NSI is an accredited registrar, as are the 50 others. NSI is not a monopoly. Everyone has thier own choice... i'm so sick of people crying over NSI.
bzzt!
Thank you for playing, Mr. NSI employee.
If you check the pricing structure of any "accredited registar" you will find that $6 for each domain gets paid to NSI, not matter who you register it with. Yup, that domain you just got from domainmonger.com just sent another $6 into NSI's pockets. Why? They still run the root DNS domains for.com,.net, and.org, and "have to cover their costs" (which, if it were true, would be about $0.06 / domain, not $6).
Re:Napster vs. The GPL
on
Napster Wars
·
· Score: 2
Without copyright the GNU GPL would not exist.
...and would be unnecessary, as the very freedoms it seeks to protect would be inherent.
Aviation Fuel Cheaper than Car Gas
on
Napster Wars
·
· Score: 2
I saw on the news last night that the average price in Chicago is $2.06
Yup. Right now, it is cheaper to buy aviation fuel ($2.00/gal at OXI) and fly than it is to buy automobile gas ($2.06/gal) and drive. How odd the world is becomming...
Understanding what Napster is
on
Napster Wars
·
· Score: 5
Just out of curiosity, exactly what does your comment have to do with the subject at hand, namely Napster? Exactly who is insisting that Napster go around deleting files from everyone's hard drive?
The RIAA is hoping to dupe a judge into doing just that. If I were the judge in question, I would be furious with the RIAA for attempting to make such an ass of both the judge personally and the legal system as a whole.
Or was this meant to be a non-sequitur?
I can't speak to the poster's initial intent, but his comment most certainly was not a non-sequitur.
Napster does not store any files on its servers. It facilitates the exchange of files between client machines only, with no traffic going to the napster server at all.
It is basically a big index, much like the old FTP indexes that circulated around the internet in text format in the days before the world wide web. It tells people where they can find things, nothing more. Last I checked, this was a protected form of speach (although the DMCA, not to mention the fiasco that is The War on Drugs, may have eroded this particular right).
Insisting that Napster remove content is insisting that Napster invade individuals personal computers and delete files, an illegal act in most jurisdictions.
The original poster's satirical comments that the editors of slashdot had better remove all the illegal content from the poster's personal computer, "or else," serves to illustrate the stupidity of such a demand rather well, actually.
In short, the RIAA is making an ass of both itself and the American Justice system.
mp3.com's broken data collection not an excuse
on
Napster Wars
·
· Score: 2
That's not entirely true. If you look on the right side of an artist page, you'll see a number called "Payback Earnings".
So, their popularity model is flawed, as it doesn't account for "word of mouth" sharing of gratis mp3s. Thus, they should sue, or file an amicus brief in the RIAA suit, a company for developing a protocol that facilitates this exchange, and even feel justified in doing so?
If they were serious about fairly guaging their artists' popularity and reimbursing the artist accordingly, they could monitor Napster traffic in exactly the same way that Metallica's lackeys did. Not a perfect collection of data (repeat download attempts distort the figures, for example), but certainly more helpful than ignoring the phenominon altogether.
mp3.com has discovered it has a competitor, and decided to coat-tial onto the RIAA frieght train to eliminate them in a ploy cynical enough to be worthy of Washington, D.C. When FreeNet and Gnutella hit the streets big time, they're going to find they really have a competitor. It is hypocritical in the extreme for them to give away mp3's in a digital, copy-friendly medium to promote their artists, and then turn on the very people they are promoting to and tell them "but don't you dare share this with your friends."
The more I think about this entire fiasco, the less I'm inclined to ever buy another thing from mp3.com again. Certainly, they should no longer receive any "good-will" support from the community. At the very least, they should be considreed to be nothing more than another amoral, unethical company that may or may not produce a product one might need or want, and treated accordingly.
MP3.com once the solution, now part of the problem
on
Napster Wars
·
· Score: 3
I find it very interesting that mp3.com has become an ally of the RIAA in this effort, particularly since they give away mp3s of their artists music.
As a customer of theirs, I find this particularly troubling. What they are saying, basically, is that the mp3's are gratis, but not libre: they want traffic to their web page, so they don't want you sharing music the artists have authorized you to download for free, and presumably therefor to share with your friends.
One expects such a cynical rape of the justice system by such amoral entities as the RIAA, but to see a relatively new startup who is not only an underdog, but a self-styled representative of change in a corrupt industry, engage in such cynical ploys simply to keep the traffic to their website up is very distasteful, to say the least.
I must say, in light of this news, I will be giving serious second thoughts to purchasing any additional CDs from mp3.com. As they have been the only ones I have been purchasing CDs from in the last year, I suppose this could mean an end to yet another vice (and more cash for other hobbies instead).
Many of the "older aircraft" have been retrofitted with newer avionics and "glass cockpits," essentially computers which ease many of the navigational and aeronotical chores pilots have to do in various phases of flight.
When the planes were originally designed, sans faraday cages and the like, they didn't need them, because the old, standard navigational equipment (VOR receivers, DME, ADF) didn't require them. For that matter, neither did the flight instrumentation: most of it was (and, in the smaller planes those of us who fly for fun use, still are) mechanical, using vacuum driven gryroscopes, static air inlets, a pitot tube to measure air movement (and thus airspeed). My standby vacuum system is electronic (as are the lights on the panel), but the primary vac system uses induction and works even with the electronics shut off. The plane flies just fine, and one can still navigate using pilotage (their naked eyeball).
The newer aircraft are designed to require the fancy electronics, but even they still have the old, familiar instruments most of you know from PC flight simulators.
There was an aircraft in Canada (I forget the model) which was landed safely after it ran out of fuel midflight and lost all flight systems, except the basic, gyroscopic instruments just about every aircraft since the 30's comes equipped with.
Loss of navigation is only a life-threatening concern in situations of low or no-visibility, such as the middle of the ocean (which way are we supposed to fly?) or in IMC (bad, foggy, rainy weather, now we can't fly the published approach, how the f*ck do we find the damn runway?). Even then, a quick call on the cell phone to the tower can probably get you the guidance you need (which is what I would do if I lost comm while in the soup, the FCC be damned).;-)
I'm guessing you never played it by this response, but I would like to say also that I think the simple fact of being an American must be dificult at times due to the ever growing global realization that Television is America, Media is America.
Your guess would be wrong. Not only have I played shadowrun, I learned to play it in Germany, in German.
However, Jon Katz is an American, writing about an American work (Shadowrun) and how it relates to an American political system which is increasingly dysfunctional, and he posted his comments to an American website.
The original flame was completely inappropriate and off-base, as were most of the replies here.
Jon Katz, to put it simply, may or may not be qualified to comment on the American political issues he raised. He is most definitely not qualified to comment on how they relate to Bengladesh or Mozambique. He appropriately limited his commentary to the country he knew and was inappropriately flamed because someone felt he had violated their rules of "International Political Correctness."
Bah. I've yet to read a comment in this thread describing these issues as they relate to Germany, the Netherlands, France, the UK, or anywhere else. For that matter, I'd be very curious to hear about these issues from a Canadian and Mexican point of view. As the two other members of NAFTA such a perspective would be very interesting.
Alas, all I have seen instead is so much bitching, whining, and anti-American bigotry, all of which is well within the rights of those who posted such drivel to do so, just as it is my right to openly mock and despise them for it.
I wonder if one were to discuss the roleplaying game Schwarze Auge and its relationship to the emergence of the SPD as the dominant party in Germany, if one would be flamed so vehemently. (Disclaimer: I doubt very much there is any such relationship!). This entire thread implies the worst form of Political Correctness: you may not mention nationality if you are an American - but for anyone of any other nationality it is OK. As a left leaning, liberal American I have had more than enough of this kind of double-standard Politicaly Correct drivel within American politics (even though the so-called standards of political correctness tend to support many of my own political views!) to not speak out against it when I see it infecting technical forums such as this.
And there was silly old me thinking the rest of the world had corporations and computers too. Thankyou for pointing out that it is, of course, only americans that this applies too.
Yes, you are silly.
Jon Katz is an American, discussing a game developed in America and how it mirrors developments in American politics. If you feel so slighted that he didn't discuss European, African, Asian, or Australian politics, why don't you add something of substance to the conversation from that point of view, rather than bitching and whining about an American website posting an article by an American Author discussing developments in American politics and how they are reflected (or predicted by) an American roleplaying game?
If Jon Katz had generalized his statements to include the rest of the world (not unreasonable when one considers the "globalization" of the marketplace and the corporate powergrab that is the WTO) you or someone else would have bitched and moaned about an American having the audacity to apply their outlook to the rest of the world.
Why don't you write a well reasoned and insightful article about similar trends in whatever part of the world you come from, rather than bitching and moaning because people in America haven't given your particular region the attention you so obviously think it deserves?
Now I will be certain to never watch it, irrespective of how good it might have been. Some priciples are worth standing up for, and copright abuse (legal or otherwise), which this clearly is, is most certainly one.
"I nearly committed suicide twice, and I know one or two friends that actually did"
I don't know what to say to you about that, because I didn't know your friends, and I don't know you. I do know that the same things happened to me however.
That's interesting. I, too, attempted to kill myself on two seperate occasions, when I was 13 and 14 years old. Fortunately for me, I wasn't very competent at it.
When I was 6, I said I was going to be a pilot. And you know what? I joined the Air Training Corps, hated the herd mentality there and left. But one day, either with money from my music or my work on computers, I'm going to take my money, learn to fly, and I'm going to plot a course directly over my old school, and the places I've been taken to remind me of 'the way it is' with sticks, fists and white trainers, and I'm going to spit on them from a thousand feet.
If your school is not built in a town (many serving the smaller midwestern towns are actually a couple of miles out in the country, surrounded by cornfields), you can legally spit on them from 500 feet AGL if you like.:-)
Shortly after I got my private pilots certificate I took my sister flying over a small town in central Illinois where we both had very unpleasant memories. While neither of us spit on the town, we did dart around the clouds (keeping the required 2000' lateral distance, of course) and did a few steep turns just for the fun of it. Why? Because we both have successful lives doing what we want, and the people which caused us such pain in those days are still down there, ecking out their sorry lives with death the only light at the end of their tunnel.
I would strongly encourage you to learn to fly, but as you probably already know, it will be an addiction to make heroin or crack cocain look innocent in comparison. Just starting the motor on the ramp after a two or three week haitus is like a needle prick to a junkie: pure, wonderful bliss and delicious anticipation...
To the person you responded to I would add: Growing up is hell. Being a teenager is hell. High school isn't the best years of your life. It may be the best years of the sorry saps lives who are tormenting you, will never go to college, and will never get out of their sorry little town, but they are not your best years. If you are at all like me, they were quite the opposite.
College may be some of the best years of your life (certainly the most carefree in some respects), but even after graduation life as a working professional isn't bad (though the first job out of school generally is). Being an adult doesn't suck at all, and can be damn fun at times...
I understand some people have a very strong opinion on this issue, as do I. But, I don't feel that the US should intervene in this situation.
If China were to use force against Taiwan, then the United States most certainly should intervene. We have made promises to the government and people of Taiwan that we would defend them, should the need arise, and it would be highly inappropriate, and probably catastrophic to our own foreign policy, if we were to look the other way in the face of such aggression.
However, short of something that dramatic the relationship between Taiwan and China is something for them to peacefully sort out themselves, and the United States should definitely remain neutral and stay out of the way while both sides negotiate their respective futures.
(Likewise, proponents of legalizing marijuana sometimes argue that marijuana use would drop if it were legalized because it would no longer be "forbidden fruit." Whatever you think of the drug laws, honesty compels the conclusion that the main reason people smoke pot is to get high, and all other reasons come in a distant second.)
With all due respect, I suspect you were never a regular user of illegal substance and, based on what you say, probably never hung out with people who were.
What you say may be true of adults, but it is certainly not true of teenagers. When I was young and started smoking pot it was primarilly the lure of the forbidden and a burning desire to rebel that led very directly to it. A distant second was the desire to fit in with my peer group. Getting high was an even more distant third, quite often an irritating side effect of rebelling and being cool that interfered with my other social interests, like suavely sweeping a girl off her feet (hard to do when you get side tracked by a really cool pattern of shadows on the wall). Of the friends I've spoken with in recent years who were partaking at the same time, most have indicated that rebellion was their initial reason for trying pot as well.
Now, in college it was different. I was an adult, with nothing to rebel against and no desire to do so. Finding acceptance amongst a group of likeminded peers was also remarkably easy -- lifestyles on college campuses are much more diverse and much less conformist. There I smoked to get high, and gave little thought to what my peers would think, or my parents (who remained disapproving as ever, of course).
Now the stuff bores me, and I no longer smoke at all. Most of the people I know have followed a similar path, some quitting earlier, some still occasionally getting high for entertainment. In all cases, our motivations for doing it (or not) changed over time.
Statistics in Holland indicate that legalizing marijuana has dramatically decreased usage among young people. Yes, there are dutch who chose to get high, but not as many per capita as their are british, american, and germans who do so (many of whome inundate Amsterdam for such purposes). Based on the experiences of myself and my friends, the same would appear to apply to the united states. In the face of anectdotal evidence on one hand, hard research and well considered (read: not cooked) statistics on the other, it is difficult for me to understand the persistence in the United States in persuing the drug policy it does, with all the detrimental effects in terms of our civil liberties, fundamental rights, economy, and the greater drug use it encourages.
Clearly there are powerful interests who benefit, but at such a cost to society it amazes me we still put up with it.
Trading mp3's is similar -- amongst those I know who do it, "sticking it to the man" ranks as high or higher than collecting the actual music. This would indicate the rebellion is playing a pretty large role in people's motivation for violating copyrights. Whether it is the primary motivator or not (as it often is with drug use) it is there, and is significant.
What is even more striking is that these are adults who are acting out feelings of rebellion they haven't felt since high school. Getting an affluent adult with a wife and three children riled up in this way takes real talent, the kind only the lawyers at the RIAA and MPAA could display. The fact that many adults are feeling so angry, dissillusioned, and, yes, rebellious should have the RIAA, the MPAA, and their lackeys on Capitol Hill very concerned indeed.
Attempts to connect to the CVS server met with failure, despite following the procedures as defined by their web page verbatim (to the point of cutting and pasting to eliminate typos as a possible source of error). And before you ask, yes, I do use CVS quite frequently, so I doubt very much I was doing anything wrong.
cvs -d:pserver:anoncvs@xiph.org:/usr/local/cvsroot login (Logging in to anoncvs@xiph.org) CVS password: cvs [login aborted]: recv() from server xiph.org: Connection reset by peer
Either they've changed the password from anoncvs to something else, or the CVS server is slashdotted.
In any event, I then tried the nightly snapshot. While the software configured and built, make install was broken to the point of absurdity, creating the install binary but installing nothing.
One can copy the files by hand to the proper location and get it working, but exactly what is needed where isn't terribly well documented, and you'll have to put up with several error messages and figure out what is missing before you get there.
I say this not to flame vorbis at all - the project is in development and not intended for casual use just yet. I mention it as a counter-point to the previous post, which to me at least conveyed an overly optimistic impression of how smooth the installation would go.
vorbis is very promising, and I hope the project reaches a point soon where I can convert all of my mp3 collection to ogg files, but it isn't quite there yet. It would be unfurtunatel if people were to form a first impression based upon software which hasn't been released for beta testing yet, much less general consumption! That having been said, if getting a little bloody with the build and installation doesn't bother you, then definitely check it out!
One way to look at File Formats is that they are essentially APIs for non-volitile data storage.
In any event, in addition to open APIs we need open file and data storage formats. No more forcing people to standardize on sub-standard software (such as Word, for example) simply because other programs have a perceived difficulty reading or writing to the same file format.
In the free software community, a library of file format filters to which all programs which store text or data to disk link would be fantastic - then people could truly run the Word Processor, spread sheet, image editor, and presentation manager of their choice with complete confidence that others will be able to read and share their documents.
While the free software community can do much, at some point someone needs to step in and require, be it through customer pressure or outright legislation, that APIs and File Formats be both published and adhered to. I favor the former, but would take the latter over the current state of affairs.
As far as i know, i'd believe that if the title of a song is copywritten, then it'd be illegal to name a files that and offer it to the world... Perfectly legal to name it that and leave it on your hard drive, but not in a way that it'd be accessible by Napster.
Can you cite a single regulation, law, or court decision implying anything even remotely like what you just implied? In any country on this planet?
Since the site is slashdotted, here's the.plan update (I finally got it after several tries):
Name: John Carmack Email: johnc@idsoftware.com Description: Programmer Project: Quake 3 Arena -------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------- 6/1/00 ------ Well, this is going to be an interesting.plan update.
Most of this is not really public business, but if some things aren't stated explicitly, it will reflect unfairly on someone.
As many people have heard discussed, there was quite a desire to remake DOOM as our next project after Q3. Discussing it brought an almost palpable thrill to most of the employees, but Adrian had a strong enough dislike for the idea that it was shot down over and over again.
Design work on an alternate game has been going on in parallel with the mission pack development and my research work.
Several factors, including a general lack of enthusiasm for the proposed plan, the warmth that Wolfenstien was met with at E3, and excitement about what we can do with the latest rendering technology were making it seem more and more like we weren't going down the right path.
I discussed it with some of the other guys, and we decided that it was important enough to drag the company through an unpleasant fight over it.
An ultimatum was issued to Kevin and Adrian(who control >50% of the company): We are working on DOOM for the next project unless you fire us.
Obviously no fun for anyone involved, but the project direction was changed, new hires have been expedited, and the design work has begun.
It wasn't planned to announce this soon, but here it is: We are working on a new DOOM game, focusing on the single player game experience, and using brand new technology in almost every aspect of it. That is all we are prepared to say about the game for quite some time, so don't push for interviews. We will talk about it when things are actually built, to avoid giving misleading comments.
It went smoother than expected, but the other shoe dropped yesterday.
Kevin and Adrian fired Paul Steed in retaliation, over my opposition.
Paul has certainly done things in the past that could be grounds for dismissal, but this was retaliatory for him being among the "conspirators".
I happen to think Paul was damn good at his job, and that he was going to be one of the most valuable contributors to DOOM.
We need to hire two new modeler/animator/cinematic director types. If you have a significant commercial track record in all three areas, and consider yourself at the top of your field, send your resume to Kevin Cloud.
Looks like Adrian and Kevin cut off their own noses to spite their face. Throwing a monkey wrench into the new Doom effort isn't going to help their company at all, and doing it in such a manner certainly isn't going to inspire the best talent to flock to their company.
If you do not get politically involved in protecting your basic rights on-line, such as privacy and anonymity, and freedom of speach, the internet will not look like anything Gibson envisioned.
Rather it will look much more like what Orwell envisioned: a boot stomping on the face of humanity.
FreeNet is one possible way of combating this, if everyone who can runs a freenet node and thus helps provide protection in numbers. However, even this possibility goes away of the "Progressive" Institutes recommendations are taken by congress and such anonymous, distributed protocols are banned outright.
But of course, it isn't cool to care too much about politicals and thus be labelled a "radical," is it?
To judge by comments here and in the old style media alike, it is far more hip to just be labelled "yet another mindless sheep," complete with social security number, Mediocre credit report, and Discount Card from your local Grocery.
Why? Because I suspect that number is self-limiting, in a way that MP3's aren't. Bootleg tapes of studio albums aren't that good. They wear out. Hell, I haven't personally put any music but mine on a tape in at least five years. People tend to buy CD's if they like an album... IF the copy they have now isn't a perfect, non-degrading, digital one.
I probably should have included unauthorized CD copies people have made with their CDR burners and $0.75 blank CD's when I made that point. This technology has been in the mainstream for going on three years (and I don't know anybody who hasn't made an illegal CD).
These are digital copies with no reduction in quality (unlike mp3's, which lose significant quality in the first generation). I suspect of Lars were able to count the number of metallica CD's alone, he would be horrified (and justly so).
Nevertheless, despite 3 years of widespread availability and use of CD burners, and over 1 year of widespread mp3 usage, CD sales are up.
You've got lots of ideas for how a band can get sold among the tiny little group of people who are out looking for new bands. Record companies have found ways to get a new band sold to people who are in music stores. Until you can do that in your business model, you're not improving on anything.
From the RIAA's point of view, the emerging paradigm will certainly not be an improvement over the stranglehold they currently enjoy over marketing, distribution, etc.
The reality is that the internet in general, and mp3 technology in particular, have fundamentally changed the economic landscape with regard to the distribution of mass media. Either you change your business model to take that into account, whether or not it is an "improvement" over the existing monopolistic cartel (from your point of view), or you simply go under.
Legislation, legal thuggary, and the like will do little to stem the tide. Even if the United States were to resort to extreme authoritarian measures to maintain the status quo, you can count on most of the rest of the world (Europe possibly excepted) putting up some resistence. Given the nature of the internet, even one small island refusing to go along with such nonsense will suffice to undermine the entire effort.
Enter technologies like FreeNet and begin to see how fruitless such efforts at putting the genie back in the bottle really are.
Excellent idea, and extremely well-put. But -- and I don't say this to be a jerk -- what's to prevent passing along the (say) unique serial number on your CD? Is everyone gonna bring their CD to Ticketmaster to get the discount on tix?
If the number were coupled to your credit card number (which would be needed to unlock and activate it) you would provide both a mechanism and a powerful incentive for not passing your serial number along. Numerous ways exist for doing this, from databases of registered "purchasers" (CDs) to standard public key/private key cryptography (for purchased mp3's). The latter would combine nicely with a "buy and download the mp3 now, your CD will arrive in a few days" sales approach.
Yes, there might be theft, just as there is credit card theft and fraud today, but existing law is more than adeqaute to address these issues. In any event, you can bet no one would be giving their credit card number out promiscuously.
As an aside, my side project, XIR (xir is recursive) has banned me for making a song called "kill everyone who works at mp3.com" bad taste? sure, but it was obviously a joke and I put it in the comedy genre and deleted it when they put it on hold, but now XIR is no more on mp3.com
So is there somewhere else I could download the mp3 from? Preferably with a clear license attached, assuring me its ok to do so? I'm kind of curious to hear the "kill everyone who works at mp3.com" song.
Since by definition an unknown artist is, well, unknown, who the hell is ever going to find their songs?
That's a good point. However, you can use the "browse user" feature and browse other songs a particular person is sharing, and stumble across stuff this way.
The problem with doing this with napster (at least for those of us conscientious about downloading only music we have already paid for in another format) is, how do you tell what is legitimate "mp3.com" material, and what isn't? Other than the big-name RIAA bands, of course, which obviously aren't.
A mixture of mp3.com and FreeNet is what is needed. An mp3.com style interface, overview, etc., coupled with FreeNet's inability to be censored. No more banned music or songs, in any country.
We can't stop unauthorized recording, or trading of illegal copies, whether its on cassette tape or in mp3 format. We can, however, maximize the exposure of underrepresented bands, put mechanisms in place that provide the opportunity and encouragement for people to behave ethically, and accept the fact that teenagers and college students will get allot of their music for free (just as they do now on the radio or via friend-sneakernet and cassette), and that these same people will buy their music when they can afford it.
I think if Lars had the ability to count the number of bootleg tapes people have (live bootlegs which he allows, or copies of studio work, which he doesn't), he would be shocked by the number. The fact that such statistics are easier to track on the net than elsewhere has perhaps contributed to his sense of panic. In addition, I have downloaded numerous songs multiple times (once at work, once onto a laptop, once at home, once on a friends PC to play the song for her, etc.). Since I own the song these aren't 'illegal', or at least 'unethical' but they would certainly show up in the artist's statistic as multiple 'illegal' downloads.
I understand his fear and concern, and he has the right, however misguided, to persue whatever means he feels he needs to to protect his rights to his work, but as another pointed out in his question, he could be spending his time and energy far more wisely in developing a business model tailored to the new technical reality which has, for better or worse, completely changed the economic landscape of mass media distribution.
If Lars & Co. are wise, they or their agents will get in touch with mp3.com. Their contract may not allow them to have any business or distribution arrangement, but they could learn a tremendous amount from the conversation regardless.
In the meantime, I will personally continue my boycott of RIAA affiliated music for philisophical reasons, irrespective of how much I may like or dislike a particular personality.
(1) Legal unenforceability: In the example you give, assuming for sake of argument that DeCSS is illegal,(*) you're offering to sell an illegal product, not in exchange for money but for a release. It follows that the contract you propose is unenforceable because it is supported by an illegal consideration.
You are correct, although not necessarilly for the correct reason.
One could host one's web page, complete with click-through license, in one of the two American States foolish enough to have passed UCITA legislation (which explicitly makes click-through licenses enforcable).
Then, have the aforementioned "click-through" license on your web page, followed by a link to download DeCSS.
What makes this unenforcable isn't the law, or even the illegality of DeCSS (after all, maybe it is the decoy DeCSS program, which is undisputably legal and merely bears a superfical resemblence to DeCSS, in the similarity of their names). It is the fact that you are a powerless, unrepresented individual on the one hand, going up against a large cartel of corporate conglomerates by whom the government is employed on the other.
Even if such a license were enforcable, the RIAA and the MPAA would simply purchase a new law from congress post haste (a relatively inexpensive proposition), which would then make the license unenforcable, probably retroactively.
Really, until we seize back our government, all of this discussion will be more or less moot.
We cannot and should not count on governments anywhere to respect, much less abide by, the notion that citizens should have the freedom to do whatever they want, even if it offends the very power and money besotted politicians whos yearning for dominion over our lives brought them to the positions they enjoy today.
Our sole hope lies in designing the infrastructure of the net itself to make legislative control of content a technical impossibility. FreeNet goes a long way toward doing this.
I would encourage anyone with an accessible IP address on the net to download the software and set up a FreeNet node. If you cannot do this (no permiment IP address, or other ISP restrictions), then please consider downloading the client software and familiarizing yourself with FreeNet and how it works.
Indeed, I do not think it is at all an exaggeration to say that we as free individuals have a civic and moral obligation to run FreeNet, and in so doing keep our freedom out of the hands of politicians and the undemocratic corporate institutions for which they work.
Slashdot Mirror
NSI is an accredited registrar, as are the 50 others. NSI is not a monopoly. Everyone has thier own choice... i'm so sick of people crying over NSI.
.com, .net, and .org, and "have to cover their costs" (which, if it were true, would be about $0.06 / domain, not $6).
bzzt!
Thank you for playing, Mr. NSI employee.
If you check the pricing structure of any "accredited registar" you will find that $6 for each domain gets paid to NSI, not matter who you register it with. Yup, that domain you just got from domainmonger.com just sent another $6 into NSI's pockets. Why? They still run the root DNS domains for
Without copyright the GNU GPL would not exist.
...and would be unnecessary, as the very freedoms it seeks to protect would be inherent.
I saw on the news last night that the average price in Chicago is $2.06
Yup. Right now, it is cheaper to buy aviation fuel ($2.00/gal at OXI) and fly than it is to buy automobile gas ($2.06/gal) and drive. How odd the world is becomming...
Just out of curiosity, exactly what does your comment have to do with the subject at hand, namely Napster? Exactly who is insisting that Napster go around deleting files from everyone's hard drive?
The RIAA is hoping to dupe a judge into doing just that. If I were the judge in question, I would be furious with the RIAA for attempting to make such an ass of both the judge personally and the legal system as a whole.
Or was this meant to be a non-sequitur?
I can't speak to the poster's initial intent, but his comment most certainly was not a non-sequitur.
Napster does not store any files on its servers. It facilitates the exchange of files between client machines only, with no traffic going to the napster server at all.
It is basically a big index, much like the old FTP indexes that circulated around the internet in text format in the days before the world wide web. It tells people where they can find things, nothing more. Last I checked, this was a protected form of speach (although the DMCA, not to mention the fiasco that is The War on Drugs, may have eroded this particular right).
Insisting that Napster remove content is insisting that Napster invade individuals personal computers and delete files, an illegal act in most jurisdictions.
The original poster's satirical comments that the editors of slashdot had better remove all the illegal content from the poster's personal computer, "or else," serves to illustrate the stupidity of such a demand rather well, actually.
In short, the RIAA is making an ass of both itself and the American Justice system.
That's not entirely true. If you look on the right side of an artist page, you'll see a number called "Payback Earnings".
So, their popularity model is flawed, as it doesn't account for "word of mouth" sharing of gratis mp3s. Thus, they should sue, or file an amicus brief in the RIAA suit, a company for developing a protocol that facilitates this exchange, and even feel justified in doing so?
If they were serious about fairly guaging their artists' popularity and reimbursing the artist accordingly, they could monitor Napster traffic in exactly the same way that Metallica's lackeys did. Not a perfect collection of data (repeat download attempts distort the figures, for example), but certainly more helpful than ignoring the phenominon altogether.
mp3.com has discovered it has a competitor, and decided to coat-tial onto the RIAA frieght train to eliminate them in a ploy cynical enough to be worthy of Washington, D.C. When FreeNet and Gnutella hit the streets big time, they're going to find they really have a competitor. It is hypocritical in the extreme for them to give away mp3's in a digital, copy-friendly medium to promote their artists, and then turn on the very people they are promoting to and tell them "but don't you dare share this with your friends."
The more I think about this entire fiasco, the less I'm inclined to ever buy another thing from mp3.com again. Certainly, they should no longer receive any "good-will" support from the community. At the very least, they should be considreed to be nothing more than another amoral, unethical company that may or may not produce a product one might need or want, and treated accordingly.
I find it very interesting that mp3.com has become an ally of the RIAA in this effort, particularly since they give away mp3s of their artists music.
As a customer of theirs, I find this particularly troubling. What they are saying, basically, is that the mp3's are gratis, but not libre: they want traffic to their web page, so they don't want you sharing music the artists have authorized you to download for free, and presumably therefor to share with your friends.
One expects such a cynical rape of the justice system by such amoral entities as the RIAA, but to see a relatively new startup who is not only an underdog, but a self-styled representative of change in a corrupt industry, engage in such cynical ploys simply to keep the traffic to their website up is very distasteful, to say the least.
I must say, in light of this news, I will be giving serious second thoughts to purchasing any additional CDs from mp3.com. As they have been the only ones I have been purchasing CDs from in the last year, I suppose this could mean an end to yet another vice (and more cash for other hobbies instead).
Many of the "older aircraft" have been retrofitted with newer avionics and "glass cockpits," essentially computers which ease many of the navigational and aeronotical chores pilots have to do in various phases of flight.
;-)
When the planes were originally designed, sans faraday cages and the like, they didn't need them, because the old, standard navigational equipment (VOR receivers, DME, ADF) didn't require them. For that matter, neither did the flight instrumentation: most of it was (and, in the smaller planes those of us who fly for fun use, still are) mechanical, using vacuum driven gryroscopes, static air inlets, a pitot tube to measure air movement (and thus airspeed). My standby vacuum system is electronic (as are the lights on the panel), but the primary vac system uses induction and works even with the electronics shut off. The plane flies just fine, and one can still navigate using pilotage (their naked eyeball).
The newer aircraft are designed to require the fancy electronics, but even they still have the old, familiar instruments most of you know from PC flight simulators.
There was an aircraft in Canada (I forget the model) which was landed safely after it ran out of fuel midflight and lost all flight systems, except the basic, gyroscopic instruments just about every aircraft since the 30's comes equipped with.
Loss of navigation is only a life-threatening concern in situations of low or no-visibility, such as the middle of the ocean (which way are we supposed to fly?) or in IMC (bad, foggy, rainy weather, now we can't fly the published approach, how the f*ck do we find the damn runway?). Even then, a quick call on the cell phone to the tower can probably get you the guidance you need (which is what I would do if I lost comm while in the soup, the FCC be damned).
I'm guessing you never played it by this response, but I would like to say also that I think the simple fact of being an American must be dificult at times due to the ever growing global realization that Television is America, Media is America.
Your guess would be wrong. Not only have I played shadowrun, I learned to play it in Germany, in German.
However, Jon Katz is an American, writing about an American work (Shadowrun) and how it relates to an American political system which is increasingly dysfunctional, and he posted his comments to an American website.
The original flame was completely inappropriate and off-base, as were most of the replies here.
Jon Katz, to put it simply, may or may not be qualified to comment on the American political issues he raised. He is most definitely not qualified to comment on how they relate to Bengladesh or Mozambique. He appropriately limited his commentary to the country he knew and was inappropriately flamed because someone felt he had violated their rules of "International Political Correctness."
Bah. I've yet to read a comment in this thread describing these issues as they relate to Germany, the Netherlands, France, the UK, or anywhere else. For that matter, I'd be very curious to hear about these issues from a Canadian and Mexican point of view. As the two other members of NAFTA such a perspective would be very interesting.
Alas, all I have seen instead is so much bitching, whining, and anti-American bigotry, all of which is well within the rights of those who posted such drivel to do so, just as it is my right to openly mock and despise them for it.
I wonder if one were to discuss the roleplaying game Schwarze Auge and its relationship to the emergence of the SPD as the dominant party in Germany, if one would be flamed so vehemently. (Disclaimer: I doubt very much there is any such relationship!). This entire thread implies the worst form of Political Correctness: you may not mention nationality if you are an American - but for anyone of any other nationality it is OK. As a left leaning, liberal American I have had more than enough of this kind of double-standard Politicaly Correct drivel within American politics (even though the so-called standards of political correctness tend to support many of my own political views!) to not speak out against it when I see it infecting technical forums such as this.
And there was silly old me thinking the rest of the world had corporations and computers too. Thankyou for pointing out that it is, of course, only americans that this applies too.
Yes, you are silly.
Jon Katz is an American, discussing a game developed in America and how it mirrors developments in American politics. If you feel so slighted that he didn't discuss European, African, Asian, or Australian politics, why don't you add something of substance to the conversation from that point of view, rather than bitching and whining about an American website posting an article by an American Author discussing developments in American politics and how they are reflected (or predicted by) an American roleplaying game?
If Jon Katz had generalized his statements to include the rest of the world (not unreasonable when one considers the "globalization" of the marketplace and the corporate powergrab that is the WTO) you or someone else would have bitched and moaned about an American having the audacity to apply their outlook to the rest of the world.
Why don't you write a well reasoned and insightful article about similar trends in whatever part of the world you come from, rather than bitching and moaning because people in America haven't given your particular region the attention you so obviously think it deserves?
I hadn't heard of it.
Now I will be certain to never watch it, irrespective of how good it might have been. Some priciples are worth standing up for, and copright abuse (legal or otherwise), which this clearly is, is most certainly one.
Nice PR move, idiots.
Subject says it all. To whomever moderated the above, thoughtful post as flaimbait, I can't wait to nail your sorry ass in meta-moderation.
"I nearly committed suicide twice, and I know one or two friends that actually did"
:-)
...
I don't know what to say to you about that, because I didn't know your friends, and I don't know you. I do know that the same things happened to me however.
That's interesting. I, too, attempted to kill myself on two seperate occasions, when I was 13 and 14 years old. Fortunately for me, I wasn't very competent at it.
When I was 6, I said I was going to be a pilot. And you know what? I joined the Air Training Corps, hated the herd mentality there and left. But one day, either with money from my music or my work on computers, I'm going to take my money, learn to fly, and I'm going to plot a course directly over my old school, and the places I've been taken to remind me of 'the way it is' with sticks, fists and white trainers, and I'm going to spit on them from a thousand feet.
If your school is not built in a town (many serving the smaller midwestern towns are actually a couple of miles out in the country, surrounded by cornfields), you can legally spit on them from 500 feet AGL if you like.
Shortly after I got my private pilots certificate I took my sister flying over a small town in central Illinois where we both had very unpleasant memories. While neither of us spit on the town, we did dart around the clouds (keeping the required 2000' lateral distance, of course) and did a few steep turns just for the fun of it. Why? Because we both have successful lives doing what we want, and the people which caused us such pain in those days are still down there, ecking out their sorry lives with death the only light at the end of their tunnel.
I would strongly encourage you to learn to fly, but as you probably already know, it will be an addiction to make heroin or crack cocain look innocent in comparison. Just starting the motor on the ramp after a two or three week haitus is like a needle prick to a junkie: pure, wonderful bliss and delicious anticipation...
To the person you responded to I would add: Growing up is hell. Being a teenager is hell. High school isn't the best years of your life. It may be the best years of the sorry saps lives who are tormenting you, will never go to college, and will never get out of their sorry little town, but they are not your best years. If you are at all like me, they were quite the opposite.
College may be some of the best years of your life (certainly the most carefree in some respects), but even after graduation life as a working professional isn't bad (though the first job out of school generally is). Being an adult doesn't suck at all, and can be damn fun at times
I understand some people have a very strong opinion on this issue, as do I. But, I don't feel that the US should intervene in this situation.
If China were to use force against Taiwan, then the United States most certainly should intervene. We have made promises to the government and people of Taiwan that we would defend them, should the need arise, and it would be highly inappropriate, and probably catastrophic to our own foreign policy, if we were to look the other way in the face of such aggression.
However, short of something that dramatic the relationship between Taiwan and China is something for them to peacefully sort out themselves, and the United States should definitely remain neutral and stay out of the way while both sides negotiate their respective futures.
(Likewise, proponents of legalizing marijuana sometimes argue that marijuana use would drop if it were legalized because it would no longer be "forbidden fruit." Whatever you think of the drug laws, honesty compels the conclusion that the main reason people smoke pot is to get high, and all other reasons come in a distant second.)
With all due respect, I suspect you were never a regular user of illegal substance and, based on what you say, probably never hung out with people who were.
What you say may be true of adults, but it is certainly not true of teenagers. When I was young and started smoking pot it was primarilly the lure of the forbidden and a burning desire to rebel that led very directly to it. A distant second was the desire to fit in with my peer group. Getting high was an even more distant third, quite often an irritating side effect of rebelling and being cool that interfered with my other social interests, like suavely sweeping a girl off her feet (hard to do when you get side tracked by a really cool pattern of shadows on the wall). Of the friends I've spoken with in recent years who were partaking at the same time, most have indicated that rebellion was their initial reason for trying pot as well.
Now, in college it was different. I was an adult, with nothing to rebel against and no desire to do so. Finding acceptance amongst a group of likeminded peers was also remarkably easy -- lifestyles on college campuses are much more diverse and much less conformist. There I smoked to get high, and gave little thought to what my peers would think, or my parents (who remained disapproving as ever, of course).
Now the stuff bores me, and I no longer smoke at all. Most of the people I know have followed a similar path, some quitting earlier, some still occasionally getting high for entertainment. In all cases, our motivations for doing it (or not) changed over time.
Statistics in Holland indicate that legalizing marijuana has dramatically decreased usage among young people. Yes, there are dutch who chose to get high, but not as many per capita as their are british, american, and germans who do so (many of whome inundate Amsterdam for such purposes). Based on the experiences of myself and my friends, the same would appear to apply to the united states. In the face of anectdotal evidence on one hand, hard research and well considered (read: not cooked) statistics on the other, it is difficult for me to understand the persistence in the United States in persuing the drug policy it does, with all the detrimental effects in terms of our civil liberties, fundamental rights, economy, and the greater drug use it encourages.
Clearly there are powerful interests who benefit, but at such a cost to society it amazes me we still put up with it.
Trading mp3's is similar -- amongst those I know who do it, "sticking it to the man" ranks as high or higher than collecting the actual music. This would indicate the rebellion is playing a pretty large role in people's motivation for violating copyrights. Whether it is the primary motivator or not (as it often is with drug use) it is there, and is significant.
What is even more striking is that these are adults who are acting out feelings of rebellion they haven't felt since high school. Getting an affluent adult with a wife and three children riled up in this way takes real talent, the kind only the lawyers at the RIAA and MPAA could display. The fact that many adults are feeling so angry, dissillusioned, and, yes, rebellious should have the RIAA, the MPAA, and their lackeys on Capitol Hill very concerned indeed.
Unfortunately, my luck was not so good.
:pserver:anoncvs@xiph.org:/usr/local/cvsroot login
Attempts to connect to the CVS server met with failure, despite following the procedures as defined by their web page verbatim (to the point of cutting and pasting to eliminate typos as a possible source of error). And before you ask, yes, I do use CVS quite frequently, so I doubt very much I was doing anything wrong.
cvs -d
(Logging in to anoncvs@xiph.org)
CVS password:
cvs [login aborted]: recv() from server xiph.org: Connection reset by peer
Either they've changed the password from anoncvs to something else, or the CVS server is slashdotted.
In any event, I then tried the nightly snapshot. While the software configured and built, make install was broken to the point of absurdity, creating the install binary but installing nothing.
One can copy the files by hand to the proper location and get it working, but exactly what is needed where isn't terribly well documented, and you'll have to put up with several error messages and figure out what is missing before you get there.
I say this not to flame vorbis at all - the project is in development and not intended for casual use just yet. I mention it as a counter-point to the previous post, which to me at least conveyed an overly optimistic impression of how smooth the installation would go.
vorbis is very promising, and I hope the project reaches a point soon where I can convert all of my mp3 collection to ogg files, but it isn't quite there yet. It would be unfurtunatel if people were to form a first impression based upon software which hasn't been released for beta testing yet, much less general consumption! That having been said, if getting a little bloody with the build and installation doesn't bother you, then definitely check it out!
One way to look at File Formats is that they are essentially APIs for non-volitile data storage.
In any event, in addition to open APIs we need open file and data storage formats. No more forcing people to standardize on sub-standard software (such as Word, for example) simply because other programs have a perceived difficulty reading or writing to the same file format.
In the free software community, a library of file format filters to which all programs which store text or data to disk link would be fantastic - then people could truly run the Word Processor, spread sheet, image editor, and presentation manager of their choice with complete confidence that others will be able to read and share their documents.
While the free software community can do much, at some point someone needs to step in and require, be it through customer pressure or outright legislation, that APIs and File Formats be both published and adhered to. I favor the former, but would take the latter over the current state of affairs.
As far as i know, i'd believe that if the title of a song is copywritten, then it'd be illegal to name a files that and offer it to the world... Perfectly legal to name it that and leave it on your hard drive, but not in a way that it'd be accessible by Napster.
Can you cite a single regulation, law, or court decision implying anything even remotely like what you just implied? In any country on this planet?
I didn't think so.
Since the site is slashdotted, here's the .plan update (I finally got it after several tries):
- ----------------------------- .plan update.
Name: John Carmack
Email: johnc@idsoftware.com
Description: Programmer
Project: Quake 3 Arena
-------------------------------------------------
6/1/00
------
Well, this is going to be an interesting
Most of this is not really public business, but if some things aren't stated
explicitly, it will reflect unfairly on someone.
As many people have heard discussed, there was quite a desire to remake DOOM
as our next project after Q3. Discussing it brought an almost palpable thrill
to most of the employees, but Adrian had a strong enough dislike for the idea
that it was shot down over and over again.
Design work on an alternate game has been going on in parallel with the
mission pack development and my research work.
Several factors, including a general lack of enthusiasm for the proposed plan,
the warmth that Wolfenstien was met with at E3, and excitement about what
we can do with the latest rendering technology were making it seem more and
more like we weren't going down the right path.
I discussed it with some of the other guys, and we decided that it was
important enough to drag the company through an unpleasant fight over it.
An ultimatum was issued to Kevin and Adrian(who control >50% of the company):
We are working on DOOM for the next project unless you fire us.
Obviously no fun for anyone involved, but the project direction was changed,
new hires have been expedited, and the design work has begun.
It wasn't planned to announce this soon, but here it is: We are working on a
new DOOM game, focusing on the single player game experience, and using brand
new technology in almost every aspect of it. That is all we are prepared to
say about the game for quite some time, so don't push for interviews. We
will talk about it when things are actually built, to avoid giving
misleading comments.
It went smoother than expected, but the other shoe dropped yesterday.
Kevin and Adrian fired Paul Steed in retaliation, over my opposition.
Paul has certainly done things in the past that could be grounds for
dismissal, but this was retaliatory for him being among the "conspirators".
I happen to think Paul was damn good at his job, and that he was going to be
one of the most valuable contributors to DOOM.
We need to hire two new modeler/animator/cinematic director types. If you
have a significant commercial track record in all three areas, and consider
yourself at the top of your field, send your resume to Kevin Cloud.
Looks like Adrian and Kevin cut off their own noses to spite their face. Throwing a monkey wrench into the new Doom effort isn't going to help their company at all, and doing it in such a manner certainly isn't going to inspire the best talent to flock to their company.
If you do not get politically involved in protecting your basic rights on-line, such as privacy and anonymity, and freedom of speach, the internet will not look like anything Gibson envisioned.
Rather it will look much more like what Orwell envisioned: a boot stomping on the face of humanity.
FreeNet is one possible way of combating this, if everyone who can runs a freenet node and thus helps provide protection in numbers. However, even this possibility goes away of the "Progressive" Institutes recommendations are taken by congress and such anonymous, distributed protocols are banned outright.
But of course, it isn't cool to care too much about politicals and thus be labelled a "radical," is it?
To judge by comments here and in the old style media alike, it is far more hip to just be labelled "yet another mindless sheep," complete with social security number, Mediocre credit report, and Discount Card from your local Grocery.
Why? Because I suspect that number is self-limiting, in a way that MP3's aren't. Bootleg tapes of studio albums aren't that good. They wear out. Hell, I haven't personally put any music but mine on a tape in at least five years. People tend to buy CD's if they like an album... IF the copy they have now isn't a perfect, non-degrading, digital one.
I probably should have included unauthorized CD copies people have made with their CDR burners and $0.75 blank CD's when I made that point. This technology has been in the mainstream for going on three years (and I don't know anybody who hasn't made an illegal CD).
These are digital copies with no reduction in quality (unlike mp3's, which lose significant quality in the first generation). I suspect of Lars were able to count the number of metallica CD's alone, he would be horrified (and justly so).
Nevertheless, despite 3 years of widespread availability and use of CD burners, and over 1 year of widespread mp3 usage, CD sales are up.
You've got lots of ideas for how a band can get sold among the tiny little group of people who are out looking for new bands. Record companies have found ways to get a new band sold to people who are in music stores. Until you can do that in your business model, you're not improving on anything.
From the RIAA's point of view, the emerging paradigm will certainly not be an improvement over the stranglehold they currently enjoy over marketing, distribution, etc.
The reality is that the internet in general, and mp3 technology in particular, have fundamentally changed the economic landscape with regard to the distribution of mass media. Either you change your business model to take that into account, whether or not it is an "improvement" over the existing monopolistic cartel (from your point of view), or you simply go under.
Legislation, legal thuggary, and the like will do little to stem the tide. Even if the United States were to resort to extreme authoritarian measures to maintain the status quo, you can count on most of the rest of the world (Europe possibly excepted) putting up some resistence. Given the nature of the internet, even one small island refusing to go along with such nonsense will suffice to undermine the entire effort.
Enter technologies like FreeNet and begin to see how fruitless such efforts at putting the genie back in the bottle really are.
In short, adapt to the new reality or perish.
Excellent idea, and extremely well-put. But -- and I don't say this to be a jerk -- what's to prevent passing along the (say) unique serial number on your CD? Is everyone gonna bring their CD to Ticketmaster to get the discount on tix?
If the number were coupled to your credit card number (which would be needed to unlock and activate it) you would provide both a mechanism and a powerful incentive for not passing your serial number along. Numerous ways exist for doing this, from databases of registered "purchasers" (CDs) to standard public key/private key cryptography (for purchased mp3's). The latter would combine nicely with a "buy and download the mp3 now, your CD will arrive in a few days" sales approach.
Yes, there might be theft, just as there is credit card theft and fraud today, but existing law is more than adeqaute to address these issues. In any event, you can bet no one would be giving their credit card number out promiscuously.
As an aside, my side project, XIR (xir is recursive) has banned me for making a song called "kill everyone who works at mp3.com" bad taste? sure, but it was obviously a joke and I put it in the comedy genre and deleted it when they put it on hold, but now XIR is no more on mp3.com
So is there somewhere else I could download the mp3 from? Preferably with a clear license attached, assuring me its ok to do so? I'm kind of curious to hear the "kill everyone who works at mp3.com" song.
:-)
Since by definition an unknown artist is, well, unknown, who the hell is ever going to find their songs?
That's a good point. However, you can use the "browse user" feature and browse other songs a particular person is sharing, and stumble across stuff this way.
The problem with doing this with napster (at least for those of us conscientious about downloading only music we have already paid for in another format) is, how do you tell what is legitimate "mp3.com" material, and what isn't? Other than the big-name RIAA bands, of course, which obviously aren't.
A mixture of mp3.com and FreeNet is what is needed. An mp3.com style interface, overview, etc., coupled with FreeNet's inability to be censored. No more banned music or songs, in any country.
We can't stop unauthorized recording, or trading of illegal copies, whether its on cassette tape or in mp3 format. We can, however, maximize the exposure of underrepresented bands, put mechanisms in place that provide the opportunity and encouragement for people to behave ethically, and accept the fact that teenagers and college students will get allot of their music for free (just as they do now on the radio or via friend-sneakernet and cassette), and that these same people will buy their music when they can afford it.
I think if Lars had the ability to count the number of bootleg tapes people have (live bootlegs which he allows, or copies of studio work, which he doesn't), he would be shocked by the number. The fact that such statistics are easier to track on the net than elsewhere has perhaps contributed to his sense of panic. In addition, I have downloaded numerous songs multiple times (once at work, once onto a laptop, once at home, once on a friends PC to play the song for her, etc.). Since I own the song these aren't 'illegal', or at least 'unethical' but they would certainly show up in the artist's statistic as multiple 'illegal' downloads.
I understand his fear and concern, and he has the right, however misguided, to persue whatever means he feels he needs to to protect his rights to his work, but as another pointed out in his question, he could be spending his time and energy far more wisely in developing a business model tailored to the new technical reality which has, for better or worse, completely changed the economic landscape of mass media distribution.
If Lars & Co. are wise, they or their agents will get in touch with mp3.com. Their contract may not allow them to have any business or distribution arrangement, but they could learn a tremendous amount from the conversation regardless.
In the meantime, I will personally continue my boycott of RIAA affiliated music for philisophical reasons, irrespective of how much I may like or dislike a particular personality.
(1) Legal unenforceability: In the example you give, assuming for sake of argument that DeCSS is illegal,(*) you're offering to sell an illegal product, not in exchange for money but for a release. It follows that the contract you propose is unenforceable because it is supported by an illegal consideration.
You are correct, although not necessarilly for the correct reason.
One could host one's web page, complete with click-through license, in one of the two American States foolish enough to have passed UCITA legislation (which explicitly makes click-through licenses enforcable).
Then, have the aforementioned "click-through" license on your web page, followed by a link to download DeCSS.
What makes this unenforcable isn't the law, or even the illegality of DeCSS (after all, maybe it is the decoy DeCSS program, which is undisputably legal and merely bears a superfical resemblence to DeCSS, in the similarity of their names). It is the fact that you are a powerless, unrepresented individual on the one hand, going up against a large cartel of corporate conglomerates by whom the government is employed on the other.
Even if such a license were enforcable, the RIAA and the MPAA would simply purchase a new law from congress post haste (a relatively inexpensive proposition), which would then make the license unenforcable, probably retroactively.
Really, until we seize back our government, all of this discussion will be more or less moot.
...is FREENET.
We cannot and should not count on governments anywhere to respect, much less abide by, the notion that citizens should have the freedom to do whatever they want, even if it offends the very power and money besotted politicians whos yearning for dominion over our lives brought them to the positions they enjoy today.
Our sole hope lies in designing the infrastructure of the net itself to make legislative control of content a technical impossibility. FreeNet goes a long way toward doing this.
I would encourage anyone with an accessible IP address on the net to download the software and set up a FreeNet node. If you cannot do this (no permiment IP address, or other ISP restrictions), then please consider downloading the client software and familiarizing yourself with FreeNet and how it works.
Indeed, I do not think it is at all an exaggeration to say that we as free individuals have a civic and moral obligation to run FreeNet, and in so doing keep our freedom out of the hands of politicians and the undemocratic corporate institutions for which they work.