Slashdot Mirror
EFF Sues Apple Over BluWiki Legal Threats
Hugh Pickens writes "The Electronic Frontier Foundation has filed suit against Apple to defend the First Amendment rights of BluWiki, a noncommercial, public Internet 'wiki' site operated by OdioWorks. Last year, BluWiki users began a discussion about making some Apple iPods and iPhones interoperate with software other than Apple's iTunes. Apple lawyers demanded removal of the content (pdf) sending a letter to OdioWorks, alleging that the discussions constituted copyright infringement and a violation of the DMCA's prohibition on circumventing copy protection measures. Fearing legal action by Apple, OdioWorks took down the discussions from the BluWiki site but has now filed a lawsuit to vindicate its right to restore those discussions (pdf) and seeking a declaratory judgment that the discussions do not violate any of the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions, and do not infringe any copyrights owned by Apple. 'I take the free speech rights of BluWiki users seriously,' said Sam Odio, owner of OdioWorks. 'Companies like Apple should not be able to censor online discussions by making baseless legal threats against services like BluWiki that host the discussions.'"
Random BedHead Ed adds ZDNet quotes EFF's Fred von Lohmann, who says that this is an issue of censorship. 'Wikis and other community sites are home to many vibrant discussions among hobbyists and tinkerers. It's legal to engage in reverse engineering in order to create a competing product, it's legal to talk about reverse engineering, and it's legal for a public wiki to host those discussions.'"
Fearing legal action by Apple, OdioWorks took down the discussions from the BluWiki site
This is what you get when lawyers are too expensive. Censorship.
They keep doing very useful (and thankless) work.
-- Let's go Viridian.
And now we're discussing it.
Please attach subpoena as a reply.
A thought, if Apple is claiming copyright juristiction on the conversation, would that not mean that Apple was claiming that it had written said conversations, in whole or part, and by which, by extention, are encouraging people to do the activities therein? Could make some interesting arguements in the courtroom. IANAL but from my viewpoint, Apple does not have much of a legal leg to stand on here.
Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
On some level, this (and other things that have been made by the courts and through law, like the Doctrine of First Sale) is how society as a whole negotiates with vendors - when they offer things that are enough against the interests of society, we effectively band together and tell them that their terms are unacceptable and they'll either modify them or they won't be sold here.
For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
This is a story regarding the countersuit to an Apple DMCA takedown notice. The EFF want publicity for this case.
No Streissand Effect here, folks.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
"I take the free speech rights of BluWiki users seriously," said Sam Odio, owner of OdioWorks. "Companies like Apple should not be able to censor online discussions by making baseless legal threats against services like BluWiki that host the discussions." Yet, they did Sam, because you were too chickenshit to stand up to them. Now you want to stand behind a court decision before you muster up the "courage" to re-post the posts. If you are really concerned, re-post then go to court. Defend your users.
I'd like to hear both sides of the story. As important as the EFF is, they tend to ignore anything that doesn't fit with their message, especially when it comes to legal proceedings.
Since Apple is Apple, I doubt we will hear much from them. But I would like to point out that there is a strong bias on the part of the EFF to selectively use facts for propaganda.
See: http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/14/193217
Anal rape in every box.
Where can I get one for my ex?
"Seriously, there's no "Linux compatible" label on their products, so why the fuck would they buy it and THEN complain?"
There's no linux compatible sticker on anything much.
An iPod without the managing capacities of iTunes makes no sense.
Only if you're an idiot. Some of us can use these things called file systems to hold and manipulate files. They've been around a while, surprised you've never heard of them.
They should be buying a mass-storage MP3 player which requires no special software.
Like an iPod? They don't require special software, Apple just deliberately make it difficult to use with other software.
In conclusion, fuck off retard.
If you want flexibility and choice then why use an iPod? I respect the BluWiki guys for standing up to Apple, but seriously, it's so much easier to take the path of least resistance and use an MP3 player that supports Explorer or Finder or command line mounting. Then you can use your player as a storage device as well. iPod and Zune are equally miserable in this regard.
My player of choice is the Creative Zen. It comes with proprietary software, but it's optional so you can use Explorer if you prefer. Only drawback is that they only come in solid-state flavours, no HDD, so the max capacity is 32GB (in case you only sit at a computer once every 3 months to add new music).
"What's next, these morons will buy a PS3 and then complain to the EFF that Halo 3 doesn't work on their new console?"
Not the same thing at all.
This is about hackers wanting to build their own software for a device they bought and own as I understand it
And a company that at all cost wants to protect its eco system of products, because having third party software that you cant control/disable/make money of, is a bad thing in Cupertino....
http://www.intellipool.se/ - Intellipool Network Monitor
Learn to comprehend what's going on. They're not saying it's Apple's fault for not making the iPod compatible, they're saying Apple can't attempt to stop them from doing that work themselves.
It's entirely reasonable for Apple to say "We're not going to support that", but when they say "We're not going to support that and we'll sue you if you try to make it work", we have a fucking problem.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
"Donate the Apple tax." Instead of paying the style premium, buy a Linux/Windows PC and donate the difference to the EFF to help keep Apple's jackbooted thugs in check.
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
If you use iTunes, you don't care. I don't.
If you use (or would like to use) something else (gtkpod) to manage your iPod, then you might want to thank EFF.
Apple relied on reverse engineering especially in it's early days back when Woz was doing the Apple I and II. Steve Jobs sold Blue Box phone freak kits made by Woz that allowed you to bypass phone charges to there college peers. They need to lighten up.
DRM and DMCA, baby.
Don't you love the USA?
Why do geeks buy XBoxes and try to turn them into Linux PC's or media devices? Why do people jailbreak smart phones? It's because geeks are geeks, and the challenge is fun. As George Mallory would say, it's because they're THERE.
Secondly, even on a more practical note, the iPod is just a nice piece of hardware. I've dropped mine a thousand times and abused it repeatedly (err, non-sexually!)... and you just can't break the thing. I simply haven't found that kind of quality in competing devices, and I am certainly NOT an Apple fanboy by any stretch.
I put the RockBox operating system on my iPod (which still leaves you the ability to dual-boot into Apple's OS if you need to)... and now my iPod functions as a typical mass-storage player. I don't need iTunes, can just copy music files on and off like a USB stick, and have support for any format I'd want (e.g. OGG, Flac, etc). Combine that with the sheer quality of the hardware (my iPod has lasted three times longer than any previous player I've had), and I'm a happy geek. If other people want to port other OS's to the device, then that's awesome and more power to them.
i think the tags for this article say it all:
eff apple !
Insightful? Honestly, the Apple zealots are making us Linux users look SENSIBLE by comparison. Go find your own thing, zealotry is our thing, dammit!
There's no "Linux compatible" label on ANY products. Would you prefer we hold you up in store queues complaining about incompatibility BEFORE we buy it (even if it is actually compatible)? But that's not the issue. The issue here is that Apple are intentionally sabotaging any reverse engineering efforts - it would be more like if Sony tried to shut down an unofficial community port of Halo 3 (which Microsoft were fine with). Your inability to understand the principle involved makes me wish that you get stabbed by someone who isn't "Not Stabbing You compatible". Maybe then you'll understand that morality is not contingent on disclosure (or lack thereof).
Yeah, well tell that to the multitude of Linux users who got an iPod for Christmas/birthday from their loving-but-naive family/friends, only to have to explain to them that an iPod is no more useful to them than a brick because Apple intentionally broke previously existing compatibility. Go eat a tub of dicks, you kool-aid drinking Apple faggot.
MPAA vs 2600 regarding linking to DeCSS source/info. It seems the words "free speech" and "constitutional rights" hinge on the size of your wallet nowadays. The DMCA simply allows companies like Apple the opportunity to scare people into silence and since the penalty for false DMCA claims never seems to be put into effect I see no reason for this kind of nonsense to stop anytime soon.
They should be buying a mass-storage MP3 player which requires no special software. Like an iPod? They don't require special software, Apple just deliberately make it difficult to use with other software. In conclusion, fuck off retard.
Sometimes, a proprietary product is simply that. I am consistently amazed that people can get their panties in such a bunch over that. Nobody's violating your civil rights by offering you a product that requires special software. If you want to use Linux, you're going to have to deal with its limitations. Not all of those limitations are purely technical - a good many of them are commercial.
Yes! There are always two sides to every conflict, and they deserve equal consideration! You can't always trust the so-called "facts" because sometimes one side has a greater ability to collect more of them than the other side. It's not fair!
Did any of you every think that maybe just maybe Apple could be right. The Ipod and the songs downloaded from Itunes have a copy protection scheme (Fairplay). Breaking this system so that songs can be transfered to other devices without using Apples Itunes and Fairplay IS IN VIOLATION OF DMCA. If you don't like that then try to get the DMCA change or reversed, otherwise shut the #@$# up.
"What's next, these morons will buy a PS3 and then complain to the EFF that Halo 3 doesn't work on their new console?" It's more comparable to Microsoft threatening legal action against a discussion about making Halo 3 (and all Xbox games) playable on the PS3.
+1 Tasteless
Actually the newer songs don't have DRM at all. Of course you're right about older songs that are still encrypted with Fairplay.
The thing is, it's not about the music files anyway. DRM'ed or not, you can move the file around. The problem seems to be the files database itself that's been encrypted.
Reminds me of the old Tengen vs Nintendo case. If I remember corretly, they lost in the USA but won in Canada.
Of course it's a civil rights issue.
If I buy a product, I should get to use it any way that I like that is not a genuine patent or copyright infringement.
IOW: If Apple can't proceed here without using/abusing the DMCA then they really shouldn't have any standing.
Reverse engineering and discussing reverse engineering should be speech protected not
just as a civil right but protected as being consistent with the copyright clause of
the US Constitution.
Copyright is meant as a means to SPREAD INFORMATION.
Too many people tend to forget that.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
This should be an easy win.
If the DMCA only applies to the application of knowledge to circumvent copy restriction, it may be counterproductive and a horribly written law but it's still constitutional.
If the DMCA applies to the sharing of the knowledge itself, then it violates Freedom of Speech and is unconstitutional. No matter how much the sharing of such knowledge may hurt corporations; even if Apple goes out of business, even if the RIAA and MPAA come crashing down, even if the economy collapses and we all starve to death, that sharing of knowledge is still guaranteed and protected by the Constitution.
In fact, I would say that this is exactly the kind of speech that the 1st Amendment was designed to protect. Useful speech. Speech that allows intelligent people to share their knowledge to create something practical.
"Seriously, there's no "Linux compatible" label on their products, so why the [explitive deleted] would they buy it and THEN complain?"
They aren't complaining about the lack of such support, they are complaining about Apple's attempts to block their work to fix the issue themselves.
This is like (to use the inevitable analogy) a car company trying to legally prevent a car owner from adding something new to their car, or prevent them from replacing the engine with an after-market version.
It's stupid. Not only because it might be illegal (i.e. anticompetitive) to do something like that, but it's also going to discourage people from purchasing that brand in the first place because they can't do what they want with it.
The Thought Police aren't coming to kill you, they are coming to enslave you. Feel like running now? No? Did I mention they are IMAGINARY? Now what are you going to do? How do you fight that which is only in your mind?
Your seriousness has killed the funny. You could have at least put it in terms of a pithy quote about liberty, lions and jackals, or free beer.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
The courts have an easy way out of this one. They'll declare there's no "case or controversy" and dismiss the complaint, just like they did when the RIAA threatned Dr. Felten over releasing watermarking information.
The only way to get heard in court when someone sends you a C&D is to fail to desist, and let them sue you. Of course, given the other side has far more resources, that's kind of like taking up Dirty Harry on his "Do you feel lucky, punk?" challenge.
Nobody's violating your civil rights by offering you a product that requires special software.
That depends.
they're not violating your rights by not providing it for your platform of choice, or where it genuinely requires special software.
They ARE violating your civil rights by stopping you even talking about creating other software.
This is not "OMFG! Apple don't support linux! OMFG!", it's "A corporate behemoth is shutting down forums that talk about making other ways to interface with products we have legally bought"
Not all of those limitations are purely technical - a good many of them are commercial.
And most of the commercial ones are not or should not be legal with a device I bought. You don't get to tell me how to use the chair I bought from you, apple don't get the right to tell me how to use the iPod. They don't have to support it, but they have no right to stop me taking it apart, talking to it with other software or shoving it up my arse if that's what I want to do.
Then, you shouldn't complain when something is not compatible with Linux.
If an iPod doesn't require special software, why are you complaining?
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
Like an iPod? They don't require special software, Apple just deliberately make it difficult to use with other software.
In conclusion, fuck off retard.
Please tell me... How can I load my iPod touch with mp3s without being forced to use iTunes?
After 3 days without programming, life becomes meaningless
- The Tao of Programming
bullshit off, or i will NEVER consider buying Apple products, AND, i may decide to work HARD to dissuade prospective laptop-buying friends from buying Appleware. KNOCK IT THE FUCK OFF, APPLE!
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Although I certainly agree with the sentiment, this has nothing to do with the First Amendment. This is the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." It enjoins Congress, not Apple Computer.
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
Te Odio Apple
gtkpod and others using libgpod. Like Amarok and Rythmbox, though support is only preliminary for touch/phone.
They were all knocked back a bit last year when apple suddenly introduced a crypto hash on some of the indexes, but it was reverse engineered. I have yet to hear why there would be any reason at all to cryptographically sign a song index other than to prevent competing software from functioning properly.
And there's the other thing, if Apple had their way, they would shut all of these down. From TFA it looks like they were trying to stop even discussion of this stuff. There is no hard and fast requirement for iTunes except that apple likes to sue people and occasionally try to throw technical hurdles at them. It's just a mass storage device and some index files.
Why is it so hard for some people to believe that Apple isn't this wonderful non-profit business with only intentions of making the world better? They are a for profit business, like the rest of them, with profit as the bottom line. They sell products to make money. That is all. Some people like their products better than others. But don't equate the products they sell with how they run their corporation.
"But this one goes to 11!"
If it's mine then I should be able to use it in any way I like *EVEN IF* I use it to break the law .. that's my problem
Freedom of speech should mean I can *discuss* anything I like, it's only doing it that might be illegal
if this stands up in court then not only is illegal to subvert copyright restrictions but it is also illegal to discuss subverting them .... when will it be illegal to discuss DCMA?
Puteulanus fenestra mortis
An iPod without the managing capacities of iTunes makes no sense.
Only if you're an idiot. Some of us can use these things called file systems to hold and manipulate files. They've been around a while, surprised you've never heard of them.
They should be buying a mass-storage MP3 player which requires no special software.
Like an iPod? They don't require special software, Apple just deliberately make it difficult to use with other software.
So let me get this straight. What you're saying is that there are, indeed, much easier, cheaper, more standards-compliant, and more plentiful ways to store data and have MP3 playback WITHOUT going through iTunes, all of which only lack Apple's shininess and now-dying DRM, but it's far better to stubbornly stick to a single, solitary device that is, in your own words, deliberately made more difficult to work with and whose purchase and use supports a company known for suing and otherwise suppressing the rights of anything that moves in a way they didn't approve of?
And the GP is the retard?
I certainly hope there's no "taste".
I do not understand why people want to interoperate with such a litigious company's products. I say just buy a different product and let Apple play alone in their own little corner of the sandbox. I purchased a UMS compliant media player years ago and I couldn't be happier with it. If you create software that works with their hardware, you are supporting them and contributing to their market share. We do not need a "Microsoft monopoly" of music players.
What I don't get is how the RDF has been so successful at making folks think Apple is better than MSFT, when it comes to freedom. I'm probably going get flamed for this, but what the hell, let us be honest here. Apple LOVES DRM, just like MSFT, Apple LOVES vendor lock in, just like MSFT. If they switched positions tomorrow Apple would be just as nasty when it comes to anti competitive practices as MSFT ever was when Darth Gates was running it(Damn I miss him. The monkey is like a bad Dilbert joke) and any attempt by anybody to go around their locks, even as we saw here to allow interoperability, will get their lawyers falling out of the sky on them.
So I honestly don't get it. The way you hear Apple fanboys talking you'd think Jobs is sitting in some office with his bare feet up tinkering these new toys by hand, when in reality Apple is nothing but a "Mini MSFT" that doesn't have a bumbling marketing monkey screwing with the line. But of course when Steve retires, well I'm sure they'll get their very own Ballmer. if they like Apple because they are shiny, or they think the brushed metal is cool,fine. But please quit trying to make it sound like Apple is this nice hippie company in California. They haven't been that since the Woz quit decades ago. They are just MSFT on a smaller scale, that's all.
They are just lucky that they still have Darth Jobs to wield the dark side of the force for them. All we MSFT users have is a really fat stormtrooper that couldn't hit the broad side of popular with a blaster rifle.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Declaration of Independence from the American colonies
{Anonymous Coward}If you don't like the tyranny of a monarchy then try to get the king to change, otherwise shut the #@$# up. Until then keep paying taxes to the king.{/Anonymous Coward}
Civil rights movement takes on the Jim Crow laws.
{Anonymous Coward}If you don't like segregation and individual rights based on the color of your skin then change the color of your skin, otherwise shut the #@$# up. Until then continue to sit in the back of the bus.{/Anonymous Coward}
Salt Satyagraha campaign against British Salt Laws.
{Anonymous Coward}If you don't like paying monopoly prices for salt due to laws that make it illegal to produce your own salt then change your diet to a no-salt diet, otherwise shut the #@$# up. Until then continue to pay exorbitant prices and taxes to the British Empire.{/Anonymous Coward}
ad infinitum...
If they were just for profit, they wouldn't have made their MacBooks' displays "eco-friendly" at the cost of rendering them useless to serious creative professionals. In other words they are now in the process of letting their politics influence the quality of their product, which WILL impact sales and marketshare.
I'm not buying ANY Apple product with that hideous glossy screen.
It's not a lie. It's the truth with lossy compression.
There are hundreds of MP3 players out there that, minus iTunes, are identical to the iPod in every way -- except they are usually cheaper. Any of which doesn't even need to be cracked. The point of this exercise is specifically aimed at cracking Apple -- nothing more, nothing less -- because the alternative is just far too retarded to be anything else.
Please explain why anyone looking for a mass-storage mp3 player to use "these things called file systems to hold and manipulate files" would be determined to spend the maximum amount of cash in order to do so? That's usually the realm of Apple fanboys who actually use the Apple software -- not linux fanboys. Is there something particularly special about the iPod that you just can't find anywhere else? Seriously.
It really is all about making a point, not about actually doing something useful. It seems it's not just Apple, MS or even the RIAA who are content to use litigation instead of creating a better product to get their way. At least google is actually trying.
I'll be a lot more impressed and enthused when the DMCA is simply removed, repealed, revoke or otherwise trashed from U.S. law books. It's bad law designed to enable a wide variety of people to do things copyright was never intended to do.
If frequent abuse of law isn't reason enough for its repeal, I can't imagine what is.
sooo much more open?
If you're going to boycott every company that pulls this kind of crap, get ready to grow your own food and cultivate your own penicillin too. Monsanto and the drug companies make Apple look like total hippies.
After high school, you'll find out that they ALL play dirty. It won't change unless we reform our "IP" laws.
I'm tired of all these copyright /. posts over the last 10 years. So let me set the record straight.
"If you use a device or media outside the INTENDED USE AND MORE THEN YOU AS A SOLE PERSON USE IT then you are breaking the copyright."
Copyright is more then just protecting the idea, it is protecting the PRODUCT in general. You buy an iPOD you are allowed to interact with it with the software that Apple allows you to interact with it. Here are some things that will get you sued, just so we are clear.
iPODs, you are breaking the terms agreement examples
if you use any software not licensed or allowed to interact with the device. (using some custom app to transfer/decrypt/convert)
if you use any hardware to function the device in a means that it is not originally designed for. (using a stereo attachment to listen to music on the beach)
if you take the device apart
if you tamper with any of the devices input/output in a way that is not provided in the how-to, instructions or terms agreement
if you use the device in any manor that is out of scope of the devices original intended use.
bla bla bla. It's all right there, black and white, clear as crystal. if you don't like it, invent your own.
There were no complaints about compatibility, the complaints are from Apple who want to control how their customers use the products they've purchased.
They were developing their own software, not complaining. It was Apple complaining and using the DMCA to stop valid reverse engineering.
So really the question is why does Apple whine so much, they've been paid for their product, what does it matter to them if some customers develop their own software to utilize their purchase the way they wish? Are these customers actually planning to convert iPods into some mass piracy ring? Or is Apple using the DMCA to control market share and guarantee a revenue stream?
I'm not saying that, I don't buy apple.
I'm saying that:
1) This is a free speech issue, that shutting down forums talking about reverse engineering or compatibility is actually evil
2) There is no good technical reason for the iPod not to be compatible, Apple are actively trying to stop people doing what they want with an item they own.
> You don't get to tell me how to use the chair I bought from you
Actually I do; I can tell you that standing on it is dangerous, and that it's not to be used as playground equipment and so forth. But you are correct in that I do not have the right to STOP you from doing those things if you choose to. And if you break it by choosing to, well then I'm not responsible for fixing it.
I also don't have the right to use predatory legal practices--the threat of a meritless lawsuit which I know I would lose, but which you can't afford to fight anyway--to force you to use the chair in JUST those ways I intended you to. Which is basically what Apple is doing. Apparently they are so mightily brilliant that they've already thought up EVERY CONCEIVABLE USE for their iPods and they're confident that everyone else is too dumb and incapable of thinking up any other ones to let them think for themselves.
It's not a lie. It's the truth with lossy compression.
It really is all about making a point, not about actually doing something useful.
Yes, just like this stupid "linux" thing, all about making a point against microsoft! It's there, it can be hacked, why not?
I shouldn't even have to explain this on slashdot.
BTW, try looking at Rockbox if you don't think its useful. OS compatibility, file formats etc.
While I support the course of action which BluWiki have taken, it is not at all surprising that apple will act in their usual reprehensible manner.
Reverse engineering/cracking/technical discussion/anything-your-corporate-overlords-raise-their-eyebrows-at groups, would do better to simply speak outside of the legal reach of such entities. Either by not having discussions in public, using channels not often trawled by our overlords (IRC, etc.) or locating the server/parent corporation in safer waters, so to speak.
If no-one could read their discussion without registering or without being added to the group/whatever, apple probably would not have found it or bothered to cause a fuss. This is by no means ideal though.
Probably more practical, if they had just bought some web space in South Korea or something, instead of using unsafe webspace based in the US, they'd be home free and probably get better service to boot...
There is no psychiatrist in the world like a puppy licking your face - Ben Williams
*sigh* Apple and Microsft aren't equal. In fact, they aren't equally detrimental to the world of computer science. And, it goes beyond scale.
Apple sells physical products, which happen to be preloaded with their own operating systems and software. Apple won't permit anyone to do much of anything with those systems, which apple doesn't approve of. Apple, bad, yeah.
Microsoft sells almost no physical products, instead relying on an established monopoly, created by intimidating manufacturers of computer hardware. Exclusivity agreements barred mfgrs from offering any competing systems on their hardware. By default, everyone in the world bought either MS operating systems, or they bought Apple, or they bought machines with no OS, or they simply bought the parts to build their own no OS systems. There was an enforced virtual MS tax on almost all computers for more than a decade, and many people still pay that tax. (I can find more proofs that MS is evil, but this one is enough to suffice) Microsoft evil.
On the one hand, we have bad. On the other, we have evil. Perhaps the bad boy would LIKE TO BE evil, but we don't know that, and we certainly can't prove it. Bad is bad, but evil trumps bad, every time.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
... and part-time Apple Fanboy, I actually do care. I hope the EFF hits Apple so hard their lawyers and management have headaches for a few years.
I generally use iTunes because I like it, but it may not always be my favorite, someone might produce something I like better. If that happens and they're willing to try to make it work with the iPod, what good reason is there for keeping them from doing so?
I do see that there are some potential copyright issues, particularly if the discussion is focused on pulling music in the device -> computer direction, rather than pushing it the computer -> device direction. But aside from that, there's nothing copyright oriented about interoperability with a portable music player.
Tweet, tweet.
I certainly hope there's no "taste".
Uhhh, you were planning on sampling it?
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
The point being, if Apple had 90% of the market, would they be any better than Microsoft is now? There's certainly enough evidence to think that they would be.
Sigh, that's what I get for just clicking through the preview. That last bit should be "they would not be [any better]."
There's no "Linux Compatible" sticker on my Dell PC either, but I would be pretty pissed if Dell tried to sue a website for telling me how to put it on my PC anyway.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Here's one that does have it (scroll down to the bottom of the page)
Cowon D2+
Bought the D2 (without the +) and I'm very happy with it.
Buy things that are aligned with your interests so that there will be more of them in the future, instead of trying of giving money to people who don't really seem to want it.
I can hear the confusion from here. Do we side with the EFF, because they take up the good fight of defending our essential digital liberties, or do we side with Apple, because they make nifty-keen little gadgets?
Believe me, their reasoning was profit. One of their number crunchers indicated that their data says that the glossy screen will make them more money. (Cheaper manufacturing, initial test show people like it better, or even "Sure it is cheaper to make, but the average customer can't tell the difference", or what have you.) Their data may be in error, but I'm sure it was presented to their marketing folks as a big "plus" and not a huge "minus". Sometimes, *gasp* even Apple gets it wrong in predicting what people really want.
Or they want you to buy one of their big fancy displays by purposely making their built-in displays crap.
P.S. I know exactly what you mean though. My girlfriend does graphic design and she hates the new displays as well. Luckily she has one of the older ones that don't suck.
"But this one goes to 11!"
As a software developer (open source & commercial) I'd say that Apple is WORSE than MS.
I buy Dells all the time with no operating systems, and no pre-loaded software at all. Just a blank hard drive. Of course I am also buying through a University and probably have more readily available options than Joe Blow customer does. But the point being is that there are ways to buy systems independent of any OS, but the manufacturers don't want to make it easy for you. Usually if you dig around a website, or call and speak to a customer service person to get the option of a "bare" system. Or just do what I do and build it yourself. I built a system using components from Newegg and got a system for about $650 that would have cost me at least $950 from Dell or any of the big boy manufacturers. Yes it takes a little more time and effort, but it is the sort of time and effort geeks find stimulating...
"But this one goes to 11!"
You don't get to tell me how to use the chair I bought from you, apple don't get the right to tell me how to use the iPod. They don't have to support it, but they have no right to stop me taking it apart, talking to it with other software or shoving it up my arse if that's what I want to do.
Ah, the EULA. It's happy to invalidate all of your little beliefs.
I know it sounds like I'm trolling, but I'm really not. The difference between a chair and an embedded device with software is that the former doesn't (usually) come with an EULA. In the United States, EULA enforceability is still somewhat uncertain, with different courts and states having different opinions on the subject. Nonetheless, they're usually treated as enforceable until a judge says otherwise, if for no other reason than there's not a lot of case law on it, and a full trial will need to be held in most cases to ascertain the enforceability.
And frankly, they're most likely going to eventually be considered enforceable for standard clauses, with absurd clauses being dismissed immediately (rights to your first born, for example) and grey area clauses enforceability being determined by a judge.
So does that mean you consider the US military, with it's "iPod touch as ballistic calculators" projecta bunch of idiots?
Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
is that no matter who wins, I still get a good laugh.
Apple LOVES vendor lock in, just like MSFT. If they switched positions tomorrow Apple would be just as nasty when it comes to anti competitive practices as MSFT... They are just MSFT on a smaller scale, that's all.
But companies love to be anthropomorphized. Lets be fair here. I like it that the type of computers I'm a specialist in administering are vendor locked into using Linux. I'm typing this from my MacBook Pro, and I actually thought about this lockin thing when I bought it. I was thinking, "Should I spend this much money or buy something cheaper?" I also thought, "You know my music is pretty vendor locked into iTunes, do I want this?"
And my answer to myself was yes and yes. I can buy a new computer anytime I want, and practically 100% of my files are able to be read on another computer with different software, but I cannot think of another laptop or desktop computer that I would like to use. Their professional lines are exactly that, the other stuff is pretty good as well.
Excuse me, I used the wrong word. Libel is not a CRIME, and therefore the police have no business investigating it. It's a Civil Matter.
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
You don't need to agree to an EULA to buy an iPod; you are only required to do so in order to hook the iPod up to iTunes. The topic at hand is precisely that of using an iPod independently of iTunes; hence the EULA is irrelevant.
And furthermore, where the hell does this "non-proprietary" product even exist? When I bought my MP3 player and wanted a hard drive player...my options were either an old player, a Zune, or an iPod. I hate iPods and I wanted something new so guess what? I'm screwed every way...even if I DID get an iPod. No one makes this fabled "non-proprietary" MP3 playing device...you need special software for ALL of them or you need software that breaks through the bullshit to support your player.
My version of synching my Zune in Linux is use Virtualbox and I imagine it'd be the same for an iPod...which is completely ridiculous. Why the hell do they care what program syncs my music ffs?
"Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - BenF
to Microsoft stating that any other operating system placed upon a PC is in violation of the DMCA's prohibition on circumventing copy protection measures. after all its nothing more than hardware.
no matter how good it is, it is human nature always wants to make things better
Your argument is meritless with regards to iPhones (at least), as there's a little notice in the box that says you must agree to the EULA. I assume that iPods have the same notice, however I don't own one, so I can't say for sure.
Anal rape in every box.
Where can I get one for my ex?
I got an idea. Ever see that movie "Strangers on a Train"?
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
The GP actually raises a valid point; he just didn't voice it properly, and here it is:
If you don't like Apple's product, why the hell did you buy it in the first place?
Not that I think Apple should have this tight of a hold on already bought iPods, but it's a fair point. Most people who have a stake in this discussion, by now, realise that it's locked down, and that Apple doesn't look kindly on breaking the locks. Whether or not Apple is allowed to do this should be largely irrelevant by now, because people who like an open device should already have bought an open device instead.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression of the DMCA's protection of DRM only applied to DRM that copyrighted files, and only the copyright holder could sue. This looks like it's way off the DMCA's radar.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Yes, MSFT "owns" the OS, but the BIG difference is they don't "own" the hardware. And frankly I think it is debatable which is more evil. I remember what is was like before, where your Vic wouldn't talk to your TRS 80 which wouldn't talk to your IBM, etc. But frankly ANYBODY can write a Windows driver. I have seen more weird shit come out in the last 15 years or so, all because it was butt simple to write a Windows driver for any weird ass piece of hardware you could dream up. I mean you can even put a fricking cassette deck in your PC!
The point is before MSFT sold MS-DOS to Compaq, the entire PC world was "welcome to proprietary land" where nothing worked with anybody else and it was all crazy expensive. And now that the PC ecosystem has matured Linux(and BSD, and Haiku,etc) can take advantage of that to give us even more choice. Do most PCs come with Windows? Yep, because that is what folks want. They WANT to play their games, or have that nice shiny disc they got at the Wally World work, or have their printer/scanner/fax without praying to the Gods of CLI. If Apple would have won we would probably still have $3000+ machines that only those with serious cash could afford. Now I can slap together a machine with frankly insane power for less than $400. To me that is progress.
So as much as I HATE what that marketing ass monkey Ballmer is trying to push in 400 fricking versions, I still give credit where credit was due. If it wasn't for Darth Gates making it so it didn't matter whether I bought Dell, or HP, or Packard Bell(remember those), or Gateway,etc that everything worked as long as it had the Windows symbol on it things would be VERY different. Because I remember what it was like before MSFT, and frankly it really, REALLY sucked. If you think Apple makes great PCs, fine. I agree completely. Ferrari makes damned nice roadsters too, I can't afford those either.
But at least now I have choice. I can run WinXP(my choice) or Vista, I can run Linux, or BSD, or thanks to the wonders of the Internet I can even run a hacked version of OSX on generic hardware if I wanted to. But we probably wouldn't have that choice if Darth Gates hadn't screwed over IBM all those years ago. And looking at their actions I would have to say that Darth Jobs is JUST as nasty as Darth Gates, he just has less money but MUCH better taste.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Clever. Now all they have to do is look for the guy that just started running.
I don't have to out run them. I just have to out run YOU!
Dammit... forgot to grab my tinfoil hat....
DMCA provides explicit exclusions for interoperability.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Because it is shiny, and how can something shiny possibly be bad?
Considering the pricing of Apple laptops, I will keep buying "good-enough-to-slightly-better-than-i-hoped" generic PCs that Linux can use reasonably well. I will keep using VirtualBox (to the extent that Oracle doesn't kill it off) and probably use windoze 7 if i buy another laptop in the next 5 months or whenever i can escape vista.
Apple iPhones and laptops are, i readily say, enviable and slick and cool and nice and all, but a few of the keys i can't wrap my head around. I still am stuck on 3-button or 2-button-with-wheel mice with apps READY TO USE the feature. About the closest-to-Apple-like product i use is Punch! ViaCAD, and that runs reasonably well & useful for me in memory-hogging vista, inside VirtualBox, inside Mandriva...
Yeh, i know i could run Parallels.... but...
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
gtkpod and others using libgpod. Like Amarok and Rythmbox, though support is only preliminary for touch/phone.
You proved my point right there. Support is only preliminary. And, according the the docs, the iPod needs to be jailbroken, and I don't think I can jailbreak my iPod without iTunes.
After 3 days without programming, life becomes meaningless
- The Tao of Programming
The email from Apple's lawyers says:
The DMCA explicitly prohibits the dissemination of information that can be used to circumvent such technology.
[emphasis added]
That general statement is a double falsehood. What the DMCA explicitly prohibits disseminating is a "technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof", not information per se. Some courts might possibly interpret the DMCA as prohibiting information that doesn't have direct functionality, but the DMCA certainly doesn't "explicitly" prohibit it.
To fall within the DMCA's prohibition something must also have a greater relationship to circumvention than being merely capable of being used for circumvention. While Apple would undoubtedly claim that this particular content does have the requisite relationship to circumvention, and may even be correct in such a claim, that doesn't make the general statement any more true.
Obviously you missed the episode of "Pimp My Ride" where they totally chromed out the Death Star.
"But this one goes to 11!"
i love how these companies think they do whatever they want. Apple is just another example of a rotten apple in a bushel of fruits. :/