I went to a techfair sponsored by a group of computer and media companies.
The hit of the event was an area where kids could take fingerpaintings, drawings, etc. and scan them in to make webpages. Then post them to the Internet.
You might try that one day.
I don't think this was a decision really about Internet porn, but rather affirming that government agencies have the same rights as employers that private organizations do. These same agencies could be held liable under "hostile workplace" sexual harassment claims and therefore have an interest in ensuring pornography does not enter the workplace.
The best fair use example I have seen of what would be a violation of the DMCA anticircumvention was provided by Nandy in reply comments to the Copyright Office. At http://www.loc.gov/copyright/1201/comments/reply/1 13nandy.pdf
He writes that vendors for medical databases omit export functions for data so hospitals and doctors are stuck using their software. At times they either have to abandon their data or hire a programmer to crack the database so the data can be exported to another platform or whent he software vendor goes out of business. This is a violation of the anticircumvention provision, but one the author feels is necessary to save lives.
Does anyone else find it ironic Berkman has chosen to stream and archive a debate on the merits of open code and the need to loosen copyright in a proprietary Realvideo format which cannot be downloaded, or copied, or time-shifted?
Mind you I'm still glad to see it, I just wish it was an MPEG.
The sample is self selected and way too small to be in any way reliable. The data collected is completely useless and could easily have been obtained by chance or bias.
Such a conspiracy would require the NSA or MS to have some clue as to the course of electronic communications, and that the Internet would become as great a phenomena as it has been. Given the explosive growth of the medium took MS almost completely by surprise, they rushed to develop IE, and Netscape continued to kick their butts until they "leverag[ed] their OS advantage," I find this completely incredulous.
I am not an attorney. This is not intended to constitute legal advice. This passage provides food for thought, though: Digital Millenium Copyright Act Section 1201 5F (f) REVERSE ENGINEERING.--(1) Notwithstanding the provi-sions of subsection (a)(1)(A), a person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent a techno-logical measure that effectively controls access to a particular por-tion of that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyz-ing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and that have not previously been readily available to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the extent any such acts of identification and analysis do not constitute infringement under this title.
It has nothing to do with age or a slowness to accept technology.
Members of Congress simply do not have the staff to answer non-constituent e-mail. As they are in many cases unable to discern what comes from constituents and what doesn't, they will only reply to e-mail if the sender provides a postal address inside their constituency.
You try responding to thousands of e-mails a week about an equally diverse number of topics. A U.S. Senator has a staff of about 40, a U.S. Representative has a much much smaller staff on average. This staff not only has to answer all the mail but track all the legislation, keep the member's schedule, etc.
Even though these e-mails are not responded to they are read.
Further, e-mail is still easily forged and many are concerned about the political implications of a forged e-mail circulated to large numbers of their constituents. They feel the best way to repudiate these forgeries before they happen is to have the policy they only respond by postal mail.
There has been talking of implementing digital signatures, but most officies are not ready to do this yet.
Last Spring you testified before Congress and met the Vice President among other policy actors, do our nation's policymakers have a clue about how to govern technology?
Slashdot Mirror
I went to a techfair sponsored by a group of computer and media companies. The hit of the event was an area where kids could take fingerpaintings, drawings, etc. and scan them in to make webpages. Then post them to the Internet. You might try that one day.
I don't think this was a decision really about Internet porn, but rather affirming that government agencies have the same rights as employers that private organizations do. These same agencies could be held liable under "hostile workplace" sexual harassment claims and therefore have an interest in ensuring pornography does not enter the workplace.
The best fair use example I have seen of what would be a violation of the DMCA anticircumvention was provided by Nandy in reply comments to the Copyright Office. At http://www.loc.gov/copyright/1201/comments/reply/1 13nandy.pdf
He writes that vendors for medical databases omit export functions for data so hospitals and doctors are stuck using their software. At times they either have to abandon their data or hire a programmer to crack the database so the data can be exported to another platform or whent he software vendor goes out of business. This is a violation of the anticircumvention provision, but one the author feels is necessary to save lives.
Does anyone else find it ironic Berkman has chosen to stream and archive a debate on the merits of open code and the need to loosen copyright in a proprietary Realvideo format which cannot be downloaded, or copied, or time-shifted? Mind you I'm still glad to see it, I just wish it was an MPEG.
I can't believe it. IP laws in this country are out of control.
The sample is self selected and way too small to be in any way reliable. The data collected is completely useless and could easily have been obtained by chance or bias.
Such a conspiracy would require the NSA or MS to have some clue as to the course of electronic communications, and that the Internet would become as great a phenomena as it has been. Given the explosive growth of the medium took MS almost completely by surprise, they rushed to develop IE, and Netscape continued to kick their butts until they "leverag[ed] their OS advantage," I find this completely incredulous.
I am not an attorney. This is not intended to constitute legal advice. This passage provides food for thought, though: Digital Millenium Copyright Act Section 1201 5F (f) REVERSE ENGINEERING.--(1) Notwithstanding the provi-sions of subsection (a)(1)(A), a person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent a techno-logical measure that effectively controls access to a particular por-tion of that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyz-ing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and that have not previously been readily available to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the extent any such acts of identification and analysis do not constitute infringement under this title.
It has nothing to do with age or a slowness to accept technology.
Members of Congress simply do not have the staff to answer non-constituent e-mail. As they are in many cases unable to discern what comes from constituents and what doesn't, they will only reply to e-mail if the sender provides a postal address inside their constituency.
You try responding to thousands of e-mails a week about an equally diverse number of topics. A U.S. Senator has a staff of about 40, a U.S. Representative has a much much smaller staff on average. This staff not only has to answer all the mail but track all the legislation, keep the member's schedule, etc.
Even though these e-mails are not responded to they are read.
Further, e-mail is still easily forged and many are concerned about the political implications of a forged e-mail circulated to large numbers of their constituents. They feel the best way to repudiate these forgeries before they happen is to have the policy they only respond by postal mail.
There has been talking of implementing digital signatures, but most officies are not ready to do this yet.
Last Spring you testified before Congress and met the Vice President among other policy actors, do our nation's policymakers have a clue about how to govern technology?