Over the 95 years of copyright, the music publishers have already done that, employing thousands of songwriters to write the estimated 9 million songs in the collective catalogs of BMI, ASCAP, and SESAC. In my journal, I've predicted how this could cause a chilling effect on songwriting.
Copyright isn't about ideas. It's about the expression of ideas
There are also a limited number of expressions.
temporary monopoly
Temporary? Ha. Not as long as DIS is listed on NYSE.
Copyright is supposed to be about a reward system as a means to an end, the end being "to promote the progress of science and useful arts" (U.S. Const. I.8.8). The entertainment industry puppets in the USA and EU legislatures have contorted it into something else.
I don't think the User-Agent header cuts it
on
Open Source Law
·
· Score: 1
when I said that I meant "standard desktop web browsers".
I'd call those "visual web browsers for PCs". To me the term "standard" means only that a given product implements a given specification.
A simple answer is to switch on information in the User-Agent HTTP header.
OK, so you're using User-Agent to negotiate a media type. That would work for browsers dedicated to a given medium. However, some browsers such as Mozilla can be made to support multiple media, and the User-agent: header doesn't always reflect this. How would you handle, say, Mozilla running in an 800x600 window (@media screen) vs. Mozilla running in a 512x384 window (@media tv) vs. Mozilla running in a 240x160 window (@media handheld) vs. Mozilla running in an 8.5" by 11" high-resolution window with discrete pages (@media print)? How would you handle wget? How would you handle a caching proxy? I understand the basics of what you're doing with server-side XSLT switched on HTTP User-Agent, but unless the browser sends some sort of X-Accept-Media request header akin to HTTP's Accept, Accept-Encoding, and Accept-Language headers, I wouldn't know what to switch on.
The point I've wanted to make so far is: what makes a table layout better than a CSS layout? Do you use <font> as well?
I define a "web browser" as a program that can download pages via HTTP and render HTML into something human-perceivable. Not all web browsers are visual web browsers. Or am I degrading this discussion into a question of semantics?
If you want content on other devices, you need to re-render it as something else specific for that target
CSS supports @media selectors to do just that. You can get different selectors for a text browser ('tty'), a WebTV style device ('tv' and 'projection'), IE/Mozilla ('screen' and 'print'), a speech browser ('aural'), a Braille browser ('braille' and 'embossed'), a PDA ('handheld'), etc.
A good solution is to represent data in XML and use XSLT or similar technology to render specifically for your target platform. Note that many browsers even have this functionality (XSLT) built in.
You sing the praises of table layout, but most web browsers that support XSLT also support CSS. Would you really want to generate a table layout using client-side XSLT? And how through HTTP would your server know which server-side XSLT script to use?
As far as I know, most viruses in their execution work using common OS scripts and commands.
As far as I know, most Windows viruses can't spread without either 1. opening an outgoing connection on SMTP's port, 2. telling Outlook to open an outgoing connection on SMTP's port, or 3. opening executables installed by the administrator for writing. Not giving unknown programs the capability to do this would stop viruses from spreading. This is possible even in a Windows environment: don't allow unknown programs to open connections to ports they have no business with (e.g. only Postfix should open an SMTP session), don't give users the right to overwrite files outside of the temp directory and the user's home directory, and run executable e-mail attachments as the Guest user.
Acrobat's facing pages view will often make the text so small and render it with so few pixels as to make it unreadable with the affordable displays of today.
[Adobe] is not responsible for the PDF files that are produced by its customers.
I agree that gun makers don't kill people. Still, I'd like to point out that just as makers of dangerous devices include copious warnings in the manuals, Adobe's manual writers could have warned users that fully restricted PDF files will often interfere with assistive technologies and prove less useful to people with vision problems.
Non-discrimination laws vs the blind only apply to some countries (AFAIK USA and -- maybe -- Spain).
If what I've read about the Disability Discrimination Act of 1995 is accurate, count the UK in as well.
But using tables for formatting is perfectly acceptable, as it consistently and clearly works, has always worked... Get over it, it works.
Does table-based visual formatting work with non-visual display methods such as a voice interface? Does it work well on a handheld device with a 240x160 pixel screen?
How long before partially-sighted people start complaining that thumbnails discriminate against them and demand full-size images? Will the court protect that under the Americans With Disabilities Act?
No. Assistive technologies are commonplace that magnify the thumbnail but still do not produce an image that can reasonably substitute for what the photographer is trying to sell.
What I want, and what I know many other people want, is an 802.11g driver.
Many makers of 802.11g cards cannot lawfully provide such a driver under various radio frequency emission regulations. Because it's more expensive to build interlocks that prevent over-powered transmissions in hardware than in software, many cards implement the interlocks only in the driver. This makes it a bit harder to justify getting FCC approval for a driver for each platform.
Linksys has one. They choose not to release it?
Is it Linksys's choice, or is the Federal Communications Commission's choice to delay approval?
If I didn't believe Hormel's claims as to the ingredients of SPAM luncheon meat, I'd get a lawyer and take Hormel to court for false labeling of ingredients.
In a way, a Microsoft Windows system has always been a UNIX clone.
on the one hand: MS-DOS 2 was Microsoft's attempt at a "transition" from DOS to its XENIX operating system. It failed, but it did introduce several UNIX features to the PC DOS platform, such as subdirectories, file handle semantics, named devices, pipes, and redirection of input and output to a file. Another transition from DOS tech to multiuser tech (Windows to OS/2) failed at first but, when tried again several years later (Windows ME to XP Home Edition), ultimately succeeded for the most part.
on the other hand: Windows is a Mac OS clone. Windows XP is a Mac OS X clone *cough*Luna skin*cough*. Mac OS X runs on top of a FreeBSD-derived core called Darwin, which adheres to the most visible parts of the Single UNIX Specification.
on the gripping hand: Though the kernel of the Microsoft Windows NT operating system was designed along the same lines as that of Digital's VMS operating system, NT has always contained a(n admittedly crappy) POSIX compatibility layer. Microsoft sells an upgrade called Services For UNIX that enhances the POSIX layer with BSD and GNU power.
Approximate summary of a possible cease-and-desist letter from Siemens's counsel:
The trouble you're having in reverse-engineering the.si3 file format is part of SDMI, the Secure Digital Music Initiative. The format is a technological measure that controls access to a copyrighted musical work. If you are not a songwriter or a publisher, you have no business playing loose with copying copyrighted works embodied in.si3 files. If, on the other hand, you are a songwriter,
you're screwed anyway.
Is it supposed to cause certain groups of people to turn their noses up at this? What group would that be?
How about the "I'm not going to cite this book in a bibliography because I cite only works that I would recommend to fellow professionals, who by the way do not appreciate obscene humor in the context of their jobs" group?
I can't think of any group or person with that reaction who would be of the inclination to reverse engineer things.
You mean like Compaq? Lots of Big Corporations(tm) reverse-engineer their competitors' products in order to learn how to interoperate. Such reverse engineering is exempt to an extent from the DMCA's circumvention ban (17 USC 1201) when under the supervision of an entity that can fund a legal defense.
Zip works fine, but if you're aiming for 100% cross-platform, tarballs are king.
Info-ZIP UnZip is claimed to be the third most portable C program.
Tarballs are used on every Unix and Unix clone OS in existence, not just Linux.
Microsoft Windows ME and Microsoft Windows XP operating systems ship with Microsoft Compressed Folders, a feature that can read and write.zip files in a manner similar to that of WinZip and WinRAR but cannot make head nor tail of.tar.gz files.
The GNU Emacs 21.3 source distribution is about 20 MB in size. I could probably fit Emacs, GCC, Binutils, and Fileutils source code along with binaries for popular architectures on one normal sized 700 MB CD-R disc.
my Plextor 16x CDRW for three years... has never made a single coaster
So you never tried to backup Roller Coaster Tycoon? Or did the copy protection make such backups fail?
</joke> (coaster == CD-R disc destroyed by a failure in a CD recorder)
I've had a PlexWriter 12/10/32A for three years as well, and it doesn't destroy discs because it has a BURN-Proof feature that turns off the laser in event of a Buffer UnderRuN.
Software sound font support is not a proprietary thing anymore. Any program using the Allegro library can use Gravis-format sound fonts; the web site has a tool to convert.sf2 format to Gravis format.
Slashdot Mirror
Over the 95 years of copyright, the music publishers have already done that, employing thousands of songwriters to write the estimated 9 million songs in the collective catalogs of BMI, ASCAP, and SESAC. In my journal, I've predicted how this could cause a chilling effect on songwriting.
Copyright isn't about ideas. It's about the expression of ideas
There are also a limited number of expressions.
temporary monopoly
Temporary? Ha. Not as long as DIS is listed on NYSE.
Copyright is supposed to be about a reward system as a means to an end, the end being "to promote the progress of science and useful arts" (U.S. Const. I.8.8). The entertainment industry puppets in the USA and EU legislatures have contorted it into something else.
when I said that I meant "standard desktop web browsers".
I'd call those "visual web browsers for PCs". To me the term "standard" means only that a given product implements a given specification.
A simple answer is to switch on information in the User-Agent HTTP header.
OK, so you're using User-Agent to negotiate a media type. That would work for browsers dedicated to a given medium. However, some browsers such as Mozilla can be made to support multiple media, and the User-agent: header doesn't always reflect this. How would you handle, say, Mozilla running in an 800x600 window (@media screen) vs. Mozilla running in a 512x384 window (@media tv) vs. Mozilla running in a 240x160 window (@media handheld) vs. Mozilla running in an 8.5" by 11" high-resolution window with discrete pages (@media print)? How would you handle wget? How would you handle a caching proxy? I understand the basics of what you're doing with server-side XSLT switched on HTTP User-Agent, but unless the browser sends some sort of X-Accept-Media request header akin to HTTP's Accept, Accept-Encoding, and Accept-Language headers, I wouldn't know what to switch on.
The point I've wanted to make so far is: what makes a table layout better than a CSS layout? Do you use <font> as well?
web pages work on web browsers.
I define a "web browser" as a program that can download pages via HTTP and render HTML into something human-perceivable. Not all web browsers are visual web browsers. Or am I degrading this discussion into a question of semantics?
If you want content on other devices, you need to re-render it as something else specific for that target
CSS supports @media selectors to do just that. You can get different selectors for a text browser ('tty'), a WebTV style device ('tv' and 'projection'), IE/Mozilla ('screen' and 'print'), a speech browser ('aural'), a Braille browser ('braille' and 'embossed'), a PDA ('handheld'), etc.
A good solution is to represent data in XML and use XSLT or similar technology to render specifically for your target platform. Note that many browsers even have this functionality (XSLT) built in.
You sing the praises of table layout, but most web browsers that support XSLT also support CSS. Would you really want to generate a table layout using client-side XSLT? And how through HTTP would your server know which server-side XSLT script to use?
As far as I know, most viruses in their execution work using common OS scripts and commands.
As far as I know, most Windows viruses can't spread without either 1. opening an outgoing connection on SMTP's port, 2. telling Outlook to open an outgoing connection on SMTP's port, or 3. opening executables installed by the administrator for writing. Not giving unknown programs the capability to do this would stop viruses from spreading. This is possible even in a Windows environment: don't allow unknown programs to open connections to ports they have no business with (e.g. only Postfix should open an SMTP session), don't give users the right to overwrite files outside of the temp directory and the user's home directory, and run executable e-mail attachments as the Guest user.
Acrobat's facing pages view will often make the text so small and render it with so few pixels as to make it unreadable with the affordable displays of today.
[Adobe] is not responsible for the PDF files that are produced by its customers.
I agree that gun makers don't kill people. Still, I'd like to point out that just as makers of dangerous devices include copious warnings in the manuals, Adobe's manual writers could have warned users that fully restricted PDF files will often interfere with assistive technologies and prove less useful to people with vision problems.
Non-discrimination laws vs the blind only apply to some countries (AFAIK USA and -- maybe -- Spain).
If what I've read about the Disability Discrimination Act of 1995 is accurate, count the UK in as well.
But using tables for formatting is perfectly acceptable, as it consistently and clearly works, has always worked ... Get over it, it works.
Does table-based visual formatting work with non-visual display methods such as a voice interface? Does it work well on a handheld device with a 240x160 pixel screen?
PHB tells you "Flip burgers." No hesitation.
How long before partially-sighted people start complaining that thumbnails discriminate against them and demand full-size images? Will the court protect that under the Americans With Disabilities Act?
No. Assistive technologies are commonplace that magnify the thumbnail but still do not produce an image that can reasonably substitute for what the photographer is trying to sell.
And who enforces the Sherman Antitrust Act? Microsoft got off on Sherman Act charges with just a slap on the wrist.
This is a development version, it's an odd numbered release for crying out loud.
You refer to the version numbering rules used by the developers of the Linux kernel. Does Apache follow the numbering scheme of Linux?
We distort. You comply.
News with as many holes as Windows.
You've got news!
They probably haven't and won't release it, even as binary-only, because they'd rather license it to Linksys for an additional fee.
Would it be possible for the public to pony up such a fee through PayPal? Is the domain 11g-ransom.org available?
What I want, and what I know many other people want, is an 802.11g driver.
Many makers of 802.11g cards cannot lawfully provide such a driver under various radio frequency emission regulations. Because it's more expensive to build interlocks that prevent over-powered transmissions in hardware than in software, many cards implement the interlocks only in the driver. This makes it a bit harder to justify getting FCC approval for a driver for each platform.
Linksys has one. They choose not to release it?
Is it Linksys's choice, or is the Federal Communications Commission's choice to delay approval?
I've read that Jim Carrey managed to mate a bulldog with a shih tzu. He called it a "bullshit".
If I didn't believe Hormel's claims as to the ingredients of SPAM luncheon meat, I'd get a lawyer and take Hormel to court for false labeling of ingredients.
In a way, a Microsoft Windows system has always been a UNIX clone.
on the one hand: MS-DOS 2 was Microsoft's attempt at a "transition" from DOS to its XENIX operating system. It failed, but it did introduce several UNIX features to the PC DOS platform, such as subdirectories, file handle semantics, named devices, pipes, and redirection of input and output to a file. Another transition from DOS tech to multiuser tech (Windows to OS/2) failed at first but, when tried again several years later (Windows ME to XP Home Edition), ultimately succeeded for the most part.
on the other hand: Windows is a Mac OS clone. Windows XP is a Mac OS X clone *cough*Luna skin*cough*. Mac OS X runs on top of a FreeBSD-derived core called Darwin, which adheres to the most visible parts of the Single UNIX Specification.
on the gripping hand: Though the kernel of the Microsoft Windows NT operating system was designed along the same lines as that of Digital's VMS operating system, NT has always contained a(n admittedly crappy) POSIX compatibility layer. Microsoft sells an upgrade called Services For UNIX that enhances the POSIX layer with BSD and GNU power.
Approximate summary of a possible cease-and-desist letter from Siemens's counsel:
Is it supposed to cause certain groups of people to turn their noses up at this? What group would that be?
How about the "I'm not going to cite this book in a bibliography because I cite only works that I would recommend to fellow professionals, who by the way do not appreciate obscene humor in the context of their jobs" group?
I can't think of any group or person with that reaction who would be of the inclination to reverse engineer things.
You mean like Compaq? Lots of Big Corporations(tm) reverse-engineer their competitors' products in order to learn how to interoperate. Such reverse engineering is exempt to an extent from the DMCA's circumvention ban (17 USC 1201) when under the supervision of an entity that can fund a legal defense.
Zip works fine, but if you're aiming for 100% cross-platform, tarballs are king.
Info-ZIP UnZip is claimed to be the third most portable C program.
Tarballs are used on every Unix and Unix clone OS in existence, not just Linux.
Microsoft Windows ME and Microsoft Windows XP operating systems ship with Microsoft Compressed Folders, a feature that can read and write .zip files in a manner similar to that of WinZip and WinRAR but cannot make head nor tail of .tar.gz files.
The GNU Emacs 21.3 source distribution is about 20 MB in size. I could probably fit Emacs, GCC, Binutils, and Fileutils source code along with binaries for popular architectures on one normal sized 700 MB CD-R disc.
GNOME, on the other hand...
my Plextor 16x CDRW for three years ... has never made a single coaster
So you never tried to backup Roller Coaster Tycoon? Or did the copy protection make such backups fail?
</joke> (coaster == CD-R disc destroyed by a failure in a CD recorder)
I've had a PlexWriter 12/10/32A for three years as well, and it doesn't destroy discs because it has a BURN-Proof feature that turns off the laser in event of a Buffer UnderRuN.
OK, so you might be right about the religion of Bengali speakers. But are Islamic fundie groups strong in Bangladesh?
I know soundfonts might be a proprietary thing
Software sound font support is not a proprietary thing anymore. Any program using the Allegro library can use Gravis-format sound fonts; the web site has a tool to convert .sf2 format to Gravis format.