And yet, it has always been illegal to own song sheets [mpa.org] that you did not legitimately buy.
Well, quoting the Music Publishers' Association is all fine, but they are just summarizing the law and conveniently ignoring the whole Fair Use exception, which directly contradicts what they say.
The MPA says:
What About Photocopies That Are Now In Our Church/School/Library?
Destroy any unauthorized photocopies immediately. Replace them with legal editions.
Title 17 says:
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting,
teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
Even Octave/Matlab are programming languages, they aren't that hard to learn and are extremely powerful. In fact, I've seen people make spreadsheets more complicated than matlab programs.
Actually, most of us neo-libertarians nowadays agree that the airwaves are property. They are, from all practical economic points of view, no different than land. They are limited, and can only be used for one thing at a time.
That doesn't mean that the government should regulate the 7-dirty words or mandate digital television. The gov't should do nothing more than work as an arbitrator over property disuputes ("he's trespassing on my land...", "she's broadcasting on my frequency...").
I was not aware that the discovered weaknesses in audio watermarks enabled someone to gain root access on a server.
But surely you were aware that removing a watermark is done to remove the security that the watermark was intended to impose and allow "unauthorized" access to it.
Whoa! How can you say I'm defending them? I'm just saying they aren't the first "unscrupulous fucks". If they are "invoking" the DMCA by stating it in a threatening letter, they're still not the first. Felton got a letter that cited the DMCA too.
My only point was that it was silly to claim that this is anything new.
6. Silicon Film's electronic film system: Last year, Silicon Film Technologies made our list for failing to deliver its intriguing "digital film" system, which purported to turn an ordinary camera into a digital one. The digital film, one year later, is still not available, to the chagrin of many readers.
They're still at it. Their Web Site says it will be available soon (last updated Feb 14, 2002).
DESCRIPTION
xmove starts a pseudoserver which allows its X11 clients
to be relocated from one display to another. Upon startup
it will create a listening port from which it accepts new
client connections. All such clients will be displayed on
the default server, until moved elsewhere. Several
clients may connect through a single xmove, thus requiring
only one per machine.
Actually, I did it from a small perl script that I downloaded off usenet in 1996. It will take any string and, if possible reveal that strings connection to the antichrist.
I tried to post the script earlier, but/.'s filter didn't like it. Alas, a
google link has solved my problem.
U 85 n 110 i 105 t 116 e 101 d 100
32 S 83 t 116 a 97 t 116 e 101 s 115
32 A 65 r 114 m 109 y 121 +85+110+105+116+101+100+32+83+116+97-116+101- 115+3 2-65+114-109-121 = 666 Coincidence? I think not!
> And in some places (elementary schools, unsupervised children) where its a choice between filtered internet or no internet.
I have two more choices. You could *gasp*, supervise the children. Or, far better than ineffective black-list filters that let porn through while blocking Dick Armey's web site, you could provide a white-list filter that only allows pre-screened URLs through.
Of course, when I was a kid, we could buy albums by the Dead Kennedys without our parents holding our hands.
Getting pr0n was a lot tougher back then, but you can trust that I was able to find it despite the fact that I couldn't go into a store and buy it.
Why are so many people suggesting that we help smartfilter by voting to remove sourceforge? This won't help discourage companies from using it.
Instead, vote to make NYTIMES.COM and CNN.COM a "Criminal Skills" site. When the bosses start finding that smartfilter is effecting THEIR browsing, maybe they'll think twice before interfering in YOUR browsing.
Do the math... using your number, 1/2 of the population is using AOL (and IE). Web sites are built with IE in mind because 95% of the surfers are using IE.
Most sites, whether designed for IE or not, still look fine with other browsers. It's really a small minority that absolutely don't work at all with anything but IE (and some of them only because they just plain block non-IE referers).
Now if (when) AOL changes to Mozilla, suddenly only half the population is using IE. That small minority of sites will now be blocking 50% of their potential customers instead of 5%.
Why they chose to block any customers remains a mystery, but blocking the entire AOL population is just not economically viable.
> It would be nice if the U.S. started making some long term goals.
It would be silly unless the gov't could see the future. When I was a kid, they kept telling us how we'd be out of fossil fuel by 1990...
Technology progresses is unforeseeable ways. Check out James Burke's Connections series and see how random the force of history can be.
Weather forecasts can't accurately predict what the weather will be like in 1 week, economists can't predict the stock market tomorrow, but you expect the politicians to predict fuel usage/availability over the next 1,000 years???
We can't even agree on what "well regulated militia" means today, yet you think we can set a policy that will help us for another millennium?
The world seems to have gone under more changes since WWII than any time before, yet Sci Fi from the 1950's didn't really come very close to predicting 2000. Heck, there was quite a bit of uncertainty about Jan 1, 2000 on Dec 31, 1999!
does it further specify that being online is a requirement
Having recently taken the Free Software Quiz, I can tell you that not only is "being online" not a requirement, but it is not even sufficient to fulfill the requirements of the GPL. From the GPL FAQ:
I want to distribute binaries without accompanying sources. Can I provide source code by FTP instead
of by mail order?
You're supposed to provide the source code by mail-order on a physical medium, if someone orders it. You
are welcome to offer people a way to copy the corresponding source code by FTP, in addition to the mail-order
option, but FTP access to the source is not sufficient to satisfy section 3 of the GPL.
When a user orders the source, you have to make sure to get the source to that user. If a particular user can
conveniently get the source from you by anonymous FTP, fine--that does the job. But not every user is on a
network. The rest of the users are just as entitled to get the source code from you, which means you must be
prepared to send it to them by post.
If the FTP access is convenient enough, perhaps no one will choose to mail-order a copy. If so, you will never
have to ship one. But you cannot assume that.
Of course, it's easiest to just send the source with the binary in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, quoting the Music Publishers' Association is all fine, but they are just summarizing the law and conveniently ignoring the whole Fair Use exception, which directly contradicts what they say.
The MPA says:
Title 17 says:Before the DMCA, Copyright was always a Civil offense, not a criminal one.
And I suppose it was Alcohol that ruined Al Capone's Chicago, not prohibition.
Octave is a Free version of Matlab.
Even Octave/Matlab are programming languages, they aren't that hard to learn and are extremely powerful. In fact, I've seen people make spreadsheets more complicated than matlab programs.
Actually, most of us neo-libertarians nowadays agree that the airwaves are property. They are, from all practical economic points of view, no different than land. They are limited, and can only be used for one thing at a time.
That doesn't mean that the government should regulate the 7-dirty words or mandate digital television. The gov't should do nothing more than work as an arbitrator over property disuputes ("he's trespassing on my land...", "she's broadcasting on my frequency...").
But surely you were aware that removing a watermark is done to remove the security that the watermark was intended to impose and allow "unauthorized" access to it.
> How can you possibly defend...
Whoa! How can you say I'm defending them? I'm just saying they aren't the first "unscrupulous fucks". If they are "invoking" the DMCA by stating it in a threatening letter, they're still not the first. Felton got a letter that cited the DMCA too.
My only point was that it was silly to claim that this is anything new.
* Technically, they only threatened to invoke the DMCA. As of now, HP has also only threatened to invoke it.
While we're at it, why don't we let them annex the Sudetenland. That ought to appease them enough that they'll never ask for more...
> The problem with this article, as well as the original Worldcom estimate, is that they assume linear growth.
Doubling every 100 days is NOT linear growth, it's exponential. Worldcom was most certainly NOT assuming the growth was linear.
See also: Wired Story and Slashdot discussion thereof.
They're still at it. Their Web Site says it will be available soon (last updated Feb 14, 2002).
It's available in Debian: http://packages.debian.org/stable/x11/xmove.html
From the man page:
NAME
xmove - pseudoserver to support mobile X11 clients
SYNOPSIS
xmove [ -server server_name:port ] [ -port listen_port ]
DESCRIPTION
xmove starts a pseudoserver which allows its X11 clients
to be relocated from one display to another. Upon startup
it will create a listening port from which it accepts new
client connections. All such clients will be displayed on
the default server, until moved elsewhere. Several
clients may connect through a single xmove, thus requiring
only one per machine.
Yes, but if you had already taken a gun to school and shot 12 people and were let go, it might be reasonable to assume you might try again.
I tried to post the script earlier, but /.'s filter didn't like it. Alas, a
google link has solved my problem.
U 85
n 110
i 105
t 116
e 101
d 100
32
S 83
t 116
a 97
t 116
e 101
s 115
32
A 65
r 114
m 109
y 121
+85+110+105+116+101+100+32+83+116+97-116+101
Coincidence? I think not!
> And in some places (elementary schools, unsupervised children) where its a choice between filtered internet or no internet.
I have two more choices. You could *gasp*, supervise the children. Or, far better than ineffective black-list filters that let porn through while blocking Dick Armey's web site, you could provide a white-list filter that only allows pre-screened URLs through.
Of course, when I was a kid, we could buy albums by the Dead Kennedys without our parents holding our hands.
Getting pr0n was a lot tougher back then, but you can trust that I was able to find it despite the fact that I couldn't go into a store and buy it.
> My internet isn't filtered and neither is yours
Not yet at least...
Why are so many people suggesting that we help smartfilter by voting to remove sourceforge? This won't help discourage companies from using it.
Instead, vote to make NYTIMES.COM and CNN.COM a "Criminal Skills" site. When the bosses start finding that smartfilter is effecting THEIR browsing, maybe they'll think twice before interfering in YOUR browsing.
Aren't the anti-trust "penalties" supposed to last 5 years...
Do the math... using your number, 1/2 of the population is using AOL (and IE). Web sites are built with IE in mind because 95% of the surfers are using IE.
Most sites, whether designed for IE or not, still look fine with other browsers. It's really a small minority that absolutely don't work at all with anything but IE (and some of them only because they just plain block non-IE referers).
Now if (when) AOL changes to Mozilla, suddenly only half the population is using IE. That small minority of sites will now be blocking 50% of their potential customers instead of 5%.
Why they chose to block any customers remains a mystery, but blocking the entire AOL population is just not economically viable.
Except that the wireless frequencies interfere with lots of sensitive medical equipment and need to be turned off in a hospital...
"A Microsoft spokesman confirmed that Microsoft provides funding to the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution."
They claim that MCSE's are more useful than a college degree. If they AREN'T taking money from MicroSoft, then they're dumber than I thought.
> It would be nice if the U.S. started making some long term goals.
It would be silly unless the gov't could see the future. When I was a kid, they kept telling us how we'd be out of fossil fuel by 1990...
Technology progresses is unforeseeable ways. Check out James Burke's Connections series and see how random the force of history can be.
Weather forecasts can't accurately predict what the weather will be like in 1 week, economists can't predict the stock market tomorrow, but you expect the politicians to predict fuel usage/availability over the next 1,000 years???
We can't even agree on what "well regulated militia" means today, yet you think we can set a policy that will help us for another millennium?
The world seems to have gone under more changes since WWII than any time before, yet Sci Fi from the 1950's didn't really come very close to predicting 2000. Heck, there was quite a bit of uncertainty about Jan 1, 2000 on Dec 31, 1999!
Having recently taken the Free Software Quiz, I can tell you that not only is "being online" not a requirement, but it is not even sufficient to fulfill the requirements of the GPL. From the GPL FAQ: