Try living anywhere in the southern United States, like New Mexico or anywhere to the east. I lived in New Mexico for awhile myself, and that bugged the hell out of me...
Me: I'll have a Coke.
Waiter: What kind?
Me: Uhhh.... a Coke?
It makes no sense. It's like the people who say "y'all" - it's a weird-ass thing southern people say, and it makes no sense at all. _____
His bad for sure. I'm not ranting about the relative merits of his claim, I'm ranting about the immediate condemnation by the/. community. His position is certainly less than optimal for a trademark claim.
That's the problem. He's put himself into a bad situation, and now he's pointing fingers at us because we're infringing on his trademark (which is long since diluted, IMO). (Us as in the global us, the Free Software and Open Source world.)
Absolutely. But we must remember, that this guy GAVE us something good (that I and a lot of other people use). We shouldn't vilify him because he's trying to make a couple of bucks off of it. (And I'm pretty sure its just a couple).
I'm not trying to vilify him. I use ssh (ok, OpenSSH) regularly. It's a great tool, and I thank him profusely for providing it to us. And I have no intention of denying him revenues, if someone chooses to buy his commercial version. But just because he did a good thing (gifting the community with SSH), why should we just quietly ignore his trying to do something stupid (trying to assert a diluted trademark on the thing he gave us)? _____
Whatever. He _gave_ it away. Have you read the licensing terms of the SSH release that OpenSSH is based on? Go read them, then try to tell me that we should stop using the term 'SSH' and just let Tatu do whatever he likes.
Yes, he did a good thing by releasing SSH to the public. But he can't make something, let it get popular, THEN try to exercise trademark control over the name after the fact. It doesn't work that way. _____
Oh yeah, except Tatu claims that, well, gee, those WERE the licensing terms, way back when, but since he got that trademark, that doesn't apply anymore, and you better not use the letters 'SSH' or ELSE. _____
Read the license for Tatu's company's SSH2. IMHO, that doesn't qualify as open source anymore (and I doubt it meets the "Open Source Definition"). _____
No one's trying to pass OpenSSH off as the "official" SSH implementation, you'll note. Besides, trademarks in the US are a "use or lose" commodity - if you don't enforce them, you don't get to keep them.
According to Tatu & co., he'd had this trademark for some time. Yet only recently has he decided to enforce that trademark. Also, naming the product, the protocol, and his company with the same name (a supposedly standardized protocol, no less) was an extremely poor choice on his part, IMO.
He really should've considered this a long time ago. The barn door's open, and the stock's already gone, as it were. _____
You obviously don't know what you're talking about - Tatu wrote the standard for the IETF SECSH working group (most, if not all). HE originally referred to the whole 'ball-o-wax' as SSH - the program, the protocol, _and_ his company. After the fact, he's trying to claim trademark infringement. I have no intention of denying him revenue if he wants to sell his product, but he's just trying to take successful competition out of the running by using a trademark to keep them out of "his" domain. _____
Do you really believe that most VCR owners actually ever read the manual? Most people never bother - my parents are famous for this. They toss the manual in a drawer somewhere, then complain that they can't figure out how to do X (X being some arbitrary thing, like setting the time, setting up a timed recording, disabling auto-tracking, whatever). Yet do they read the manual? Hell, they wouldn't recognize it if they saw it.
That's the problem - the "average" user wants products engineered for someone who knows nothing, and is unwilling to educate oneself. The techies are willing to educate themselves to use things, and most (not all, but most) don't expect users to know everything, but at least to be functionally literate, so they can read directions.
The situation here isn't as opposite as it seems. _____
I have a Palm Vx, and I can happily run it 1-2 weeks on a charge (varies depending on usage pattern). You don't _have_ to charge it every day, but it's easy to do, since the HotSync cradle charges the battery as well. _____
I don't think so - we couldn't meet their requirements. Each client is to be given a client ID code, and it has to be stored in such a way that it's difficult to get at the client ID (preencrypted?) from the binary (yes, binary). They require that you can NOT use any other CD info service other than Gracenote CDDB. They require that you display a splash screen when pulling info from the CDDB servers.
In short, no. Just use FreeDB - that's what XMMS's CD player plugin uses by default anyway, unless I'm mistaken. (Though someone does need to fix it so it provides the HTTP/1.1 headers to work in a transparent proxy setting...) _____
I can see wanting to make money. I don't conceptually have a problem with that. But (a) they didn't do any of the collection legwork. The people who entered the data did. Yes, in practical terms, it's not OUR data, but neither is it Gracenote's data.
And (b) I remember using CDDB before all this "you must do X and Y and... to use CDDB" bullshit got started - it was hosted as part of UNC's SunSITE project, if memory serves. The university's servers and network connection hosted it (all that stuff was there anyway) - it wasn't costing them money until they decided to MAKE IT cost them. We originally participated under the pretense that it was for users, by users.
Thank goodness for FreeDB. (Yes, I'm going to keep mentioning it.) _____
Read their "free" license - they have some very specific requirements that I don't think any open-source app could reasonably meet. Even if grip included the required advert image while pulling from the CDDB servers, it could be hacked to disable that. If it didn't allow pulling from anywhere but www.cddb.com, someone would hack it to do so.
Well, (a) grip isn't a "licensed" CDDB client. I think Gracenote are a bunch of assholes, but that's the fact of the matter. And, (b) did you READ the requirements for their agreement? You have to display some "Powered by Gracenote CDDB" advert image when it's pulling from their CDDB server, they have specific limits on how you can/can't use the retrieved data, you can't allow the use of any other CD info retrieval service, etc. They're really a bunch of picky bastards. _____
Because the company that is now Gracenote bought up the CDDB database and the rights to the protocol a few years back, and now they want every CD player that uses their DB to advertise for them (when doing a lookup, it's supposed to pop up a window with an ad for them). We *the community* put the data in their database, but they make the money, because they're hosting the servers. Sigh. It has nothing to do with preventing people from copying CDs - it's all about ads for them. That's all. _____
Yes, but when the issues that they fix are on the order of two years old, and they're still not applied, and it's causing massive numbers of CC numbers to be swiped, one wonders why the machines aren't kept up to date.
Other posters have given some (IMO quite valid) answers to this question. _____
CSS is a two-phase procedure - first being the player software (well, that's the DVD CCA's idea) authenticating to the drive (software passes player key to drive, verifies that player key is entitled to access the loaded disc's content), and then, the title keys are used to decrypt the individual streams on the disc.
Is it a crappy arrangement? You bet. The title keys are 40 bits, and the player keys are (iirc) 80 bits. This is not high encryption here. Once you get past the auth-with-drive part, the title keys are handed over anyway. But simply, yes, it is encryption - from what I've heard from cryptological experts, far from a well-designed system. But it more-or-less does what the DVD CCA intended. _____
Because there are too many people who use Windows, and can't understand how to do the Windows equivalent. You or I wouldn't need a plugin (whether in Windows, Linux, *BSD, MacOS, or whatever) - but for the computer-stupid, you have to give them the illusion that something is easy (even if it's really not, or if the "easy" way is broken). _____
Just thought you should know that Microsoft didn't create IE on their own - they screwed over Spyglass to get it (by licensing it from them, then later distributing it for free - then not paying all the licensing fees).
I know you like Microsoft and all, but don't revise how IE really came to be. Microsoft cheated their way into possession of the code for what became IE, and the more people that understand that, the better, IMO. _____
It's funny that Microsoft "dumped" IE onto the market, when Netsacpe was doing the same thing with Navigator (free for non-commercial use.)
Well, Netscape had no leverage by which they could force you to install their product. Microsoft did - you install Windows (as of Win95 OSR2.1 or so), IE comes along with it - even if you don't want it, you have to have it. "But why?", you ask. "Because we say so - don't ask stupid questions." _____
You do understand they can't actually "trace you from there [Microsoft]" - a MAC address is only usable as a means to contact a machine if you are on the same physical network, i.e. no layer 3 switches or routers in between?
Now if they have your IP address, that's more worth worrying about. ('doze box on static IP, anyone?) _____
Isn't Hollywood Music part of Hollywood Pictures? And I am pretty sure Hollywood Pictures is owned by Disney (along with Buena Vista Pictures, Miramax, and some others). _____
Slashdot Mirror
Try living anywhere in the southern United States, like New Mexico or anywhere to the east. I lived in New Mexico for awhile myself, and that bugged the hell out of me...
Me: I'll have a Coke.
Waiter: What kind?
Me: Uhhh.... a Coke?
It makes no sense. It's like the people who say "y'all" - it's a weird-ass thing southern people say, and it makes no sense at all.
_____
Not according to the OpenSSH folks. It all depends which side of the story you believe.
_____
His bad for sure. I'm not ranting about the relative merits of his claim, I'm ranting about the immediate condemnation by the /. community. His position is certainly less than optimal for a trademark claim.
That's the problem. He's put himself into a bad situation, and now he's pointing fingers at us because we're infringing on his trademark (which is long since diluted, IMO). (Us as in the global us, the Free Software and Open Source world.)
Absolutely. But we must remember, that this guy GAVE us something good (that I and a lot of other people use). We shouldn't vilify him because he's trying to make a couple of bucks off of it. (And I'm pretty sure its just a couple).
I'm not trying to vilify him. I use ssh (ok, OpenSSH) regularly. It's a great tool, and I thank him profusely for providing it to us. And I have no intention of denying him revenues, if someone chooses to buy his commercial version. But just because he did a good thing (gifting the community with SSH), why should we just quietly ignore his trying to do something stupid (trying to assert a diluted trademark on the thing he gave us)?
_____
Whatever. He _gave_ it away. Have you read the licensing terms of the SSH release that OpenSSH is based on? Go read them, then try to tell me that we should stop using the term 'SSH' and just let Tatu do whatever he likes.
Yes, he did a good thing by releasing SSH to the public. But he can't make something, let it get popular, THEN try to exercise trademark control over the name after the fact. It doesn't work that way.
_____
Oh yeah, except Tatu claims that, well, gee, those WERE the licensing terms, way back when, but since he got that trademark, that doesn't apply anymore, and you better not use the letters 'SSH' or ELSE.
_____
Read the license for Tatu's company's SSH2. IMHO, that doesn't qualify as open source anymore (and I doubt it meets the "Open Source Definition").
_____
No one's trying to pass OpenSSH off as the "official" SSH implementation, you'll note. Besides, trademarks in the US are a "use or lose" commodity - if you don't enforce them, you don't get to keep them.
According to Tatu & co., he'd had this trademark for some time. Yet only recently has he decided to enforce that trademark. Also, naming the product, the protocol, and his company with the same name (a supposedly standardized protocol, no less) was an extremely poor choice on his part, IMO.
He really should've considered this a long time ago. The barn door's open, and the stock's already gone, as it were.
_____
You obviously don't know what you're talking about - Tatu wrote the standard for the IETF SECSH working group (most, if not all). HE originally referred to the whole 'ball-o-wax' as SSH - the program, the protocol, _and_ his company. After the fact, he's trying to claim trademark infringement. I have no intention of denying him revenue if he wants to sell his product, but he's just trying to take successful competition out of the running by using a trademark to keep them out of "his" domain.
_____
Do you really believe that most VCR owners actually ever read the manual? Most people never bother - my parents are famous for this. They toss the manual in a drawer somewhere, then complain that they can't figure out how to do X (X being some arbitrary thing, like setting the time, setting up a timed recording, disabling auto-tracking, whatever). Yet do they read the manual? Hell, they wouldn't recognize it if they saw it.
That's the problem - the "average" user wants products engineered for someone who knows nothing, and is unwilling to educate oneself. The techies are willing to educate themselves to use things, and most (not all, but most) don't expect users to know everything, but at least to be functionally literate, so they can read directions.
The situation here isn't as opposite as it seems.
_____
I have a Palm Vx, and I can happily run it 1-2 weeks on a charge (varies depending on usage pattern). You don't _have_ to charge it every day, but it's easy to do, since the HotSync cradle charges the battery as well.
_____
I don't think so - we couldn't meet their requirements. Each client is to be given a client ID code, and it has to be stored in such a way that it's difficult to get at the client ID (preencrypted?) from the binary (yes, binary). They require that you can NOT use any other CD info service other than Gracenote CDDB. They require that you display a splash screen when pulling info from the CDDB servers.
In short, no. Just use FreeDB - that's what XMMS's CD player plugin uses by default anyway, unless I'm mistaken. (Though someone does need to fix it so it provides the HTTP/1.1 headers to work in a transparent proxy setting...)
_____
I can see wanting to make money. I don't conceptually have a problem with that. But (a) they didn't do any of the collection legwork. The people who entered the data did. Yes, in practical terms, it's not OUR data, but neither is it Gracenote's data.
... to use CDDB" bullshit got started - it was hosted as part of UNC's SunSITE project, if memory serves. The university's servers and network connection hosted it (all that stuff was there anyway) - it wasn't costing them money until they decided to MAKE IT cost them. We originally participated under the pretense that it was for users, by users.
And (b) I remember using CDDB before all this "you must do X and Y and
Thank goodness for FreeDB. (Yes, I'm going to keep mentioning it.)
_____
Read their "free" license - they have some very specific requirements that I don't think any open-source app could reasonably meet. Even if grip included the required advert image while pulling from the CDDB servers, it could be hacked to disable that. If it didn't allow pulling from anywhere but www.cddb.com, someone would hack it to do so.
Use FreeDB. Please.
_____
Well, (a) grip isn't a "licensed" CDDB client. I think Gracenote are a bunch of assholes, but that's the fact of the matter. And, (b) did you READ the requirements for their agreement? You have to display some "Powered by Gracenote CDDB" advert image when it's pulling from their CDDB server, they have specific limits on how you can/can't use the retrieved data, you can't allow the use of any other CD info retrieval service, etc. They're really a bunch of picky bastards.
_____
Because the company that is now Gracenote bought up the CDDB database and the rights to the protocol a few years back, and now they want every CD player that uses their DB to advertise for them (when doing a lookup, it's supposed to pop up a window with an ad for them). We *the community* put the data in their database, but they make the money, because they're hosting the servers. Sigh. It has nothing to do with preventing people from copying CDs - it's all about ads for them. That's all.
_____
Yes, but when the issues that they fix are on the order of two years old, and they're still not applied, and it's causing massive numbers of CC numbers to be swiped, one wonders why the machines aren't kept up to date.
Other posters have given some (IMO quite valid) answers to this question.
_____
You should ask 2600 about that.
_____
CSS is a two-phase procedure - first being the player software (well, that's the DVD CCA's idea) authenticating to the drive (software passes player key to drive, verifies that player key is entitled to access the loaded disc's content), and then, the title keys are used to decrypt the individual streams on the disc.
Is it a crappy arrangement? You bet. The title keys are 40 bits, and the player keys are (iirc) 80 bits. This is not high encryption here. Once you get past the auth-with-drive part, the title keys are handed over anyway. But simply, yes, it is encryption - from what I've heard from cryptological experts, far from a well-designed system. But it more-or-less does what the DVD CCA intended.
_____
DeCSS was the name for the code that broke CSS (Content Scrambling System) - the encryption/authentication system for DVDs.
_____
Because there are too many people who use Windows, and can't understand how to do the Windows equivalent. You or I wouldn't need a plugin (whether in Windows, Linux, *BSD, MacOS, or whatever) - but for the computer-stupid, you have to give them the illusion that something is easy (even if it's really not, or if the "easy" way is broken).
_____
Just thought you should know that Microsoft didn't create IE on their own - they screwed over Spyglass to get it (by licensing it from them, then later distributing it for free - then not paying all the licensing fees).
I know you like Microsoft and all, but don't revise how IE really came to be. Microsoft cheated their way into possession of the code for what became IE, and the more people that understand that, the better, IMO.
_____
It's funny that Microsoft "dumped" IE onto the market, when Netsacpe was doing the same thing with Navigator (free for non-commercial use.)
Well, Netscape had no leverage by which they could force you to install their product. Microsoft did - you install Windows (as of Win95 OSR2.1 or so), IE comes along with it - even if you don't want it, you have to have it. "But why?", you ask. "Because we say so - don't ask stupid questions."
_____
Too bad Judge Jackson decided not to take the time to hammer that one home. I had rather hoped to see Bill get smacked over that one.
_____
You do understand they can't actually "trace you from there [Microsoft]" - a MAC address is only usable as a means to contact a machine if you are on the same physical network, i.e. no layer 3 switches or routers in between?
Now if they have your IP address, that's more worth worrying about. ('doze box on static IP, anyone?)
_____
Isn't Hollywood Music part of Hollywood Pictures? And I am pretty sure Hollywood Pictures is owned by Disney (along with Buena Vista Pictures, Miramax, and some others).
_____