now ... will lexmark have to reimburse them for their lost sales? or, how about customers, who have been deprived of a legal cheaper product?
HIV Crosses Species Barrier... into Muppets
The court ruled on the law. They decided that Lexmark was stretching the DMCA beyond what Congress intended. It has nothing to with being for or against "the people".
If Congress had written the DMCA to support this scenario, the court would probably have upheld it.
Now how do you expect us to do that without reading the article?
If you don't have a problem with low prices on ink cartridges while supporting a group of Catholic monks in Wisconsin, go here the next time you need to buy an ink cartridge. I've ordered a couple of times from them and haven't had any problems with the ordering process or with their products. With them, I get my Epson Stylus C60 cartridges for about 1/4-1/3 the price of the Epson OEM cartridges at local stores.
/., because they carry a /. banner at the bottom of their home page referring back to a thread about them here earlier this year (in which I had originally heard about them).
They also seem to think very highly of
Ad astra per aspera (A rough road leads to the stars)
All you Libertarians are seriously deluding yourselves if you think leaving it in the hands of "the market" will solve anything.
There is no "invisible hand", and "the market" is a non-entity. It's composed of essentially psychopathic entities (corporations) who cannot, by their very definition, take the interest of society in consideration. To believe that some magic forces can somehow act in the favor of society and correct things by themselves is beyond wishful thinking, it's downright irresponsible and infantile.
What do you think will happen if government stops taking part in regulating industries? Their behavior will worsen, and they will get more grabbing and take more control of our everyday lives in other ways. Leaving them free will not help at all!
If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
I agree, in fact it irks me to no end the fact that when you go in the store to buy a printer, they don't include the required cable. Funny rule of thumb, modems come with both ethernet and usb cables, but printers simply do not.
There are many older lasers out there that either take refurbished cartridges, or will take raw toner. You have your choice to either buy the official toner which tends to be pretty cheap, or buy something similar but for a photocopier which might be even cheaper. Sure you have to replace the drum and developer from time to time, but it's in my minds eye worth it in the long run to keep my cost of consumables down.
Even if you have an old clunker like an HP laserjet II you can find those cartridges refurbished for under $50/each. Even at $100/each per 3000 pages this works out to be less than your typical ink jet. I still use inkjet, but for printing bulk text I go laser. Even at only 300DPI it's crisp, clear, and easy to read.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
From the ruling:
"Franklin Computer, 714 F.2d 1240, and Formula International, 725 F.2d 521, involved copies of Apple's operating system program -- a program whose size and complexity is to the Toner Loading Program what the Sears Tower is to a lamppost."
Also, what's really great about this ruling is that Lexmark effectively shot themselves in the foot. By making the bytecode of the TLP a prerequisite for making an ink cartridge work (through the use of either a checksum or a CRC, it's not entirely clear which), Lexmark itself makes the TLP uncopyrightable in the context of using that bytecode as a key for making the ink cartridge usable. That is, even if the code *could* be written some other way for the purpose of performing the same computations that the TLP does, it only works if the checksum requirement is met, meaning that the code pretty much has to be the way it is. (See pages 11-12 in the ruling.)
From Judge Feikins' appendix (Page 26 of the pdf): ...
However, an otherwise copyrightable text can be used as a method of operation of a computer - for instance, an original, copyrightable poem could be used as a password
Under this reasoning, an individual who copied a poem solely to use as a password would not have infringed the copyright, because in that scenario, the alleged infringer would have the defense that the poem has "merged" with a method of operation (the password).
So it seems to me that a spammer could use Habeas' copyrighted haiku header, claiming that it was being used as a "password" and therefore (at least in the 6th Circuit) not infringement. Of course, IANAL. But that's what it looks like to me.
Of course, Judge Feikins is speaking strictly for himself here, not on behalf of the 6th Circuit. But it's a clear indication of his position...
I agree... assuming, of course, you realize that the only pirates in this story are the printer manufacturers setting up artificial monopolies so they can sell ink for 7 times the price of Dom Perignon.
Hear recorded Slashdot headlines on your phone! New service beta testing. Just call (248) 434-5508
All you Libertarians are seriously deluding yourselves if you think leaving it in the hands of "the market" will solve anything.
Markets aren't perfect, but they easily beat central planning, as demonstrated by the entire 20th century.
It's composed of essentially psychopathic entities (corporations)
The market is composed of individuals such as yourself, who can choose to not do business with entities whose practices you disapprove of.
To believe that some magic forces can somehow act in the favor of society and correct things by themselves is beyond wishful thinking
And yet it's perfectly rational to believe that government acts in the best interests of the people, and not in ways that benefit current officeholders? Corporations have to produce something that people want, or they go out of business. Governments can take what they want at gunpoint.
What do you think will happen if government stops taking part in regulating industries?
We'd all be dead from rat poison in our food, no doubt.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
Article V of the Constitution seems to disagree with you. Beginning of Article V:
"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution..."
How fucking sad that we don't even know what our Constitution says.
-truth
I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...
Evidence #1: Federal court issues a very common-sense interpretation the badly-abused DMCA and limits this abuse.
Evidence #2: The Red Sox are about to win a World Series.
You didn't really buy that cartridge. You're just licencing it. If you don't agree to these terms, just return the cartridge and all used ink (and the paper it's attached to) to the store for a good long laughing at by the store staff. Thank you.
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
But for $699, you can have a lawful copy of Linux.
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
I pay under $2 a cart for my i560.
Sure i could have bought 5 lexmarks for the price of the printer, but i'm happy to do that.
The primary use of DECSS, just like the microchip in this case, is to make the DVD operate with linux, just like the microchip was used to make the printer operate with the toner cartridge. They weren't trying to pirate the printing program, and that's why dmca doesn't apply. those who used decss to play movies weren't trying to pirate the movies so why didn't this outcome happen in that case?
because I have been enjoined by this Holy Office to abandon the false opinion which maintains that the Sun is the centre
I bought a car about a week ago. A couple of days later I went to fill up the tank and I found the following on the gas cap: (paraphrase)
- By removing this cover, you agree to the following:
- You agree that GM (Gates Motors) retains ownership of this vehicle, and you have only purchased the wheels on which it was delivered.
- You agree that you will only have this vehicle repaired by a GM authorized dealer.
- You agree that you will not attempt to disassemble, reverse engineer or repair this vehicle on your own.
- You agree that, should GM dictate, you will blindly accept any upgrade or modification to this vehicle they offer you.
- You agree that you will pay for any such upgrade whatever charge GM deems acceptable.
- You agree that, despite the forgoing, GM shall not be responsible for any malfunction or failure of the Vehicle, including malfunctions which cause death and/or dismemberment, even if GM has been informed of the likelihood of such such malfunction or failure.
- if you disagree with this license, please return the vehicle to your GM dealer for a full refund before removing this cap.
Is this license legally binding?(if you refuse such an upgrade, you agree that you will forfeit any right to use the vehicle).
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
No. I hardly ever check the URL before clicking. Checking the URL each time I clicked a link would be even more of a pain in the ass than having a PDF pop up occasionaly.
Thanks for that.
[The market is] composed of essentially psychopathic entities (corporations) who cannot, by their very definition, take the interest of society in consideration.
A market needs sellers and buyers. Won't consumers vote with their dollars and act in the interest of society?
What do you think will happen if government stops taking part in regulating industries? Their behavior will worsen
Evidence? Apart from antitrust legislation, which some libertarians seem to support because they consider predatory pricing to constitute coercion, what can the government regulate more efficiently than a private regulatory body such as Underwriters Laboratories (for electrical appliances) or Orthodox Union (for food purity)?
Are you joking, is this like the first time you've ever heard about the benefits of freedom? Read Milton Friedman's "Capitalism and Freedom" if you need a refresher course.
If you'd like to see how your post might sound to a libertarian please read the following:
There is no "interest of society" and "society" is a non-entity. It's composed of essentially psychopathic entities (people) who cannot, by their very definition, take the interests of the market in consideration...
If that sounds like gibberish to you, then you get a feeling as to how your post sounded to people who understand the benefits of freedom and liberty.
Lesson #1: in voluntary, informed transactions, both the seller and the buyer end up with more than they started with, because each gave up something of lesser value to them in order to get something else that had greater value to them. Think about that.
There is a role for government, and that is to ensure that transactions are voluntary and informed rather than being imposed by physical force or the threat of force.
Do you believe that transistors are "magic" and that the idea that they can somehow correct things by themselves is wishful thinking?
"To be absolutely certain about something, one must know everything or nothing about it." -- Olin Miller
From the ruling:
The Toner Loading Program relies upon eight program commands add, sub (an abbreviation for subtract), mul (multiply), pct (take a percent), jump, if, load, and exit
and
The Toner Loading Program for the T520/522 printers comprises 33 program instructions and occupies 37 bytes of memory.
Good thing Lexmark stood up to protect their IP from theft! Obviously these particular 33 instructions must have taken years and millions of dollars to develop.
I see your "informed" and rise by a truckload of "marketing".
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
Because sooner or later they would find a way around it. Haven't you looked at your e-mail lately? Why do you suppose spammers are sending strings of nonsense words, and referring to dog-worming tablets {sold under the pretence that they may contain some of the drug Sildenafil Citrate} as "\/i4gr/\" rather than the more-obvious "Viagra" ? Answer: On purpose: to get past filters that were designed to keep them out!
It'd take about 15 minutes to set up an anti-GNAA filter -- and, coincidentally, that's about how long it would work before someone found a way to bypass it. It then becomes a pointless game of cat and mouse, just like e-mail Spam filtering. And meanwhile, the content will become more and more offensive.
The best thing in the long run is to simply ignore it. GNAA and others are just sad, pathetic individuals with no life of their own, so the only way they can get their kicks is by spoiling things for other people. If you respond to their postings, then you will only encourage them. The trolls may claim to hate Slashdot, but we know this is false. Slashcode is Open Source, so they could always set up their own message board -- something they have consistently failed to do. There are also plenty of closed-source message board systems, for those who simply need to feel they are stealing something rather than accepting a gift offered with grace. They have consistently refused this offer because the truth is they need Slashdot, when they are down in their parents' basements with their tweezers and magnifying glasses.
{I once wrote a message board of my own, and I came up with a really good way to keep both trolls and normal people happy. I'm not going to describe it here, though, because that might reduce its effectiveness.}
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
They take me back to a time pre 9/11, when the DMCA was the biggest problem on my radar. Such a warm and comforting time when I think about it now.
I mean, imagine back to living in a USA where your biggest concern is a law about copying software and recharging ink cartridges.
Seems like utopia compared to the world we're now in.
This case is too weak. The problem is Lexmark has completely no foot to stand on - they still could hit the "copyright violation" bell on copying their program (arguably uncopyrightable) - one can change the program AND re-create a new hash to match it, so it's not strictly the only possible "keycode".
But the DMCA claim was completely misplaced. DMCA protects PROTECTION of COPYRIGHTED work. That is you can't circumvent protection of DVD movies, e-books, games, any "work of art" that is copyrightable. This chips circumvents access to measurement of toner, printing with ink, using replacable cartridges. You can PATENT these things but you can't COPYRIGHT them. And DMCA applies only to copyright stuff.
Actually, this means you could try to circumvent DVD protection if the DVD disk didn't contain a movie but, say, set of algorithms or driver to some machine. With special intention not to copy/redistribute the driver, just to control the machine with 3rd party software and the driver...
Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
Since I'm sure nobody got around to reading to the end of the article, the court made a very important point at the end:
Instead, a better reading of the statute is that it requires plaintiffs as part of their burden of pleading and persuasion to show a purpose to pirate on the part of defendants.
This is a huge victory for fair use. The court recognized that allowing anyone to sue anyone else for copyright infringement in effect created a monopoly, stifling creativity. Not that I expect frivolous lawsuits to come to a screeching halt, but hopefully we'll see a little more common sense in the future.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
I'm still waiting for the "give them the car, sell them the gas," business model to come into play. Obviously they've already started the "sell them the gas" half. I expect to see the "give them the car" half kick in any day now. Yep.. annnnyyyy day now.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
There more expensive, can't print color photos as well as you would like, but they will run for 5000-10000 pages before needing a new toner cartridge, the ink can't dry up any more than it is, and it doesn't do a 'head cleaning' which dumps 1/2 the ink into a large sponge at the bottom of the printer every time you switch it on :)
Going one step further,
... or at least full disclosure of the facts.
I'm more and more thinking that the ultimate regulation is the concept of incorporated entities. And, over time, I've got less and less support for that concept.
Incorporated entities (companies, trusts, etc) are great vehicles for making money. Legal spearation of owners from liability and a prime directive of profit. Corporations have virtually only one legal death (bankruptcy). So long as it makes money faster than taxes and inflation eats it away, it can live until it owns the world.
I think we'd have a lot more ethical behaviour if owners and executives had full legal repercussions of an incorporated entities actions. Company-X makes drugs that steralise you? Owners and executives have full criminal and tort consequences? I think another round of testing might be on the cards
This would also solve the problem of $2 shelf companies (but not asset and jurisdiction shifting).
Full free trade amoung people, but let's not distort the market with phoney legal inventions.
Q:I was listening to a CD in Grip and it sounded horrible! What's up? A:Perhaps you are listening to country music
I am not an economist, but the legal seperation of corporation from person not only works for large companies, but for small ones as well. As it stands now, a single person wanting to go into business can incorporate to insulate himself from possible failure of his company. Without this protection, he's risking all of his assets and possibly criminal penalties. I suspect that a lack of protection in this area may lead to fewer entrepreneurs in the system. Yes, the way that the larger corporations abuse the right is wrong, but abolishing corporations altogether is not the solution either.
This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
No you can't. SCO has no authority to distribute the Linux kernel. See, the copyright on the Linux kernel belongs to a whole bunch of people; and if any one of them objects to SCO distributing it, and if SCO's distribution wouldn't be covered by "fair dealing" / "fair use" provisions {which may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction}, then SCO are violating copyright law by distributing the Linux kernel. By imposing a "fee" of $699, they are also committing fraud, and quite likely demanding money with menaces.
SCO's only defence against the copyright violation charge is the GPL; but since they have broken the conditions attached to the permissions it grants, then those permissions are withdrawn. However, anyone who has received a copy of the Linux kernel from an unlicenced distributor is licenced to distribute it {unless and until they break the rules}, since it is the copyright holder, not the distributor, who grants the GPL permissions.
The GPL has already been shown to be valid in a Court of Law {albeit a minor one in Germany}; and if the GPL is not legally enforcible then no EULA will ever be legally enforcible either, since most EULAs ask you not to do things the Law of the Land gives you an explicit right to do. {Analogy: If a woman signs a piece of paper stating that she consents to have sex with a man at a certain time on a certain date, then changes her mind, and he has sex with her anyway, it's still rape; because you can't waive your right to say "no" to sex.}
Copyright is one of the greatest misnomers going. It's actually a temporary privilege granted on behalf of Society At Large, in exchange for the promise that a work will eventually enter the Public Domain.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
I guess I should have added a smilely.
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
-truth
I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...
"If you do not accept thte terms of the License Agreement, you should promptly return the product for a refund."
What happens if you attempt to return the software, but the merchant refuses to accept the return and refund your money?
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
In light of the ruling that the DMCA cannot be applied in cases of fair-use,
the prior ruling agains Jon should be presented to the courts for re-interpretation.
If a reverse-engineering of a product can be framed in terms of providing
increased service to consumers or enabling service to those deprived
because of physical handicap (deafness, blindness, vision problems, etc.)
it is now legal because of this ruling against Lexmark.
Intuition tells me that the tide has only started to turn...
This post encoded with ROT26. If you can read it, you've violated the DMCA. Handcuffs please, sergeant.
This also presumes that they judge has been appointed with the best interests of Justice in mind, and not some political agenda, either liberal or conservative. (or neo-conservative)
This works in with Senate confirmation of Presidential appointments.
Unfortunately, the House has become a Republican Marching Body, and the Senate is tending that way, rather than both being varying degrees of Deliberative Bodies.
That is reason enough to vote for Kerry. I don't have to consider any of *his* plans, because he can't do much of anything without Congress. But I want to STOP our current one-party rule.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
There is a filter for this kind of crap, it's called moderation. If you don't want to see it, raise your threshhold.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
By taking the software back you have legitimised the licensing terms.
Perhaps you should send a letter to Microsoft, something to the effect of. By reading this letter you here by agree that I may use, copy, modify and reverse engineer you software to my hearts content. If you do not agree don't read this letter.
Then when they sue you for breach of there contract you've got a counter claim.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
And lexmark is by far the worst abuser of this business model.
And how. I made the mistake of buying a Lexmark printer, and on top of the ridiculous cost of ink cartridges, the quality is past shitty. I've had to return 1/3-1/2 of them as defective.
Granted, Lexmark did agree to replace them, after going through a very time consuming and painstaking process to ascertain that, no, I was not a drooling idiot and yes, the cartridges were useless, but it just shouldn't happen so much in the first place. From here on out it's either third party cartridges or a new printer for me. Going through the defective cart song and dance just isn't worth the hassle.
The Japanese Diet passed a law a few weeks ago, banning reverse importation of CDs. Beginning in January, it will be against the law to bring a legimately licensed US version of a Japanese music CD into Japan, because of the differences between the two markets.
If you don't believe it, read this favorably-worded article in Japan's most reputable newspaper. Or read this response from one of Japan's major music distributors.
It's BS, and of course I didn't believe it when I first heard about it. The worst part is that in some facility, I work for the bill's sponsors.
They are? What I see the market doing so far is create organisations whose sole purpose is the domination of that market, in ways that are detrimental to the evolution of society and to the well-being of its constituents who are not members of the new oligarchy.
Don't take me for a communist: I believe that the capitalistic ideal works well in a sane economic environment. But you can't apply an economic principle to social problems and expect sound results. What's more, I am not convinced that a capitalistic system can be self-balancing and naturally gravitate towards a balance of the factors that result in the best consequences for society. As we can now see, even with significant input from regulators, the system is leaning towards more control by a certain class, not an equilibrium. It's quite possible (and I believe) that the system is chaotic, and thus may have different attractors, and that we are now seeing one of those that results from the tinkering to the system.
The problem with libertarians is that they (you?) believe that the system is necessariy self-balancing, like some kind of bell curve, and that it will automatically gravtiate towards a balanced solution if left to itself. That's where the wishful thinking rests. I believe, as many others do, that the economic system is chaotic and that balance may be one of many attractors towards which it would gravitate. Constant tugging may be required to send it towards a less powerful attractor state. I do not advocate complete control or centralized planning either, but I am definitely in favor of carefully planned, numerous but minimalistic in themselves, interference in the system. Even better, I believe there are certain specific changes which could be made to the system that could help make it be more stable.
Can I? As another poster pointed out, the issue is that corporations are ready to do ANYTHING to get more power and money, which may entail breaking the law and being completely amoral. A corporation will break the law to get a monopoly or keep it as long as the consequences of its illegal behavior end up costing it less than the profits gained from the actions. Such behavior will, over time, lessen my choices and favor the corporations over the individuals, and allow them to have more control over what I buy (simply by controlling what I CAN buy) than I do myself.
At least, the government and individuals have a CHOICE in the matter. It might not always act in the best interest of people, but it often does, or at least tries to. You must always safeguard against individuals within the government (elected or otherwise) acting against the common good. Such safeguards appear to be inefficient or insufficient in the US at the moment, and that's a big cause of the problem.
No, but we would most likely live in some corporate version of 1984.
If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
Which is where you are being fallacious: People can and will take the interests of the gorup (society, market) of which they are a part of beyond their own. Call it enlightened self-interest or altruism, those behaviors make all the difference. Corporations, by definition, care only about bringing profit for their investors. Those investors, when they are few and mostly in control of the corporation, project their own interests and altruisms into that corporation. But faceless investors and shareholders as well as corporative officers who have little knowledge or care of what really happens inside the company's walls won't do that.
You mean economic freedom, I guess? I don't much care about what has been written so much as what is currently happening. The reality shows consequences which economists and policy makers didn't anticipate, and must be corrected.
And even supposing that there is too much government control, the solution is not to stop all influence and control! If someone eats too much, is stopping eating going to help him? You are only advocating a radical solution which would be no better than the actual problem. What I think we need is some lateral thinking: a different kind of interventionism for a different kind of society.
If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
so, since "lock out" mechanisms (like DVD copy locks) are of a necessary form and function, they are ideas and not non-functional expression, and so are the proper domain of patent, not copyright, and so the DMCA can't extend copyright protection to them. Wham-bam-thank-you-m'am.
Next question, where does this leave the same mechanism if it were protected by patent?
You often see it as consumers has the power of putting bad businesses out of business. Has that ever happened though?
Ask Google.
Maybe not, but a lot more of us would be dying or sick from atmospheric/groundwater poisoning or workplace hazards.
I mean for crying out loud, people continue to smoke when they know it's got a good chance of killing them via any one of a number of long painful ways, and yet you expect them not to buy Nikes because they're made by a child in a sweatshop 2,000 miles away? Get real.
Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
I was looking for a cheap printer recently, and saw the HP Inkjet 3520 selling at Wal-mart for $29, with an included tri-color ink cartridge. That ink cartridge alone cost $22. I had heard of the scam that the included toner cartridges with laser printers is only half full, so I checked the volume of ink that it came with and compared it to the ink cartridge sold by itself, and sure enough they were the same. (8ml) Bingo! $7 printer! You have any links about less-than-full included ink cartridges? I'd just be curious.
Corporations, by definition, care only about bringing profit for their investors.
Then perhaps the definition is at fault. Some claim the government should hold investors, directors, and executives significantly more accountable for the company's actions than the current government holds those of public corporations as we know them. This would give investors an incentive not to invest in enterprises that hurt the market/society.