Add to the linux copyright a prohibition on running any code which constitutes a "system protecting a copyrighted work" as defined by the DMCA.
I.e. if you consider your DRM system to be a "system protecting a copyrighted work" as defined by the DMCA, you may not run it on Linux. Acceptance of the license would mean you agree anything you run would not constitute such a system. If the DRM code license prohibits this, then you are simply forbidden from using it (just as the GPL forbids using another licenses restrictions to circumvent its own).
Then we could release patches, since we wouldn't have to worry about circumvention of an access control system which itself is in violation of the Linux license.
Of course, with Kaplan on the bench, we do have to worry. He could just ignore the illegality of the protection system like he ignored fair use. Just requires the RIAA/MPAA/BSA/SPA/IFPI/WIPO to write a big enough check.
Firstly, I think the DMCA and the assault on our fair use rights through law and technology is wrong.
However, if the RIAA decided to allow copying of a CD quality stream off an enhanced CD and copy protected just the enhanced part of it (i.e. anything about 2 channels, 44.1 KHz sample rate and 16 bit samples), I could probably live with it as a matter of practicality.
That is enough for me. I'd still like my freedom back however...
It would set a dangerous precedent, but on the other hand, a lone guy putting the squeeze on Ebay with a patent might well persuade many with money (and power) to abolish or restrict software and business model patents.
It could be the beginning of the end of these ridiculous patents if the "big boys" see themselves getting squeezed.
Companies are laying off US programmers so they can get slave labor (H1-Bs).
Unfair to the US worker, AND unfair to the H1-B, who is made to do anything the employer wants (like work 100 hour weeks for $10/hour) or risk getting fired and deported.
Summary judgement FOR the defendant does not pose a constitutional problem.
Of course, the civil court system ignores the Constitution and other laws of the land (such as the DMCA exemptions listed RIGHT IN the DMCA itself in the DeCSS case) on a daily basis. So if you are a defendant and lose via summary judgement, you're going down.
Even if you have good lawyers if you "threaten the system", you are very likely to lose and even be ordered to pay for your own persecution. Again, look at the DeCSS 2600 case.
Sometimes, the accounting overhead costs more than the thing is worth.
Very true. For example, the New York City subway pays as much to pay for the expenses of fare collection as it actually collects in fares. Making the subway free wouldn't hurt the bottom line, except for the fact they'd lose federal matching funds for the fares - so they have to throw money down a hole to get money from the Feds.
Las Vegas local phone calls are free. They probably save money on NOT billing.
Of course, that's all assuming your phone isn't hacked.
Slashdot Mirror
Check out ;)
Spherical Cows.
Rule 2:
;)
Don't try this on an airplane.
Open source requires the user be given certain rights, not just access to the source.
Keep your Stallmanesque ranting about "free software" versus "open source" out of the rest of the Linux community, it is divisive.
In other words, he is a Republican...
It all depends on the type of corporations we have.
Gov't isn't the big threat. It is a threat mostly when it is being a hired bully for the corps.
If a "Gattaca" future becomes a reality, it will be the corporations, not the gov't, pushing for it and implementing it.
It doesn't matter if the gov't doesn't oppress you but no one will hire you, you'll starve anyway.
Hey!
;) ;)
That's the code for the smallpox virus.
Gonna have to call the Department of Homeland Security... And I thought DMCA violations would be the worst of what I'd find on Slashdot.
Possible solution:
Add to the linux copyright a prohibition on running any code which constitutes a "system protecting a copyrighted work" as defined by the DMCA.
I.e. if you consider your DRM system to be a "system protecting a copyrighted work" as defined by the DMCA, you may not run it on Linux. Acceptance of the license would mean you agree anything you run would not constitute such a system. If the DRM code license prohibits this, then you are simply forbidden from using it (just as the GPL forbids using another licenses restrictions to circumvent its own).
Then we could release patches, since we wouldn't have to worry about circumvention of an access control system which itself is in violation of the Linux license.
Of course, with Kaplan on the bench, we do have to worry. He could just ignore the illegality of the protection system like he ignored fair use. Just requires the RIAA/MPAA/BSA/SPA/IFPI/WIPO to write a big enough check.
UCITA is a civil law, not criminal, and it certainly doesn't define any new felonies as far as I know.
Humans can't hear phase distortion.
sin(kx)+sin(2kx+a) will sound the same no matter what
value of "a" you choose.
He should change his name to Mohammed Atta or Osama Bin Laden and he'd get right in.
They gave a visa to Mohammed Atta well after the September 11 attacks...
And plus, a terrorist isn't considered as much of a threat as someone that might give back fair use to the people...
Yeah, frequencies over the limit of hearing can cause nausea. (doesn't sound cool to me)
;)
Then again, so can normal frequencies when listening to Brittney Spears.
How many ears do you have?
But, you must admit, playing a DVD-audio of Britney Spears would make a good insect repellent.
Firstly, I think the DMCA and the assault on our fair use rights through law and technology is wrong.
However, if the RIAA decided to allow copying of a CD quality stream off an enhanced CD and copy protected just the enhanced part of it (i.e. anything about 2 channels, 44.1 KHz sample rate and 16 bit samples), I could probably live with it as a matter of practicality.
That is enough for me. I'd still like my freedom back however...
CDs are 44.1 KHz. That means frequencies up to 22050 Hz can be represented.
No human can hear above 20000 Hz.
So a higher sample rate is superfluous.
And a 16 bit quantization is essentially perfect for all music except that with an extreme dynamic range, and even then, only if you are anal.
The 96 KHz sample rate on DVD audio is insane. And as for 5:1 surround sound, please note humans only have 2 ears...
Are you smarter than RMS? Ok, this one here's subjective; but I doubt most of the people criticizing RMS have an IQ of 170.
And an emotional IQ of 17. Oh wait, this is Slashdot... :)
All the innovation is in the commercial sector?!
Are you on crack?!
Look at the Network UPS Tools. They are way more innovative than any commercial product performing a similar function.
In that case, he should be expelled (and shot) for even using MySQL in the first place. ;)
:)
Now if he were using PostgreSQL that would be a different story.
Cool, let's do that with laws.
Then I can get you arrested for something that isn't even in violation of any law.
He did indeed stop, however he refused to sign a document that said he was a criminal.
Not admitting to a violation is not the same as continuing in the behavior which was considered a violation.
The First Amendment also guarantees him the right to bitch about it and claim he had a right to do it.
It would set a dangerous precedent, but on the other hand, a lone guy putting the squeeze on Ebay with a patent might well persuade many with money (and power) to abolish or restrict software and business model patents.
It could be the beginning of the end of these ridiculous patents if the "big boys" see themselves getting squeezed.
Unless you are an H1-B they are still numbered.
Companies are laying off US programmers so they can get slave labor (H1-Bs).
Unfair to the US worker, AND unfair to the H1-B, who is made to do anything the employer wants (like work 100 hour weeks for $10/hour) or risk getting fired and deported.
Funny you should mention that.
CDROMS can't exceed about 50x-60x speeds.
At faster speeds, the G-forces will deform them to the point where they are unreadable. This was discovered by Philips.
See:
http://www.xiph.org/paranoia/faq.htm
It is completely unconstitutional for a defendant to lose without being allowed to have a trial.
See the 7th Amendment
Summary judgement FOR the defendant does not pose a constitutional problem.
Of course, the civil court system ignores the Constitution and other laws of the land (such as the DMCA exemptions listed RIGHT IN the DMCA itself in the DeCSS case) on a daily basis. So if you are a defendant and lose via summary judgement, you're going down.
Even if you have good lawyers if you "threaten the system", you are very likely to lose and even be ordered to pay for your own persecution. Again, look at the DeCSS 2600 case.
Sometimes, the accounting overhead costs more than the thing is worth.
Very true. For example, the New York City subway pays as much to pay for the expenses of fare collection as it actually collects in fares. Making the subway free wouldn't hurt the bottom line, except for the fact they'd lose federal matching funds for the fares - so they have to throw money down a hole to get money from the Feds.
Las Vegas local phone calls are free. They probably save money on NOT billing.
Of course, that's all assuming your phone isn't hacked.