Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Violates Another Software License
Patrick
Robib, a blogger who wrote his own blogging engine called Forest Blog recently noticed that none other than the MPAA was using his work, and had completely violated his linkware license by removing all links back to the Forest Blog site, not crediting him in any way. The MPAA blog was using the Forest Blog software, but had completely stripped off his name, and links back to his site. He only found about it accidentally when he happened to visit the MPAA site.
Wouldn't it be nice to send the friendly folks from the BSA to do a complete software audit of the MPAA?
Maybe an auditing circle-jerk could be set up: the BSA investigates the MPAA, who investigates the RIAA, who invesigates the BSA, etc. ad nauseum, and they could just leave the rest of us alone.
Apparently they're hiding now. I get a "Page cannot be found" on the MPAA blog...
At least *I* make sure that "grep GPL /dev/dvd" gets a match before I copy a DVD.
Who's the pirate now, MAFIAA?
"Maybe an auditing circle-jerk could be set up:..."
Their circle is already a bunch of jerks.
I didn't desert Windows; Windows deserted me: BSOD
Here, I suggest contact MPAA about the whole piracy issue and point them to the offending party; themselves.
http://www.mpaa.org/ReportPiracy.asp
Please feel free to let them know about their own transgressions.
Perhaps the MPAA considered it "Fair Use"--after all, they were modifying the pages for their own personal use...
ORLY? Note the lack of anything resembling an apology. Also, I must remember that defence when I get a P2P Tax demand from them: "Oh, sure, I copied your memebers' work, but only for testing purposes, and now that I've been caught, I can totally assure you that I intended to buy licensed versions."
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
I'm sure you're wrong - they are such nice fellahs, I'm sure they'd never, ever do any such thing. Unless of course they thought they were above the law, being the MPAA and all
How many beans make five, anyhow ?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
And a DVD costs what? 12 bucks or so.
See my journal, I write things there
They are happy to run a 30 second unskippable advertisement at the beginning of a DVD which I have purchased expounding the illegality of stealing. Being unskippable they have STOLEN not only my time, but also the electricity required to run my DVD player and screen (and sound system). 30 seconds may not seem much, but when every time that disk is inserted causes 30 seconds of my time and electricity to be STOLEN (I definitely no longer have them) it soon adds up; not to mention that I'm not the only one who has purchased that disk and so the amount of STOLEN electricity soon adds up and makes them rather un-green, unenvironmentally friendly, not to mention the amount of STOLEN man-hours.
And then there's all the unskippable copyright messages in various languages, most of which I can't read also STEALINGmy electricity (and time) - in this case a minute or two, or more. Again unenvironmentally friendly (especally when all the copies taken into account).
Perhaps this explanation could also apply to music:
.99 cents that would have authorized me to play a version of the music without internal moral objection.
The Britney Spears music has been removed from my personal computer.
* The songs were never assigned to a playlist.
* The songs were never played to any of my friends.
* The material on the harddrive was a proof of concept awaiting approval to be moved into my library.
* The songs were only ever used for testing purposes.
* Should I have decided that I enjoyed the music, then I would have paid the
Of course, I'm pretty certain that defense wouldn't prevent a lawsuit, as I'm sure the MPAA are hoping it will in their case...