Slashdot Mirror
Medieval Copy Protection
An anonymous reader writes "In medieval times a 'book curse' was often included on the inside cover or on the last leaf of a manuscripts, warning away anyone who might do the book some harm. Here's a particularly pretty one from Yale's Beinecke MS 214: 'In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, Amen. In the one thousand two hundred twenty-ninth year from the incarnation of our Lord, Peter, of all monks the least significant, gave this book to the [Benedictine monastery of the] most blessed martyr, St. Quentin. If anyone should steal it, let him know that on the Day of Judgment the most sainted martyr himself will be the accuser against him before the face of our Lord Jesus Christ.'"
That's theft protection. Copyright infringement != theft, remember?
They should put message at the beginning of movies instead of the stupid FBI warning thing.
I see that the effectiveness of DRM hasn't changed in 800 years.
I think it would be pretty kick-ass to have some Saint materialize and lay on some whup-ass to would be thieves.
*gasp* THE BISHOP!
crazy dynamite monkey
No wonder my crops failed and there was a rain of toads on the farm after I downloaded "Superman III".
Ahem... that one _is_ one of God's laws: "Thou shalt not steal". Written in stone, no less.
In these days, it was common practice to copy books. It was even encouraged to spread knowledge and share it with others. This protection is against theft and is just as (in)effective as today's copy protection techniques.
The Book of Revelation ends like this:
Not copy-protection, but an "invariant section" definition as in the GFDL. The translation is medieval, but the original and therefore clearly the practice is much older. Since there was no government-provided copyright law with which to enforce this, threatening eternal damnation is pretty much the only resort available. (Right?)
(Sidenote: of course, this was written before that book was commonly bound into a single-volume manuscript, but that doesn't stop people from assuming that they were meant to apply to the entire bible in its current form.)
No, that's one of man's laws written under the guise of god so people would actually follow it back in the day.
Living With a Nerd
Even slashdot eventually will equate copyright violations with theft.
Not steal. It doesn't forbid copying the bible into your own personal notebook. "If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself. But the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it.
"Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine...
"That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property." - Thomas Jefferson
Therefore:
While I can claim ownership of this bible, and label you a "thief" if you steal it (because I have been deprived of use of the computer), I have NO natural right to claim ownership of the ideas contained within. Your copying of text deprives me of nothing. I still possess knowledge.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
You're just upset because Moses yelled at you for building the golden calf.
Technically I suppose it is possible to steal and only break one, but most theft is proceeded by the crime of coveting as well.
Oh, come now. Next thing you're going to say is that all religious rights, texts, and associated constructs... even the religions themselves are simply creations of man! What kind of crazy-talk is that?
Things like this are in News, while things like research on how monkeys make the same mistakes humans do when it comes to money are thrown in Idle. This story is a novelty while that one has implications for how we do things. These are far from the only examples. What gives?
I don't think I'd mind nearly as much if Idle's comments page wasn't so broken; it makes a story otherwise worth discussing too much of a pain in the ass.
Your brain is not a computer.
"If yee hath downloaded this book from a site of file sharing, then may thy hard drive crash and all your data be lost."
I think these kinds of notes in books were not uncommon at all back in the day. My great grandfather wrote in several of the big books that were handed down "This book belongs to ____. If you take it, and don't give it back, then you are no darn good." We always kinda laughed at that in our family, but lots of people took that a little more seriously then.
A case can be made that this would be MORE effective, because there are more people who might pay attention to this instead of the silly FBI warnings.
Then again, it's theft protection, not copy protection, as another person noted. After all, they don't care about people copying it, only about people stealing it.
They should write EULAs more like this. Just as effective, but far more likely to be read out of sheer curiosity.
'In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, Amen. In the one thousand two hundred twenty-ninth year from the incarnation of our Lord, Peter, of all monks the least significant, gave this book to the [Benedictine monastery of the] most blessed martyr, St. Quentin. If anyone should steal it, let him know that on the Day of Judgment the most sainted martyr himself will be the accuser against him before the face of our Lord Jesus Christ.'
That is the longest password I've ever seen.
"I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
How many times do we have to explain that copying something is different than stealing something?
It is incredibly *dangerous* to our culture to have the vernacular polluted in a way that equates a criminal deed to a legally mandated civil disregard.
The title of this article should be changed.
No more effective than the FBI/INTERPOL warning on a video.
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
I believe that all copies of this book must be immediately destroyed because this was the wish of the original authors.
You can't handle the truth.
Any chance it's in public domain by now, or does Sony have involvement in this also?
I think that "Steal" is the key word here, as in "To Deprive Them of Their Property" Calling this copyright is a stretch to say the least.
haha, my CAPTCHA is "Criminal" I wonder if its a coincidence or something.... More.
Reads more like a theft deterrent than copy protection.
I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
Yeah...because god, the creator and lord of all things, is going to enforce human laws.
Actually, yes, according to the Bible, breaking human laws is wrong, unless it contradicts God's law.
Romans 13:1
Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
No, there is no "-1 I'LL NEVER ADMIT BEING WRONG!!!" mod.
Yet someone stole that and wrote it down in a little book called the Bible. Perhaps he should have included some DRM on his tablets...
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
The first version was written on papyrus, but someone walked off with it.
When someone says, "Any fool can see
To me, that passage says human law is a waste of time and an illusion, since only god's laws are the ones that truly matter...this part is what makes me interpret it that way:
"For there is no power but of God."
To me, that says human laws are inconsequential and mean nothing.
Living With a Nerd
Guessing at the literacy rates in 1229, what are the chances that a sticky-fingered thief would also be able to read the curse in order to feel the dread that it was meant to create? Did they have a literacy program for miscreants?
I need trepanation like I need a hole in the head.
Here's the relevant chapter.
Can you point us to the line where it says "Thou shalt not steal"....?
No sig today...
there was a medieval book called "SaintRoulette" that had this feature but it didn't work out too well. The Saint materialized, but all he did was hold up a sign that said "tits or gtfo"
I think what at least one interpretation is, is that it says that only Gods rules matter, but if someone is in the position to impose human laws then he must have the backing of god and therefore they are gods rules as well.
"the powers that be are ordained of God"
But then it is obviously not obvious what "the powers that be" are.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
It could also be construed as a predecessor to the current (U.S.) constitution. "Unless it is already covered by God's laws, humans have the ability to do as they please." Sound familiar? If not, substitute "the federal government" for God and "state government" for humans.
naive impressionable fools shell out hundreds of thousands of dollars and years of their lives... to find out the next exciting chapter in the riveting saga of xenu and the thetans
if these people knew up front that they were sacrificing all of their money and years of their lives for bad science fiction, they wouldn't join the stupid cult
whenever someone leaks their nonsense, they try to sue the leaker into oblivion and insist on erasing the treasured revelations from any appearance outside the cult
including yours truly here, slashdot:
http://slashdot.org/yro/01/03/16/1256226.shtml
the tactics of scientology, and medieval monks, are a cautionary tale. they actually represent the end game of intellectual property: i control all the information, so i control you, you are my slave. corporations don't call it a religion, but they do the same tactics, with the same end game, whether they realize it or not. relentlessly, they buy off our legislators, and convince them to pass yet stricter and stricter controls on the flow of information
for the sake of all of the noble principles that have arisen out of the enlightenment and so many of us cherish so dearly, and have been codified into such things as the constitution and the declaration of independence, you must do your best in your life to sabotage and destroy the effectiveness of intellectual property. intellectual property is a flawed philosophical premise, but its enforcement works because it creates flows of money, that create power bases, that can be invested in further toll booths on the flow of information, until the whole thing is jammed up, strangled, and controlled. the only antidote is enough of us realizing the threat, and sabotaging it. the idea of fighting intellectual property is actually the fight for the continues enjoyment of our freedoms, ultimately, this is the crux of the clash
and we can do that, with the internet
intellectual property is the ultimate enemy of the freedoms you enjoy and cherish. the internet is the greatest thing since the printing press to challenge the notion. it's a long, ongoing struggle, pitting the highest principles of mankind, versus the lowest, basest forms of control over your life, for the sake of cash. but if you don't wish you or your children to be slaves to corporations, you will do your best to make intellectual property law unenforceable on the internet. it won't be easy, it won't be done in a day, but its one of the most important struggles of our lives, involving the highest principles you believe in
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Ahem... that one _is_ one of God's laws: "Thou shalt not steal". Written in stone, no less.
Heh. "I bring you fifteen (CRASH)...ten commandments!"
Ancient inscriptions from classical, and older (e.g., ancient Middle Eastern), times often contain curses against those who would deface, or in some cases alter, them. The key is that they don't seem to prohibit copying them at all.
---- Richard L. Goerwitz III
Medieval scribes wrote book curses in the "colophon" at the end of the book; here are two favorites:
Whoever steals this book let him die the death; let him be frizzled in a pan; may the falling sickness rage within him; may he be broken on the wheel and be hanged.
For him that stealeth, or borroweth and returneth not, ... let it change into a serpent in his hand and rend him. Let him be struck with palsy, and all his members blasted. Let him languish in pain crying out for mercy, & let there be no surcease until he sing in dissolution. Let bookworms gnaw his entrails. ... Let the flames of Hell consume him forever.
— San Pedro monastery, Barcelona
... and one a bit older (from Asurbanipal's library in Assyria 650 BCE):
Clay tablet of Ashurbanipal, King of the World, King of Assyria, who trusts in Ashur and Ninlil. Your lordship is without equal, Ashur, King of the Gods! Whoever removes [this tablet], writes his name in place of my name, may Ashur and Ninlil, angered and grim, cast him down, erase his name, his seed, in the land.
People were encouraged to copy books and discouraged from stealing books. If you wanted a book you could buy the ink, paper and sit and copy it yourself. You could pay someone else to copy it. Churches made money employing people with penmanship skills to copy books. Who do you think funded Galileo's work and published copies of his work? God made commandments about stealing and no commandments about copying even though there was a lot of intellectual property floating around. Maps in particular were very valuable. Simple math formulas were closely guarded secrets because there were no commandments about copying them. The formula for purple dye was a trade secret because people were afraid it would be copied. No copy protection, just simple reminders that theft will be punished by God.
No, he's upset because Moses insisted that the heavy stone plates had to be carried around, instead of simply copying the text onto a papyrus and taking that with them. You know, when going through the desert, the last thing you want is to sweat under the weight of stone plates.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
And your stupid.
See Hebrews 11:13-16 - We are "strangers and pilgrims" in whatever land we happen to live. We must be obedient to the law of the land insofar as these laws do not contradict God's law.
I'm an Atheist, and I find believers ignorance regarding there own theology very funny..and sad because you alway spread your ignorance of your theology s if it's the truth and then try to force others to comply.
regardless to your belief, ignoring man's laws leads to anarchy.
I know I wont change your mind because you use your ignorance as justification to do what you want and ignore how it impacts other. Hopeful someone who actually thinks will read this and realize that according to The Bible you are supposed to obey mans laws.
It also says in the Bible to pay your taxes. Something that's convenient overlooked by the tea party and stupid people like Palin.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Certainly they couldn't be self-replicating memes, more interested in their own survival than that of their human hosts, sorta like money, countries, various -isms, and some really good cake recipes.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
And your stupid.
Too easy of a target. I also love how you say I'm stupid because of my opinion. Thanks.
See Hebrews 11:13-16 - We are "strangers and pilgrims" in whatever land we happen to live. We must be obedient to the law of the land insofar as these laws do not contradict God's law.
True...if you follow those books as being "the word".
I'm an Atheist, and I find believers ignorance regarding there own theology very funny
I'd like to once again point out that you called me stupid...although I do agree with your statement about believers own ignorance regarding their religion.
.and sad because you alway spread your ignorance of your theology s if it's the truth and then try to force others to comply.
::pause button::
My theology? First of all, you don't know me, so you don't know what that theology is. Secondly, if you're an atheist, who the fuck are you to tell someone else what their religion says or means? Lastly, I don't follow any organized religion.
regardless to your belief, ignoring man's laws leads to anarchy.
Agreed.
I know I wont change your mind because you use your ignorance as justification to do what you want and ignore how it impacts other.
Really? Tell me more about myself, Mr. Person Who Has Never Met Me.
Hopeful someone who actually thinks will read this and realize that according to The Bible you are supposed to obey mans laws.
And according to Al Qaeda, Islam dictated that they fly planes into the towers. Ain't religion grand?
Living With a Nerd
An old gypsy might have touched you on the face and said "Thinner."
My mom's got a book in her collection from 1775 called "Watt's Logick". It's got a great inscription in the inside cover:
"Steal not this book, you dirty clown, for fear th' gallows shall be yours."
Where's your house? I only ask because you claim it's morally reprehensible to ask somebody not to steal, so I assume you have no problem with people breaking in and snatching all of your stuff. As you say, by claiming you somehow have more of a right to your possessions than I do, you're playing the same endgame. You think all other men your slave. That or you're illiterate and totally failed to read even the summary. Did you even read the headline, or is your usual tirade against copyright law only (slightly) on-topic by pure chance?
ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
What really irks me that Bible, a text supposedly to be enjoyed by the common folk, is written in a language that makes the worst EULA seem like a Sunday afternoon reading. Either the translators are idiots, or whoever wrote it down was on drugs. The two sentences you cite above are a perfect example of that. What the heck? Couldn't whoever authored that just wrote it in plain whatever language?
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
Some scholars believe that God's ultimate intention for that was to establish the need for a large, majestic container to store them in, and thus prepare the way for the eventual creation of Raiders of the Lost Ark.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
Ahem... that one _is_ one of God's laws: "Thou shalt not steal". Written in stone, no less.
Actually, the correct translation is "Thou shalt not kidnap", as the "stealing" in the original referred to the "stealing" of people.
(Of course, even that's a translation from a bunch of cobbled-together sources, interpreted and edited multiple times by people with different axes to grind.)
Ahem... that one _is_ one of God's laws: "Thou shalt not steal". Written in stone, no less.
If copying is theft then Jesus stole the loaves and fishes. If Jesus is sinless, copying is not theft. There is no other viable Christian view. Are you one of those people who insist drinking alcohol is wrong is spite of Jesus turning water into wine? We don't need your type.
I get it, I really do. So bear with me for a moment...
What I want is really pretty simple. First off, with the current unemployment situation it is terribly unfair that some people have jobs and others do not. Especially considering that most of the people without jobs today (as much as 20% of the US population, even higher elsewhere) are never going to get a job. Ever. So the government needs to be in charge - completely - of providing income for people that aren't working. Calling the money "unemployment insurance" is a joke. Call it the dole. Or government support. Whatever. It doesn't matter what it is called but the government needs to recognize that there are more people than jobs and these people need to eat. So working becomes optional. If you don't want to work, there are 10 people that are overqualified for your job that would work for half of what you are making. So nobody needs to work ever again.
Obviously food, rent, clothes and other necessities have to be affordable to the people on the dole. So we need government price controls to insure that people aren't gouged and that the dole covers everything they need. Health care just needs to be something that happens. You shouldn't have to register because that would be a huge problem for immigrants and tourists who can't really "register".
A side effect of this is that you get some really strange lobbying going on. Let's say you have a Ferrari dealership and you sell a couple of cars a month. Wouldn't it be nice if driving a Ferrari was included as a "basic necessity" so people on the dole could buy Ferraris? Then you wouldn't be selling one a month but more like 20 a day. Business would be booming and you might even be able to hire more people.
The result is just about everyone in any sort of business is then going to want to have their products and services declared as a basic necessity so that people on the dole can either buy them or the government just pays for it anyway. The end result of this is that pretty much everyone in any sort of business is working for the government directly or indirectly. From the Ferrari dealer to the company that makes generic (thin) toilet paper. Probably the thicker, more absorbent stuff is declared as a luxury and eliminated by the government.
I guess at that point it doesn't make any difference if I pirate a movie or if I go to the store and buy it - because everything is pretty much owned, priced, paid for and owned by the government. So there is no need for anything like "copyright" any longer and no worries about people stealing stuff - it all belongs to the people anyway.
This system has been tried and it doesn't work. Not just doesn't work well, but actively collapses within a very short period of time. Read some history and look into non-religious communes. Too bad. Of course, there seems to be a never-ending supply of people trying to vote for this kind of plan. We are starting to see what happens when we get someone that almost half-believes this is possible. But doesn't really and can't actually bring himself to either admit it or tell people the truth. So we are getting some half-assed attempts at this kind of a plan without really doing it.
I guess the next plan is based around making rich people pay for it all. Tax them until they aren't quite so rich anymore and all our problems will be over. Except that plan doesn't work any better than the one above.
What it comes down to is you either pay for what you consume or you expect someone else to. Not paying is the gateway to anarchy.
because it now costs $0 to distribute it
furthermore, what motivates people to write a song? love of music, love of fame, or just trying to get in a girl's pants
the point is, you can consume media, because media costs nothing, and those who make it, make it for love
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
...
if these people knew up front that they were sacrificing all of their money and years of their lives for bad science fiction, they wouldn't join the stupid cult
...
I find your lack of faith disturbing.
Here they are in these modern times finally placing their faith where it should be in such matter, with their infallible creator and they who sitith at the right hand of His Honor Almighty. Why, only 800 years perviously a (yes, I saw it, I like it better this way) FAR more barbaric time in this growing Savior's development, they were actually burning books, a self-limiting process. So desperate had they become for sources large enough to keep a mob in books until their fervor wore off that they had not only raided Alexanderia, the world's largest library and stripped it shelves clean, but fervor unabated had raided the daughter of the librarian there and had stripped her flesh bare of skin. What a pleasure to know that the pinnacle of rights management had been achieved 8 centuries ago and continues on today. Rightfully doubting the law of man when the One True Lawmaker is still on the job, Phillip Emmons "Isaac" Bonewits protected his 1971 treatise "Real Magic" ISBN 0-87728-688-4 with just such a shrink-wrap damnation. I am sorely tempted towards enjoining any who, giving up after struggling with their fourth 3 syllable word in this article and exercising their editor-given divine right to mod down what they can't understand, to find themselves forced pivvy-wise with sudden gusts of bowel explusions, but unable to gain entrance instead expulse perforce into their socks. In a public place. Instead I'll withhold the explicit and allow them to identify themselves herewith.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
... golden calf.
Just think of the golden steaks!
Just because a lot of people like to read the Bible in 400 year old English, doesn't mean that's the only version. Try the New Living Translation, the Message or the New International Version.
Modern Bible
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
Lol, this would only ward off the fools, since there is no god.
Basically, it's 6,000 year-old FUD? Same ole tricks, same ole tricks.
The eternal struggle of good vs. evil begins within one's self.
want to buy a capital letter?
want to buy a punctuation?
To me, that passage says human law is a waste of time and an illusion, since only god's laws are the ones that truly matter...
This is where reading the whole passage and not just one verse is nice, since it leaves less room for potentially errant interpretation. For example, here's the whole passage starting with the verse we've already seen:
1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. 6This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. 7Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
Romans 13:1-7 (NIV)
Hopefully Zondervan won't condemn me in the last days with a curse for violating their IP in the use of that translation.... I suppose I could claim that Paul had prior art? IANAL....
Anyway, it still leaves a lot of room for interpretation, but at least that's hopefully a bit more clear than when just one verse was given by the grandparent poster. It more clearly means that human laws are to be obeyed. When taken in context with the rest of the Bible, the exception for not obeying evil laws is added.
It also says in the Bible to pay your taxes. Something that's convenient overlooked by the tea party and stupid people like Palin.
I was unaware that the Tea Party and so called, "Stupid People" were actively not paying taxes. Seems like we'd be hearing more complaints from the IRS were that the case. They are, however, protesting issues they feel are unjust, which they are well within their rights to do. They are still in obedience to the laws of the land, and uphold the spirit of the same which gives them the right to peaceably assemble and protest, regardless of whether or not we agree with them.
Yeah, but the obsolete versions are seemingly most popular, and not only in English. And people are OK with that: double facepalm.
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
So because TFA makes the same mistake it's OK to just spew the same crap in the summary's title? There is exactly _one_ disclaimer in the six examples that can be interpreted (liberally) to mean "don't copy this".
Each and every single one of those six disclaimers concerns itself with copying. Nothing else.
Yeah, you're actually illiterate. This example is of a curse being aimed at someone stealing a very expensive physical object. Books were not cheap back then, they were precious. You couldn't just instantly make an exact duplicate of one. You have a point, but you're spamming it in entirely the wrong place - the theft being referred to in the curse is explicitly actual physical theft. You do believe that stealing a valuable physical object from its owner is theft, right?
do you understand the concept you fucking retard?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
>>To me, that says human laws are inconsequential and mean nothing.
And yet some feel the need to legislate God's will, in order to enforce it. Go figure.
Huh?
that reminded me of longest surviving tamil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_language) books (thirukural, tolkappiyam, etc.), chinese books (art of war, etc.), any arts (picasso, etc.), or buildings (pyramids, etc.); and, these do not require a warning message to survice test of time.
Rev. 22:18-20:
[18] For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: [19] And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Always made me chuckle, considering the number of times the bible has been reformatted, translated, sourced, etc.
"...And who wants to make buttprints in the sands of time?" ~Bob Moawad