Normally, I'd consider a user signing without reading to be their problem. However, in this case, there are several facts that change things.
First off, in most cases, the user technically isn't signing anything. For software, they click Ok. For a lot of products, I think they get a sheet of some sort when they open the box with a bunch of terms and the line (or something like it): "Using this product constitutes agreement of these terms." No signing anything, yet rights are being removed. Isn't this illegal?
Secondly, the documents seem to be written intentionally so that most people are unable to read them without a couple of years of law school training. They're loaded with legal language and as much fluff text and obscuration as possible, burying the terms of the agreement and making it a burden to read. The textual equivalent of having to travel several hundred miles through difficult terrain in order to retrieve the easy to read version.
I don't think you could hold someone to a contract they had to sign in order to use something they'd paid for that was written in a foreign language. How is this much different?
Note that this post is based on my limited knowledge and the examples used may be somewhat extreme. Constructive criticizm will be considered, flames and bashing will be ignored.
-RickHunter
Re:Another attack on open source from RMS
on
RMS On 'Open' Motif
·
· Score: 1
Actually, to be picky, RMS doesn't have anything to do with Open Source if he can help it. Read the Philosophy section of the GNU web site. He's got some good reasons for disliking it. However, you are basically right. RMS' criteria are very systematic and fairly clear and distinct.
I've only actually read this on a couple of places online (one of them being Slashdot), but I think it answers your "why doesn't IBM announce things 2 or 3 years before their ship date?" question. The answer is that, a long time ago, when the earth's crust was cooling and computers used 640k RAM (maybe more recent than that. Don't remember the exact date), IBM controlled the computer world. Basically, everything that was anything was IBM. People complained, the government waded in, and an antitrust suit was launched. One of the penalties IBM got slapped with was not being able to "pre-announce" products.
Look what a productive and friendly company they've turned into. Now, we can just hope the current lawsuit does the same to Microsoft.
Note that this is completely from memory, and all data was gathered through online sources. So if its wrong, don't hesitate to correct me.
From what I understand, the DMCA is unconstitutional anyway, even without the free speech argument. It extends copyright law in a matter which violates the US constitution. Not sure if its direct or indirect. But, IMHO, the best way to get rid of it is to stop the MPAA, RIAA, etc. from bribing the politicians. Read: stop corporate campaign contributions.
-RickHunter
Re:The only thing to be done...
on
DeCSS Update
·
· Score: 1
I must agree. The quality of almost every single anime I've seen to date has been far higher than almost every live-action movie I've ever seen. A lot of anime is also (if I remember right) producted and distributed by compnaies that are a LOT smaller than the MPAA's members. Of course, a lot of the stuff being released on DVD is lisenced by some DVD CCA subsidy, but VHS quality is good enough for me.
Yes, that sounds like a good system for online music distribution. One of many, the other being not making money by selling your music, but the pre-RIAA way, through live concerts, etc. However, the fact that Napster allows people to pirate music doesn't mean that it should be regulated or sued because people do use it for that. Doing that sets some really nasty legal precedents.
I do agree with the original intent of copyright law, to give an artist a limited monopoly over their work to encourage them to give the public access to it. I don't agree with the current "extensions" to it that gives the publisher a permanent, for-all-time right over the work, even after its first sale.
These bodies do not have the power to annul the 1st amendment of the constitution. If I could be forbidden to criticize Apogee based upon their "ownership" of various identifying names and symbols, then what would exist to stop private individuals, social groups, or even politicians from doing the same with their "licensed" speeches and doctrines?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this exactly what the Church of Scientology has been doing to anyone who tried to criticize their work? I'm willing to be some computer company lawyer looked at a Scientology case and said, "Wow! It'd be neat if we could do that. Wait.... We have the money to bribe the government into doing what we want. So we CAN do that!"
Oh, and interesting note. My local school board has censored the EFF's website and denied all access from any school computer. Wonder what they're trying to hide...?
An excellent post, and everyone who's been moderated higher that I've seen so far seems to be missing this point. Being Open-Source or Free Software doesn't automatically make anything secure. However, with the source available for community review and modification, there's a higher chance that bugs, including security holes, will be found and patched.
A key example of this is OpenBSD. If I remember right, it was written from scratch to be completely security-hole free. I don't think there have been any major security problems for quite a while now.
Of course, there's still ways to get around this. Such as the infamous compiler that builds backdoors into login programs.
FINALLY! A high-rated post gets this RIGHT! If I had moderator access right now, I'd moderate you up even further. The GPL, I believe, explicitly says that a distributor can charge money for GPLed software. Of course, there are some restrictions (mostly relating to the distribution of code), but still...
Unfortunately for us, to most corporate interests, the idea of people being able to freely modify and redistribute their "product" tends to drive them away. Oh, well. Their loss.
Yes, I'll agree that Corel products are quite good. I use WordPerfect 8.0 for Windows (I'd rather use Linux, but my current machine has too much Windows-only hardware, yadda, yadda...). However, they aren't really jaw-dropping. Borland's products, on the other hand.... I'd used a few other IDEs before I tried theirs, and theirs just blew me away. They haven't done anything much recently, although C++ Builder 3.0 was much better (IMHO) than Visual C++. I'm hoping that they'll start using their IDE experience to work on some killer IDEs for Linux/BSD/BeOS/whatever.
Hmm... This sounds familiar.;-) If you're interested in seeing a kind-of implimentation of this, check out Orson Scott Card's description of the Fantasy Game in Ender's Game. Its kinda fragmentary and self-contradictory in places, but the book was written over a decade ago.
Excellent post. I agree with you about the way people design web sites. O'Reilly's excellent book on HTML (HTML: The Definative Guide, I believe) makes a point of constantly reminding the reader that HTML cannot control exactly how a page will be displayed, nor is it designed for that. If I remember right (I haven't actually read the book in about a year), HTML is described as being only a general advisory to the browser as to how the document should be displayed. Anyone wanting to even think about doing HTML should have to read this book.
I also can't stand web pages that use a lot of graphics. Using stylesheets or images to add some color to the page is fine, but there are too many sites out there (corporate and otherwise) that use images for almost everything! The web is primarily a text medium, no matter what anyone says, and images should be treated like what they are. Optional extras that can make a page look better, but shouldn't be required to get at the page's content. (Unless its a picture gallery or something, but that's different)
The folks championing Open Source try to ignore it.
Would you please tell me why anyone championing Open Source or Free Software would want to do that? One of the points of those licencing systems is that bugs are easier to find, easier to fix, and less damaging. A server admin with Apache can go in and patch it. Wheras with a closed server program, you've got to wait until the publisher decides to stop denying the problem and issue a fix.
I won't deny that Cmdr. Taco and Hemos have their own agenda. But remember that them not choosing to post a story could have reasons behind it that aren't related to some huge communist conspiracy.
Exactly! Software patents are bad, although patends in general do have some advantages. The current USPO is, IMHO, currently too screwed up to be beneficial. As for friendly software patents like this ones... I happen to think that some of the copyright system as it stands now is bad. A good portion of it, in fact. But I like the GPL. It basically takes the current copyright system and stands it on its head. That's pretty much what these patents do.
I do like the copyright stuff that's laid out in the constitution (from what I've read of it). Its the recent "extensions" to those laws by publishing corporations that I don't like.
Give me one good reason why Slashdot should have to post any story you or other submit? Remember, there's a limited amount of stories they can run a day. Yes, I agree that apache.org being cracked might be a good story. It depends. Taco/Hemos may not. And the finally-something-to-post could be referring to an official announcement about the MP3.com.
Slashdot is a private site. If you don't like the way Taco and Hemos are managing it, no-one's stopping you from starting your own.
No offense intended, but I'm getting a bit tired of people who get moderated up for "Slashdot ignored my world-shattering story!" or "Slashdot sucks" posts. Yes, you have a right to free speach. But that means I can also criticize you.
EXACTLY! This is the kind of Judge I absolutely cannot stand. The same kind that (IMHO) would rule that loading a computer program into memory would be copying it. MP3.com's service added a lot to the MP3's they distributed. Especially in terms of the time it would take me to rip songs from my CD collection. Now if that's not value-added, what is? And if MP3.com had charged money for the service, would anyone (meaning the RIAA) have objected so much?
Remember. Just because lawyers say its legal doesn't mean it is. A lot of corporate lawyers put things together and claim they're legal (like shrinkwrap lisences), when really they've little if any power. Of course, that changes under the DMCA and UCITA, but since both those laws pretty much take every law and legal precident for the past hundred years, study them closely, then go and do exactly the opposite...
No, you don't seem to understand. The GPL grants you EXTRA rights, but only if you comply with some limitations they've placed on those EXTRA rights. The Microsoft lisence, on the other hand, removes rights in a non-negotiable way without you signing any kind of contract. One is illegal, the other isn't. Guess which is which.
As has been pointed out before, Slashdot is the "sandbox of Cmdr. Taco and Hemos." If you don't like the stories they choose, then there are plenty of other news sites out their for your viewing pleasure. Or you could try submitting a story of your own. Or use Slashcode to start your own competeing site, it is free software after all.
As for Linux, ever stopped to consider why it has so many vocal zealots supporting it? Maybe its because its got good software supported by nice extras (one of those, for me, is the GPL!).
Thank you for replying without flaming! Yes, I agree with you. They exercised their rights and ignored the conditions we put on them. If they don't open it, they're violating a lisence. As others have pointed out, what would they do to a free software coder if he/she reverse-engineered and GPLed their driver? We should ask them a couple of times to GPL it, and if they don't, the FSF or the author should sue.
As for your replacement card, I recommend a Matrox. They may not be bleeding-edge performance, but they're decent. I personally use a Millennium G200 (mid-end), and I like it. Their drivers are pretty good, and they offer drivers for a wide range of systems (even OS/2!). The cards have flashable chipsets, too. And I believe that their drivers are, if not free software, than very open-source.
From personal experience, I must say that its usually "left-wingers" who are the most ready to give up individual rights for the "good of the people," and "right-wingers" who fight to defend them. That's not saying that those two statements apply to "left-wing" and "right-wing" political parties. From what I've seen, both terms are now meaningless and have little relevance to a politician or individual's views. Especially politicians, who tend to call themselves whatever will get them elected.
I personally like MOST of RMS' views. Not some (especially not bits of the "war on drugs"), and I can't say anything about his actions (the M&Ms incident mentioned in another post). But I like his stated philosophy of individual freedom and co-operation.
I definitely agree with you about this. Not only is the company in violation about the GPL, but nothing's being done about it! Yes, saying "we'll fix it next time" is better than "ha ha! You can't do anything!" but not by much. IMHO, that's the standard proprietary software response to ANYTHING. Not only should they be required to remove the code in the next release if they want to keep it closed, but they should have to lisence the current one under the GPL. After all, that's the restriction they agreed to for exercising their extra rights granted under the GPL, no?
I'm a major fan of Ender's game, and I'm glad to see that OSC is doing another book. However, I'm rather disappointed that its set in the Battle School. I believe I'm part of a minority of fans for this, but I actually liked the "Hundred Worlds" setting better. And the end of Children of the Mind seemed to imply that another novel was forthcoming.
That said, both Ender's Game and Ender's Shadowwere very well done. For any fans who don't already know, there's a semi-official (we have OSC's permission, with a few of restrictions) MOO operating at telnet://ansible.org:6000. I really recommend using a MU*-client program like GMud. For those who don't know MOO's are text-based roleplaying games. Ansible is very RP-centered (RP=roleplay), even though some of our players may not be.
My opposition to the IE integration wasn't that Microsoft included a browser with their operating system. IBM did that with OS/2, almost every Linux distro I know of does, and I believe BeOS and MacOS (or whatever its called now!) do too. My problem is that they integrated it. Made many functions of Windows dependant on the web browser, including loading bits of it at startup so it would load faster than other browsers. They also, if memory serves, used their monopoly to prevent computer system distributors from including other browsers with their systems.
Slashdot Mirror
Normally, I'd consider a user signing without reading to be their problem. However, in this case, there are several facts that change things.
First off, in most cases, the user technically isn't signing anything. For software, they click Ok. For a lot of products, I think they get a sheet of some sort when they open the box with a bunch of terms and the line (or something like it): "Using this product constitutes agreement of these terms." No signing anything, yet rights are being removed. Isn't this illegal?
Secondly, the documents seem to be written intentionally so that most people are unable to read them without a couple of years of law school training. They're loaded with legal language and as much fluff text and obscuration as possible, burying the terms of the agreement and making it a burden to read. The textual equivalent of having to travel several hundred miles through difficult terrain in order to retrieve the easy to read version.
I don't think you could hold someone to a contract they had to sign in order to use something they'd paid for that was written in a foreign language. How is this much different?
Note that this post is based on my limited knowledge and the examples used may be somewhat extreme. Constructive criticizm will be considered, flames and bashing will be ignored.
-RickHunter
Actually, to be picky, RMS doesn't have anything to do with Open Source if he can help it. Read the Philosophy section of the GNU web site. He's got some good reasons for disliking it. However, you are basically right. RMS' criteria are very systematic and fairly clear and distinct.
-RickHunter
I've only actually read this on a couple of places online (one of them being Slashdot), but I think it answers your "why doesn't IBM announce things 2 or 3 years before their ship date?" question. The answer is that, a long time ago, when the earth's crust was cooling and computers used 640k RAM (maybe more recent than that. Don't remember the exact date), IBM controlled the computer world. Basically, everything that was anything was IBM. People complained, the government waded in, and an antitrust suit was launched. One of the penalties IBM got slapped with was not being able to "pre-announce" products.
Look what a productive and friendly company they've turned into. Now, we can just hope the current lawsuit does the same to Microsoft.
Note that this is completely from memory, and all data was gathered through online sources. So if its wrong, don't hesitate to correct me.
-RickHunter
From what I understand, the DMCA is unconstitutional anyway, even without the free speech argument. It extends copyright law in a matter which violates the US constitution. Not sure if its direct or indirect. But, IMHO, the best way to get rid of it is to stop the MPAA, RIAA, etc. from bribing the politicians. Read: stop corporate campaign contributions.
-RickHunter
I must agree. The quality of almost every single anime I've seen to date has been far higher than almost every live-action movie I've ever seen. A lot of anime is also (if I remember right) producted and distributed by compnaies that are a LOT smaller than the MPAA's members. Of course, a lot of the stuff being released on DVD is lisenced by some DVD CCA subsidy, but VHS quality is good enough for me.
-RickHunter
Yes, that sounds like a good system for online music distribution. One of many, the other being not making money by selling your music, but the pre-RIAA way, through live concerts, etc. However, the fact that Napster allows people to pirate music doesn't mean that it should be regulated or sued because people do use it for that. Doing that sets some really nasty legal precedents.
I do agree with the original intent of copyright law, to give an artist a limited monopoly over their work to encourage them to give the public access to it. I don't agree with the current "extensions" to it that gives the publisher a permanent, for-all-time right over the work, even after its first sale.
-RickHunter
These bodies do not have the power to annul the 1st amendment of the constitution. If I could be forbidden to criticize Apogee based upon their "ownership" of various identifying names and symbols, then what would exist to stop private individuals, social groups, or even politicians from doing the same with their "licensed" speeches and doctrines?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this exactly what the Church of Scientology has been doing to anyone who tried to criticize their work? I'm willing to be some computer company lawyer looked at a Scientology case and said, "Wow! It'd be neat if we could do that. Wait.... We have the money to bribe the government into doing what we want. So we CAN do that!"
Oh, and interesting note. My local school board has censored the EFF's website and denied all access from any school computer. Wonder what they're trying to hide...?
-RickHunter
An excellent post, and everyone who's been moderated higher that I've seen so far seems to be missing this point. Being Open-Source or Free Software doesn't automatically make anything secure. However, with the source available for community review and modification, there's a higher chance that bugs, including security holes, will be found and patched.
A key example of this is OpenBSD. If I remember right, it was written from scratch to be completely security-hole free. I don't think there have been any major security problems for quite a while now.
Of course, there's still ways to get around this. Such as the infamous compiler that builds backdoors into login programs.
-RickHunter
FINALLY! A high-rated post gets this RIGHT! If I had moderator access right now, I'd moderate you up even further. The GPL, I believe, explicitly says that a distributor can charge money for GPLed software. Of course, there are some restrictions (mostly relating to the distribution of code), but still...
Unfortunately for us, to most corporate interests, the idea of people being able to freely modify and redistribute their "product" tends to drive them away. Oh, well. Their loss.
-RickHunter
Yes, I'll agree that Corel products are quite good. I use WordPerfect 8.0 for Windows (I'd rather use Linux, but my current machine has too much Windows-only hardware, yadda, yadda...). However, they aren't really jaw-dropping. Borland's products, on the other hand.... I'd used a few other IDEs before I tried theirs, and theirs just blew me away. They haven't done anything much recently, although C++ Builder 3.0 was much better (IMHO) than Visual C++. I'm hoping that they'll start using their IDE experience to work on some killer IDEs for Linux/BSD/BeOS/whatever.
-RickHunter
Hmm... This sounds familiar. ;-) If you're interested in seeing a kind-of implimentation of this, check out Orson Scott Card's description of the Fantasy Game in Ender's Game. Its kinda fragmentary and self-contradictory in places, but the book was written over a decade ago.
-RickHunter
Excellent post. I agree with you about the way people design web sites. O'Reilly's excellent book on HTML (HTML: The Definative Guide, I believe) makes a point of constantly reminding the reader that HTML cannot control exactly how a page will be displayed, nor is it designed for that. If I remember right (I haven't actually read the book in about a year), HTML is described as being only a general advisory to the browser as to how the document should be displayed. Anyone wanting to even think about doing HTML should have to read this book.
I also can't stand web pages that use a lot of graphics. Using stylesheets or images to add some color to the page is fine, but there are too many sites out there (corporate and otherwise) that use images for almost everything! The web is primarily a text medium, no matter what anyone says, and images should be treated like what they are. Optional extras that can make a page look better, but shouldn't be required to get at the page's content. (Unless its a picture gallery or something, but that's different)
-RickHunter
The folks championing Open Source try to ignore it.
Would you please tell me why anyone championing Open Source or Free Software would want to do that? One of the points of those licencing systems is that bugs are easier to find, easier to fix, and less damaging. A server admin with Apache can go in and patch it. Wheras with a closed server program, you've got to wait until the publisher decides to stop denying the problem and issue a fix.
I won't deny that Cmdr. Taco and Hemos have their own agenda. But remember that them not choosing to post a story could have reasons behind it that aren't related to some huge communist conspiracy.
-RickHunter
Exactly! Software patents are bad, although patends in general do have some advantages. The current USPO is, IMHO, currently too screwed up to be beneficial. As for friendly software patents like this ones... I happen to think that some of the copyright system as it stands now is bad. A good portion of it, in fact. But I like the GPL. It basically takes the current copyright system and stands it on its head. That's pretty much what these patents do.
I do like the copyright stuff that's laid out in the constitution (from what I've read of it). Its the recent "extensions" to those laws by publishing corporations that I don't like.
-RickHunter
Give me one good reason why Slashdot should have to post any story you or other submit? Remember, there's a limited amount of stories they can run a day. Yes, I agree that apache.org being cracked might be a good story. It depends. Taco/Hemos may not. And the finally-something-to-post could be referring to an official announcement about the MP3.com.
Slashdot is a private site. If you don't like the way Taco and Hemos are managing it, no-one's stopping you from starting your own.
No offense intended, but I'm getting a bit tired of people who get moderated up for "Slashdot ignored my world-shattering story!" or "Slashdot sucks" posts. Yes, you have a right to free speach. But that means I can also criticize you.
-RickHunter
EXACTLY! This is the kind of Judge I absolutely cannot stand. The same kind that (IMHO) would rule that loading a computer program into memory would be copying it. MP3.com's service added a lot to the MP3's they distributed. Especially in terms of the time it would take me to rip songs from my CD collection. Now if that's not value-added, what is? And if MP3.com had charged money for the service, would anyone (meaning the RIAA) have objected so much?
-RickHunter
Remember. Just because lawyers say its legal doesn't mean it is. A lot of corporate lawyers put things together and claim they're legal (like shrinkwrap lisences), when really they've little if any power. Of course, that changes under the DMCA and UCITA, but since both those laws pretty much take every law and legal precident for the past hundred years, study them closely, then go and do exactly the opposite...
-RickHunter
No, you don't seem to understand. The GPL grants you EXTRA rights, but only if you comply with some limitations they've placed on those EXTRA rights. The Microsoft lisence, on the other hand, removes rights in a non-negotiable way without you signing any kind of contract. One is illegal, the other isn't. Guess which is which.
-RickHunter
As has been pointed out before, Slashdot is the "sandbox of Cmdr. Taco and Hemos." If you don't like the stories they choose, then there are plenty of other news sites out their for your viewing pleasure. Or you could try submitting a story of your own. Or use Slashcode to start your own competeing site, it is free software after all.
As for Linux, ever stopped to consider why it has so many vocal zealots supporting it? Maybe its because its got good software supported by nice extras (one of those, for me, is the GPL!).
-RickHunter
Thank you for replying without flaming! Yes, I agree with you. They exercised their rights and ignored the conditions we put on them. If they don't open it, they're violating a lisence. As others have pointed out, what would they do to a free software coder if he/she reverse-engineered and GPLed their driver? We should ask them a couple of times to GPL it, and if they don't, the FSF or the author should sue.
As for your replacement card, I recommend a Matrox. They may not be bleeding-edge performance, but they're decent. I personally use a Millennium G200 (mid-end), and I like it. Their drivers are pretty good, and they offer drivers for a wide range of systems (even OS/2!). The cards have flashable chipsets, too. And I believe that their drivers are, if not free software, than very open-source.
-RickHunter
From personal experience, I must say that its usually "left-wingers" who are the most ready to give up individual rights for the "good of the people," and "right-wingers" who fight to defend them. That's not saying that those two statements apply to "left-wing" and "right-wing" political parties. From what I've seen, both terms are now meaningless and have little relevance to a politician or individual's views. Especially politicians, who tend to call themselves whatever will get them elected.
I personally like MOST of RMS' views. Not some (especially not bits of the "war on drugs"), and I can't say anything about his actions (the M&Ms incident mentioned in another post). But I like his stated philosophy of individual freedom and co-operation.
-RickHunter
I definitely agree with you about this. Not only is the company in violation about the GPL, but nothing's being done about it! Yes, saying "we'll fix it next time" is better than "ha ha! You can't do anything!" but not by much. IMHO, that's the standard proprietary software response to ANYTHING. Not only should they be required to remove the code in the next release if they want to keep it closed, but they should have to lisence the current one under the GPL. After all, that's the restriction they agreed to for exercising their extra rights granted under the GPL, no?
-RickHunter
I'm a major fan of Ender's game, and I'm glad to see that OSC is doing another book. However, I'm rather disappointed that its set in the Battle School. I believe I'm part of a minority of fans for this, but I actually liked the "Hundred Worlds" setting better. And the end of Children of the Mind seemed to imply that another novel was forthcoming.
That said, both Ender's Game and Ender's Shadow were very well done. For any fans who don't already know, there's a semi-official (we have OSC's permission, with a few of restrictions) MOO operating at telnet://ansible.org:6000. I really recommend using a MU*-client program like GMud. For those who don't know MOO's are text-based roleplaying games. Ansible is very RP-centered (RP=roleplay), even though some of our players may not be.
-RickHunter
I actually liked the sequels to Ender's Game better than the original novel. However, I'm a major minority there.
-RickHunter
My opposition to the IE integration wasn't that Microsoft included a browser with their operating system. IBM did that with OS/2, almost every Linux distro I know of does, and I believe BeOS and MacOS (or whatever its called now!) do too. My problem is that they integrated it. Made many functions of Windows dependant on the web browser, including loading bits of it at startup so it would load faster than other browsers. They also, if memory serves, used their monopoly to prevent computer system distributors from including other browsers with their systems.
-RickHunter