So you let the DVD player decrypt instead of DeCSS, and you have a slightly lower quality image. But in a world where DeCSS exists, which is easier? Rip from your DVD ROM drive and DeCSS it, or play analog signal and re-encode? Oh wait, I need another stage to defeat Macrovision too....
I didn't say DeCSS was the only way, moron, but it damn sure is the easiest right now.
And once again, since you obviously missed it the first time, that doesn't mean that I think DeCSS should be illegal.
Some of the most common piracy involves asia, where VCDs are popular. You can't dup a DVD onto a VCD. You have to decrypt the video stream first. Which DeCSS does very well.
Is that a reason to ban DeCSS? Of course not. As we all keep saying, just 'cos you can kill someone with a baseball bat doesn't mean it should be banned.
Second, the patent goes out of its way to define "electronic document management system." You can't ignore its definition and just say that it's synonymous with "any file system."
I think the proof is in the question "who are they suing?" Are they suing companies doing something very specific and indentical to what Maz Technologies is doing? Or are they suing anyone who is in any way similar (like, oh, I don't know, someone using an encrypted filesystem?). Let's take a look...
From The Register:
PC Dynamics, the publisher of a virtual disk encryption product for Windows called SafeHouse, is among the first companies targeted in Maz's claim.
Hm, that sounds like AN ENCRYPTED FILESYSTEM to me.
Let's look at the product in more detail....
From the PC Dynamics web page:
SafeHouse encrypted volumes appear on your PC as another Windows drive letter. All encryption is performed automatically and transparently on the fly.
Yep, sounds exactly like what PGP does, and like an encrypted filesystem. The main difference being that it's a filesystem built on a raw file on another filesystem. Which doesn't really change things much at all.
Or none of the providers wants to provide it to them. DSL it too far away, has fibre in the line, etc. Cable hasn't been built out, etc. There are plenty of people who WANT and can AFFORD broadband, but just can't get it.
Except when Joe Smith wants to use PGP. While that particular kettle has died down again, I'm willing to bet that it's on the minds of the Homeland Security folks.
What they want is encryption in the hands of those with the power, not the rest of us.
1) I am an amateur musician and need to be able to burn my own music to CD
2) I am also an amateur artists who does album covers for other musicians
3) I work for Sun Microsystems who makes general purpose computers, and the
threat to the industry threatens my job.
4) RIAA/MPAA are not poor; note the huge money spent supporting really
awful music and movies.
5) Artists such as Courtney Love dispute claims that they are being supported
6) RIAA in particular has not put their music into any reasonable electronic
format: if things are available at all, they are typically $1 per song.
For $1 per song, I can buy a typical album, with uncompressed music, artwork,
liner notes and a physical medium for storage. Why would I pay the same for
a compressed format with none of the other benefits?
You said that there are benefits to companies being able to track my every move. I likened that to the judge who commented on a rape victim that she should just lay back and enjoy it (i.e. enjoy the benefits). How is that not reading what you wrote?
Filling my mailbox with unsolicited coupons is not doing me any favors. There are plenty of other ways to achieve the same ends without being so intrusive as to record a complete track of all my comings and goings in your establishment.
Ultimately, all of these things that are "more convenient for consumers" are really primarily "more convenient for the company", and secondarily "more intrusive into parts of my life they haven't got any need to know, much less TRACK". If the data is aggregated, it will be used, and I'll lay money that whatever the STATED purpose is, a use will be found and done that exceeds and abuses that stated purpose.
So I'm not going to lay back and enjoy it, I'm going to say they can go to hell, and I'm going to do what I can to prevent such intrusive uses of technology.
Of course I figured all that was pretty clear in my analogy by itself, but I guess I was wrong.
Generally, if you're not a bad apple, an absolute freak, or a ridiculously easy
mark, then everyone will be too busy to worry about your personal information or activities.
Where have you lived? Were you completely savvy the minute your mom popped you out? If we only focus on the "ridiculously easy mark" part of your statement, your point fails. Everyone was a ridiculously easy mark at least once. There's no way that it's acceptable to magnify the impact of being an easy mark via technology "just because it might be easier" in some poorly defined sense.
As for the "absolute freak" bit, sorry to say but one man's freak is another man's interesting person, and it is unacceptable to me for people who haven't even met me (only read data about me in a database) to have the power to judge and affect my life with as much impact as this technology would give them. Ultimately, unless it's illegal to be "an absolute freak", there's no justification for tracking my "freakness".
Finally, for the bar in question, the first time I get targeted crap mail from them would be the last time I went there (assuming I didn't realize they were tracking with their scanner at the time I was scanned). That's going to bring them lots of benefit, isn't it?
And that's why it's extra disappointing to see this come out from O'Reilly, because they typically review the books closely enough to prevent this kind of problem.
If your firewall was configured correctly, it wouldn't be a matter of tracking them down. It would be a matter of checking the logs for obvious abuses, firing a handful of abusers, and the others would get wise and stop. All it takes is a couple high profile examples.
This is just like previous rounds of telephone tyranny. "No use of the phones for anything but company business." Typically that drives morale into the crapper, and ends up with people finding other ways to cost the company money. Personally, if my employer starts telling me I can't do the occasional personal business on company time, I'll find another employer. Either that, or I'll work from home all the time where they can't tell what the hell I'm doing. Whoopty.
Slashdot Mirror
Get a sense of humor. They're nice.
Which part of that said anything about "need"?
Exactly. No people, no toast.
I'll give you all the others, despite disagreeing with them. But how in fsck's name can you say with a straight face that Java is not Object Oriented?
I didn't say DeCSS was the only way, moron, but it damn sure is the easiest right now.
And once again, since you obviously missed it the first time, that doesn't mean that I think DeCSS should be illegal.
The cat is perfectly allowed to be a cat. S/he just has to eat the prey outside the house.
Um, I'd say pissing all over your clothes is more destructive than bringing friends over for a meal.
Is that a reason to ban DeCSS? Of course not. As we all keep saying, just 'cos you can kill someone with a baseball bat doesn't mean it should be banned.
Ah. Digital Void Disk then.
I think the proof is in the question "who are they suing?" Are they suing companies doing something very specific and indentical to what Maz Technologies is doing? Or are they suing anyone who is in any way similar (like, oh, I don't know, someone using an encrypted filesystem?). Let's take a look...
From The Register:
PC Dynamics, the publisher of a virtual disk encryption product for Windows called SafeHouse, is among the first companies targeted in Maz's claim.
Hm, that sounds like AN ENCRYPTED FILESYSTEM to me.
Let's look at the product in more detail....
From the PC Dynamics web page:
SafeHouse encrypted volumes appear on your PC as another Windows drive letter. All encryption is performed automatically and transparently on the fly.
Yep, sounds exactly like what PGP does, and like an encrypted filesystem. The main difference being that it's a filesystem built on a raw file on another filesystem. Which doesn't really change things much at all.
Does that mean Hollings is right? Of course not.
Sounds like your garden variety encrypted filesystem to me. Are you saying there's no prior art?
What they want is encryption in the hands of those with the power, not the rest of us.
2) I am also an amateur artists who does album covers for other musicians
3) I work for Sun Microsystems who makes general purpose computers, and the threat to the industry threatens my job.
4) RIAA/MPAA are not poor; note the huge money spent supporting really awful music and movies.
5) Artists such as Courtney Love dispute claims that they are being supported
6) RIAA in particular has not put their music into any reasonable electronic format: if things are available at all, they are typically $1 per song. For $1 per song, I can buy a typical album, with uncompressed music, artwork, liner notes and a physical medium for storage. Why would I pay the same for a compressed format with none of the other benefits?
a few speed bumps != active resistence.
Filling my mailbox with unsolicited coupons is not doing me any favors. There are plenty of other ways to achieve the same ends without being so intrusive as to record a complete track of all my comings and goings in your establishment.
Ultimately, all of these things that are "more convenient for consumers" are really primarily "more convenient for the company", and secondarily "more intrusive into parts of my life they haven't got any need to know, much less TRACK". If the data is aggregated, it will be used, and I'll lay money that whatever the STATED purpose is, a use will be found and done that exceeds and abuses that stated purpose.
So I'm not going to lay back and enjoy it, I'm going to say they can go to hell, and I'm going to do what I can to prevent such intrusive uses of technology.
Of course I figured all that was pretty clear in my analogy by itself, but I guess I was wrong.
So I should just lay back and enjoy it then, is that what you're saying?
Where have you lived? Were you completely savvy the minute your mom popped you out? If we only focus on the "ridiculously easy mark" part of your statement, your point fails. Everyone was a ridiculously easy mark at least once. There's no way that it's acceptable to magnify the impact of being an easy mark via technology "just because it might be easier" in some poorly defined sense.
As for the "absolute freak" bit, sorry to say but one man's freak is another man's interesting person, and it is unacceptable to me for people who haven't even met me (only read data about me in a database) to have the power to judge and affect my life with as much impact as this technology would give them. Ultimately, unless it's illegal to be "an absolute freak", there's no justification for tracking my "freakness".
Finally, for the bar in question, the first time I get targeted crap mail from them would be the last time I went there (assuming I didn't realize they were tracking with their scanner at the time I was scanned). That's going to bring them lots of benefit, isn't it?
I may not complain, but I sure as hell wouldn't stay.
But guess who holds most of the stock. Which sucks.
But a city of ice isn't scary...oh...you meant icebErg.
And that's why it's extra disappointing to see this come out from O'Reilly, because they typically review the books closely enough to prevent this kind of problem.
If your firewall was configured correctly, it wouldn't be a matter of tracking them down. It would be a matter of checking the logs for obvious abuses, firing a handful of abusers, and the others would get wise and stop. All it takes is a couple high profile examples.
This is just like previous rounds of telephone tyranny. "No use of the phones for anything but company business." Typically that drives morale into the crapper, and ends up with people finding other ways to cost the company money. Personally, if my employer starts telling me I can't do the occasional personal business on company time, I'll find another employer. Either that, or I'll work from home all the time where they can't tell what the hell I'm doing. Whoopty.
So are my blank floppies. There ya go.