How about the most viable commercial threat to MS office? WordPerfect/Quatro/Paradox. Yes, we have Star Office, which has the virtue of being free, but its not yet nearly as mature or full featured as this set.
I find that fairly important and worth preserving. (Besides I'm a Paradox Junkie:) QBE is THE way to interactively work with data stores.)
When you are hemoraghing cash you need to cut costs. Generally, since you can't fire equiptment, cutting costs means cutting workers.
Likely both statements are true. Corel IS out of the woods financially, for the moment, as they now have their expenses under control. That meant cutting your friends from the pay-roll.
The big limit on back-tracing truly abusive internet users is DHCP. A site knows the IP of someone conencting to it, but most ISPS don't assign fixed IPs-- instead using DHCP to assign them dynamicly on connect. Without a log at the ISp of what IP address was assigned when it becoems extremely difficult to find genuine culprits who need to be dealt with.
(Yes I know a serious cracker wil lstage his attackthrough multiple machines, but the problem children generally don't have that skill set.)
If net-abuse can be reported to an ISP and the ISP know who the user was, the ISP can deal with it. Without that ability, one obnoxious kiddie can get the entire ISp blocked from sites and news groups.
eInk is a Xerox PARC spin off using the electronic ink technology developed there.
In addition to self-driving signs it can be used for passive "electronic paper". Basicly a sheet that is printed on magneticly and can be resused. So, for instance, for your electronicly delivered news-sheet you can re-use the same sheet of "paper" every day.-
Haven't you ever noticed how many suppoaed game projects these days put up "screen shots" (often done with on off-the shelf 3D package) and some cool verbage and then never deliver a game?
I sure wouldn't pay for a game ahead of time based on that. Even if the developer is sincere (and this would open the door for all kinds of straight con-jobs) abilty to dream and ability to deliver are very different. The first is preveleant, the second is not so.
The only developer I would even think of gioving my moeny to ahead of time woul be a big, well established and already successful group with a lot of cash on hand to voer their development costs. In which case, they don't need my money anyway.
Your case doesn't have to have merit in order for you to file it. This doesn't mean the opposing lawyer can't immediately file for summary judgement and get it thrown out.
A sun-ray is run ona remote protocol that virtualizes the screen and input devices. As such, running programs on a Sun Ray is jsut like beign on the host.
There is n oway that MS can get the kind of bandwidth-performance needed for this kind of true remoting through throwing around ascii XMl packets.
Same market line but Sun has technology to back it up.
.. but you have to wait 8 months after your give them your money for suppsoed delivery?
Thats a hell of a long time to disappear and cover your tracks with. Given the vauge "robotic homing piegon", pardon me if I'm thinking thsi may be the con of the decade in progress...
I also haven't heard anwywhere of this 'child safety tour', which seems odd for a PR event. has anyone else? (Though even if the tour IS legit, the listing still could be a con. It would just mean the pcitures are real rather then rednered.)
Call me overly suspicious, but it's covneient that it isn't street legal, as well. This means there is no registration to authenticate ownership...
I'm sorry, but that's aotu tyhe msot appropriate thing i csn think to say.
Sounds like MS is paniced by Sun's Application Serveice Provider model and that they'll loose relevance if it actially takes hold, so once again they scrambeld to get a buzz word complaint annoucnement out.
Wake me when they start showing real usable product.
If you reach into my hosue and take soemthing out, how is it unreasonable search for me to photograph you doing so?
That copy is coming from outside your home. The act of your copyiong it is beign recorded outside your home (and in POF in their office.) Yo uare correct, IP DOESN'T change it. The law you quote is therefor irrellevent.
You better give the whole context here,inclduing the appropriate cites. IANAL and thus thsi does nto constitute legal advice, but I've never heard of such a thing and I study the copyright laws as somewhat of a hobby.
I **strongly** suspect you are confusing the right to back up intellectual proeprty you own with the right to copy IP you don't. A law such as you suggest would violate the very spirit of the Copyright laws.
(P.S. If you are not a licensned attorney, you better make that clear in your posts. Its illegal for a non-attorney to give legal advice, which is why us non-lawyers always start with IANAL.)
You are assuemd neiother guilty nor inncoent ina civil case. Both plaintif and defendant have equal standing, which is appropriate in a disagreement between members of society.
In a criminal case you are assuemd incoent until proven guilkty because it is you v. the state. the state, having much more pwoer then the indvidual, needs to be apporpriately abalcned so some semblance of justice is done.
Answer: YOU. Or some other poor handful of randomly selected slobs.
The law doesn't require them to sue EVERYONE who violates their copyrights to sue anyone. What I would do if I were them would be to take a random handful to court and do my best to break them financially as an example.
How many people would pirate if they knew they were running that risk, of beign one of the spot-checks?
For a variety of reasons. Parents are responsible for the liabilty of their children, so that argument falls away immediately. If it's beign stored on your machine then you are the legal owner of that illegal copy, regardless of who put it there. At bear minimum you are a conspirator.
Finally, and msot importantly, civil court is not criminal court. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is only for criminal cases. You are not "presumed innocent" in a civil case. In a civil case the plaintiff and the defendant are equal under the eyes of the law. The judge or jury just has to weigh the arguemnst of both sides and decide wich is more credible. "Janey did it without my knowledge" is not likely to sound terribly credible to the jury, particualrly if yo uare the msot computer savvy one in the hosue and/or the one who uses the computer most..
Is there any authentication scheme for thsi information or is it purely a way for a suer to answer qustiosn automaticly?
The fact of the matter is that ther are quite a few web applciations that would benefit from a cheap, easy, reliable way to identify users. the issue isn't si much "knowing who you are" as it is having a foolproof handle by which to track you. (Anyone who ever played UOL I'm sure can see the benefits of being able to, for instance, remove destructive players (cheaters) from the environment.)
I don't see any reason why a site should not identify itself as requiring a validatable unique ID.. and I don't see how this is any threat to anyone. If you don't want to give such an ID just don't use the site. (It's a whole lot like my Caller-ID box, actually. If you don't want me to know who you are, the answer is easy just don't call me.)
IANAL, but I know a fair bit as an amature about Copyright and Trademark law.
I think the entrapment argument works, at least for criminal charges. They enticed you to perform an ilegal act by "offering" the fiels by way of response to your search request. The only issue here I can see, that I'm unsure of, is if entrapment is even an issue in civil cases. (And Copyright suits is a civil case, not criminal.) It may not be. I've never heard of it being used as an argument in civil court, but that in itself doesn't mean all that much
I'm not sure the "you made it available" argument hwoever flies. It's an inetresting sisue, but you were given no explicit permission by anyone who you had reason to believe was the Copyright holder. The copyright holser can argue that he provided those works for download specificly be others he had given explicit permission to, or even just himself from another location.
That you grabbed a copy you shouldn't have doesn't in any way weaken his copyrights. it USED to be (a long time ago) that publication of a work withotu proepr copyright designation coudl weaken the copyrights but that was fixed with the last major revision of the Copyright laws. Now an author holds righst to their work implicitly and until either Copyright runs out or he or she explicitly reliquishes said rights.
(1) It only pertians to dynamic DNS. Some people have static IPs (Like just about everyone using a cable modem, for instance.)
(2) Sometiems DHCP (Dynamic DNS) is sued for long term assignment. There is soemthing called a "lease time". You can be using DHCP and still have a specific IP assigned for days, weeks or months at a time. Again this is true of any "always on" service that is using DHCP. Chances are the only DHCP assignemnt that ever happens is when you connect for your first time.
(3) More and more ISPs are keeping good records of Dynamic DNS assignment. Thsu even if you ARE dialing in and getting a new DHCP assugnment each time, your ISp can dientify you based on IP and time/date.
Consider this: When you connect to a sevrer what are you doing? Youa re requesting it (ordering it) to make a copy. Your own software is also half that copy process.
Ergo, yes you have violated copyrights if you do not have the right to copy that work.
Whenever you connect to someoen else, that other computer gets your computer's IP address. In the case of Gnutella, since Gnutella cts as a host for downlaod, anyone you connetc to to download gets your IP.
Now if they can get any more info depends on how your DSN is set up. There are three possibilities: (1) You have a static IP and DNS. This means that your IP address and a DNS name (your machine's name) are bound semi-permenantly. In this case it is relatively easy to track an IP to its user.
(2) You have a dynamic Ip (DHCP) and have dynamic DNS. In this case a potentially different IP is assigned every tiem you log on, hwopever your machine's name is also bound to the Ip at that time. In this case it is easy to get your machien name but harder to track you down as an individual. The ISP basicly has to keep records and make those records available to the tracker.
(3) You have dynamic Ip (DHCP) and no dynamic DNS. This is the most anonymous form as they get no machioen name HWOEVEr you can still be tracked if your ISp keeps good records of its DHCP assingment.
The conclusion: There is no such things as 100% anonymity on the net. (Well, there ARE ways to hide your trail better, but those take a very sophisticated understanding of the net and no program can do it for you.) This is probably a good thing, as 100% anonymity brings 100% impunity to commit criems and without some order no society can exist.
The "Academy" was created by the studios for the purpose of self-promotion. (This isn't flaming, this is fact, read any book on film history.)
Ofcourse the studios see web distribution as a threat, they are distribution companies. You might say "well they shoudl be far sighted enough to figure out a way to work in this new world" but thats a pretty rare quality in entrenched power-structures.
Slashdot Mirror
How about the most viable commercial threat to MS office? WordPerfect/Quatro/Paradox. Yes, we have Star Office, which has the virtue of being free, but its not yet nearly as mature or full featured as this set.
:) QBE is THE way to interactively work with data stores.)
I find that fairly important and worth preserving. (Besides I'm a Paradox Junkie
When you are hemoraghing cash you need to cut costs. Generally, since you can't fire equiptment, cutting costs means cutting workers.
Likely both statements are true. Corel IS out of the woods financially, for the moment, as they now have their expenses under control. That meant cutting your friends from the pay-roll.
The big limit on back-tracing truly abusive internet users is DHCP. A site knows the IP of someone conencting to it, but most ISPS don't assign fixed IPs-- instead using DHCP to assign them dynamicly on connect. Without a log at the ISp of what IP address was assigned when it becoems extremely difficult to find genuine culprits who need to be dealt with.
(Yes I know a serious cracker wil lstage his attackthrough multiple machines, but the problem children generally don't have that skill set.)
If net-abuse can be reported to an ISP and the ISP know who the user was, the ISP can deal with it. Without that ability, one obnoxious kiddie can get the entire ISp blocked from sites and news groups.
This reads very confused.
PIXAR is already half-and-half-owned by Disney Corp and Steve Jobs (look it up, Drudge didn't.)
Hey, why do the work of research when you can print wild speculation. (And yes that applies to a lot we see here, too.)
Anyone else think its funny that a Drudge is a low level monster with a paticularly annoying squeal in Acheron's Call?
eInk is a Xerox PARC spin off using the electronic ink technology developed there.
In addition to self-driving signs it can be used for passive "electronic paper". Basicly a sheet that is printed on magneticly and can be resused. So, for instance, for your electronicly delivered news-sheet you can re-use the same sheet of "paper" every day.-
Good, very old example of a freeware, volunteer extended game.
JK
Haven't you ever noticed how many suppoaed game projects these days put up "screen shots" (often done with on off-the shelf 3D package) and some cool verbage and then never deliver a game?
I sure wouldn't pay for a game ahead of time based on that. Even if the developer is sincere (and this would open the door for all kinds of straight con-jobs) abilty to dream and ability to deliver are very different. The first is preveleant, the second is not so.
The only developer I would even think of gioving my moeny to ahead of time woul be a big, well established and already successful group with a lot of cash on hand to voer their development costs. In which case, they don't need my money anyway.
We've tried it.
Storyteller mode without the world building tools is fairly useless.
They still haven't releasd the promised world building tools.
Your case doesn't have to have merit in order for you to file it. This doesn't mean the opposing lawyer can't immediately file for summary judgement and get it thrown out.
WhenI was a kid in Great neck, NY, one ngith a month or computer club got to work with the adminstratiosn Honeywell.
:)
One of the techs who worked full time on the machien ahd a deck (yes this was punch cards) that woudlk play christmas carols on the line printer.
Never thought I'd see that again
Well noit exactly...
A sun-ray is run ona remote protocol that virtualizes the screen and input devices. As such, running programs on a Sun Ray is jsut like beign on the host.
There is n oway that MS can get the kind of bandwidth-performance needed for this kind of true remoting through throwing around ascii XMl packets.
Same market line but Sun has technology to back it up.
.. but you have to wait 8 months after your give them your money for suppsoed delivery?
Thats a hell of a long time to disappear and cover your tracks with. Given the vauge "robotic homing piegon", pardon me if I'm thinking thsi may be the con of the decade in progress...
I also haven't heard anwywhere of this 'child safety tour', which seems odd for a PR event. has anyone else? (Though even if the tour IS legit, the listing still could be a con. It would just mean the pcitures are real rather then rednered.)
Call me overly suspicious, but it's covneient that it isn't street legal, as well. This means there is no registration to authenticate ownership...
I'm sorry, but that's aotu tyhe msot appropriate thing i csn think to say.
Sounds like MS is paniced by Sun's Application Serveice Provider model and that they'll loose relevance if it actially takes hold, so once again they scrambeld to get a buzz word complaint annoucnement out.
Wake me when they start showing real usable product.
P.S. Anyone seen a real UPnP device yet??
IANAL warning.
If you reach into my hosue and take soemthing out, how is it unreasonable search for me to photograph you doing so?
That copy is coming from outside your home. The act of your copyiong it is beign recorded outside your home (and in POF in their office.) Yo uare correct, IP DOESN'T change it. The law you quote is therefor irrellevent.
UM...
You better give the whole context here,inclduing the appropriate cites. IANAL and thus thsi does nto constitute legal advice, but I've never heard of such a thing and I study the copyright laws as somewhat of a hobby.
I **strongly** suspect you are confusing the right to back up intellectual proeprty you own with the right to copy IP you don't. A law such as you suggest would violate the very spirit of the Copyright laws.
(P.S. If you are not a licensned attorney, you better make that clear in your posts. Its illegal for a non-attorney to give legal advice, which is why us non-lawyers always start with IANAL.)
IANAL Warning.
Actually thats not quite right.
You are assuemd neiother guilty nor inncoent ina civil case. Both plaintif and defendant have equal standing, which is appropriate in a disagreement between members of society.
In a criminal case you are assuemd incoent until proven guilkty because it is you v. the state. the state, having much more pwoer then the indvidual, needs to be apporpriately abalcned so some semblance of justice is done.
Welcome to cynicism and the real world.
:|
You wrote:
Reading through these comments surprises me
because one would think that most people are
law abiding citizens.
But that seems to not be the case.
Welcome to late 20th c. america.
Most americans don't refrain from shop-lifting because it's wrong and they hurt someoen else. By and large its simply fear of being caught.
If they could shoplift with the same anonymity and safety they cruise the net with currently, no store would stay in business.
Answer: YOU.
Or some other poor handful of randomly selected slobs.
The law doesn't require them to sue EVERYONE who violates their copyrights to sue anyone. What I would do if I were them would be to take a random handful to court and do my best to break them financially as an example.
How many people would pirate if they knew they were running that risk, of beign one of the spot-checks?
IANAL warning.
You're wrong.
For a variety of reasons. Parents are responsible for the liabilty of their children, so that argument falls away immediately. If it's beign stored on your machine then you are the legal owner of that illegal copy, regardless of who put it there. At bear minimum you are a conspirator.
Finally, and msot importantly, civil court is not criminal court. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is only for criminal cases. You are not "presumed innocent" in a civil case. In a civil case the plaintiff and the defendant are equal under the eyes of the law. The judge or jury just has to weigh the arguemnst of both sides and decide wich is more credible. "Janey did it without my knowledge" is not likely to sound terribly credible to the jury, particualrly if yo uare the msot computer savvy one in the hosue and/or the one who uses the computer most..
Like some of the reply posters .
Is there any authentication scheme for thsi information or is it purely a way for a suer to answer qustiosn automaticly?
The fact of the matter is that ther are quite a few web applciations that would benefit from a cheap, easy, reliable way to identify users. the issue isn't si much "knowing who you are" as it is having a foolproof handle by which to track you. (Anyone who ever played UOL I'm sure can see the benefits of being able to, for instance, remove destructive players (cheaters) from the environment.)
I don't see any reason why a site should not identify itself as requiring a validatable unique ID.. and I don't see how this is any threat to anyone. If you don't want to give such an ID just don't use the site. (It's a whole lot like my Caller-ID box, actually. If you don't want me to know who you are, the answer is easy just don't call me.)
IANAL, but I know a fair bit as an amature about Copyright and Trademark law.
I think the entrapment argument works, at least for criminal charges. They enticed you to perform an ilegal act by "offering" the fiels by way of response to your search request. The only issue here I can see, that I'm unsure of, is if entrapment is even an issue in civil cases. (And Copyright suits is a civil case, not criminal.) It may not be. I've never heard of it being used as an argument in civil court, but that in itself doesn't mean all that much
I'm not sure the "you made it available" argument hwoever flies. It's an inetresting sisue, but you were given no explicit permission by anyone who you had reason to believe was the Copyright holder. The copyright holser can argue that he provided those works for download specificly be others he had given explicit permission to, or even just himself from another location.
That you grabbed a copy you shouldn't have doesn't in any way weaken his copyrights. it USED to be (a long time ago) that publication of a work withotu proepr copyright designation coudl weaken the copyrights but that was fixed with the last major revision of the Copyright laws. Now an author holds righst to their work implicitly and until either Copyright runs out or he or she explicitly reliquishes said rights.
Okay, thsi is too symplsitic:
(1) It only pertians to dynamic DNS. Some people have static IPs (Like just about everyone using a cable modem, for instance.)
(2) Sometiems DHCP (Dynamic DNS) is sued for long term assignment. There is soemthing called a "lease time". You can be using DHCP and still have a specific IP assigned for days, weeks or months at a time. Again this is true of any "always on" service that is using DHCP. Chances are the only DHCP assignemnt that ever happens is when you connect for your first time.
(3) More and more ISPs are keeping good records of Dynamic DNS assignment. Thsu even if you ARE dialing in and getting a new DHCP assugnment each time, your ISp can dientify you based on IP and time/date.
Consider this: When you connect to a sevrer what are you doing? Youa re requesting it (ordering it) to make a copy. Your own software is also half that copy process.
Ergo, yes you have violated copyrights if you do not have the right to copy that work.
Okay, here's how it works, folks...
Whenever you connect to someoen else, that other computer gets your computer's IP address. In the case of Gnutella, since Gnutella cts as a host for downlaod, anyone you connetc to to download gets your IP.
Now if they can get any more info depends on how your DSN is set up. There are three possibilities:
(1) You have a static IP and DNS. This means that your IP address and a DNS name (your machine's name) are bound semi-permenantly. In this case it is relatively easy to track an IP to its user.
(2) You have a dynamic Ip (DHCP) and have dynamic DNS. In this case a potentially different IP is assigned every tiem you log on, hwopever your machine's name is also bound to the Ip at that time. In this case it is easy to get your machien name but harder to track you down as an individual. The ISP basicly has to keep records and make those records available to the tracker.
(3) You have dynamic Ip (DHCP) and no dynamic DNS. This is the most anonymous form as they get no machioen name HWOEVEr you can still be tracked if your ISp keeps good records of its DHCP assingment.
The conclusion: There is no such things as 100% anonymity on the net. (Well, there ARE ways to hide your trail better, but those take a very sophisticated understanding of the net and no program can do it for you.) This is probably a good thing, as 100% anonymity brings 100% impunity to commit criems and without some order no society can exist.
The "Academy" was created by the studios for the purpose of self-promotion. (This isn't flaming, this is fact, read any book on film history.)
Ofcourse the studios see web distribution as a threat, they are distribution companies. You might say "well they shoudl be far sighted enough to figure out a way to work in this new world" but thats a pretty rare quality in entrenched power-structures.