Got my ENGL degree and some honors crap on acid. Nothing like acing an honors class while watching miniature "Apocalypse Now"-style helicopter assaults taking place on the discussion table.
This article (which I nearly passed over) caused me to think a bit about the parallels between computer users and their operating systems & radio operators and their use of equipment.
I've always viewed my friends who are especially into Linux and ham radio (Rob Carlson -- radio callsign KC2AEI -- is one friend of mine who's fluent in both fields) as advanced hobbyists, the type of folks who might have scoured mall Radio Shacks for 6.5536 mhz crystals and dabbled in Heathkit catelogues several decades ago. Tinkerers, in other words, passionate about tweaking the miniscule component constituents of their electronics to achieve a personal, customized result.
On the other hand, the similarities between radio "consumers" and Windows users are too tempting not to make. Unlike the Linux/ham radio enthusiasts, these folks operate their store-bought PCs/radio receivers as black boxes, strictly according to the design intended by the devices' manufacturer and rarely cracking open cases out of curiousity. Of course, I'm painting w/ a broad metaphorical brush here, lumping swaths of individuals into overly generalized categories.
I've always found it intriguing how actions on behalf of the US Trade Representative against parallel importation (a.k.a. "the gray market") flies in the face of the current U.S. administration's professed loyalty to the merits of a global "free market."
In my opinion, a thriving gray market -- where consumers seek out cheaper products/services in other districts/countries -- is evidence of a healthy, competitive global economy.
Good point, Axxackall. When I referred to Unix as a "common platform," I was admittedly painting with a broad brush.
Speaking of updates for OSX, I've been pleased a number of ibook/Powerbook wielding staff members (seems as if every other sysadmin has at least one) have been happily using Fink, which closely resembles one of my favorite Linux utilities -- Debian's apt-get.
BusinessWeek might have a point regarding the declining presence of Macs in K-12 computer labs as school officials turn towards a "single platform" for educational computing.
I work at the IT office of a state-run public university that focuses on research. UMBC's 24-hour student computer labs contain hundreds of terminals with a variety of hardware/OS configurations (PCs, Macs [ranging from G3/4s to eMacs] and a smattering of SGI Indigos/Indys dating back to the mid 90's, when the state budget allowed for such purchases).
Gradually, our student terminals -- PCs and Mac -- are shifting towards a "common platform": Unix. Our Macs are being upgraded to OSX, and each PC (most are Dell Optiplex GX-110s, GX150s and newer 270s) can be booted into either Windows 2000 or a customized RedHat lab image.
Re:$12 CHEAPER at Amazon!!!
on
Absolute OpenBSD
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I've noticed that a number of posters have regularly commented on the inevitable Barnes & Noble links that accompany Slashdot book reviews.
Although I don't have any moral objections to any arrangements made between Slashdot and one particular online retailer, I feel that any website that purports to be in the business of disseminating "news" ought to be obligated to voluntarily divulge any links to for-profit enterprises that appear appended to articles and reviews.
While an arrangement between Slashdot and Barnes & Nobel might not necessarily alter the objectivity of an article/review, it introduces some interesting questions. For instance, does Slashdot receive compensation for links to Barnes & Nobel merchandise appearing in published reviews? Would Slashdot turn down a reader submitted book review if a book was sold by Amazon -- but not stocked or sold by Barnes & Noble?
Again, there isn't anything inherently wrong (in my mind) with Slashdot consistently linking to one retailer's products. However, if Slashdot readers consistently ask about the nature of any alleged relation between the Slashdot news site and another company, then perhaps Slashdot editors should make an effort to disclose any relevant details.
After you've read through a dozen EULAs and TOS (Terms of Service) Agreements, you'll realize that the vast majority of shrinkwrap/clickwrap adhesion contracts are substantially similar.
Most tech journalists fail to understand this -- evidenced by the ever-popular "New EULA Disclaims Implied Warranty of Merchantability!" articles.
Most EULAs do not contain new, inventive or clever language. After all, they're essentially standard form contracts -- otherwise known as boilerplate -- meaning that one choice of forum/ anti-reverse engineering clause looks pretty much like another.
I spent around a year (while at the Consumer Project on Technology) sifting through EULAs and contract related law, such as UCITA. Occaisionally, I would find an odd clause that appeared particularly draconian. I archived a few of those here.
The EULA clauses I found most fascinating were the ones that: 1. purported to limit benchmarks/criticism of a software title (McAfee), 2. Specified favorable choice of law/forum jurisdictions, 3. attempted to squelch parodies of a software publisher's title (Microsoft).
(yeah, I was the guy that submitted the previous, EULA harvesting Slashdot article). If you want any help dealing w/ EULAs, drop me a line.
"Here in the west, tech. is controlled by we, the people."
I'm really interested in knowing how, exactly, you arrived at that comfortable little conclusion. Did "we the people" draft the DMCA/UCITA/RIP (in Britain) to represent and protect our interests? Did "we the people" pass such shortsighted legislation into law by popular referendum?
"I guess that Orwell didn't predict the geek... Maybe he was just wrong about the POWER of the geek." (spelling corrected)
Your post seems to reference some unspecified, inherent ability of "the geek" to circumvent any use of technology to limit freedom. While such a reductively Katzian assertion of geek power is heartening, it is hardly grounded in political reality. When's the last time you wrote a letter to your elected representative? Organized a protest? Sat across a table from a government official and explained your views? Some geeks regularly engage in such activities -- but not enough. Orwell may have failed to predict the "power" of the geek. But he certainly didn't misunderstand the inertia of comfortable complacency.
Then again, your curious notion of controlling technology seems to hinge on a group's ability to acquire or purchase technological products. In other words, you seem to equate a complex concept --"technology" -- with a tangible good, such as a stereo or CD-RW drive. Hate to burst your bubble, pal, but your ability to buy consumer electronics has very, very little to do with your ability to exercise control what you can -- and cannot do with said technology.
Sincerely,
I Spent a Few Weeks in Seoul...
on
Net-Nexus Seoul
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
in the summer of '99, after flying Korean Air in from Jakarta. I showed up at a surprisingly sanitary $10-night youth hostel w/ no knowledge of the Korean language or culture (even though I'm 1/2 Korean).
After wandering around the city, I found a well-stocked Internet cafe that sold decent coffee and fairly decent cigarettes (Mild Sevens). The per-hour price wasn't bad, and it wasn't exactly difficult to master the Korean language keyboards. This particular cafe was classy, boasting a waxed wood floor and decorative plants. The drop-down Windows "run" menus of its 3-4 PCs were full of Ivy League servers, vestiges of touring American bluebloods.
Unfortunately, this particular cafe shuttered relatively early in the evening. Later in the night (when I wasn't occupied w/ meetings), I'd frequent an entirely different sort of Internet cafe accessible through a alleyway door and a staircase. This dim, windowless cafe was crammed wall-to-wall with high end PCs -- almost all manned by a stooped Korean teens mesmerized by StarCraft. For some reason, the beefy proprietor always waved away my cash, never accepting any of my proferred payment.
I haven't thought about Korean Internet cafes (or posted to slashdot) for some time, until encountering this article. Good to be back, and props to the trollaxor crew.
um...hemos?
on
ACM vs. RIAA
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Just a minor quibble, but did you intend to include a "Patent Pending" icon along w/ this story?
Last time I checked, the RIAA was in the business of copyright enforcement.
Perhaps/. should whip up a generic, catch-all Intellectual Property icon. Or, better yet, individual icons and sections to reflect the different facets of IP protection - patent, copyright, trademark, and sui generis (so-called one of a kind protections, like those covering databases in the EU).
I posted the above comment originally at 2. A little while afterwards, it had been moderated up +1 to 3, Insightful.
Around 10 minutes later (around 3:03), the moderation attached to my comment was down to 2, Insightful.
However, there was no evidence any change in moderation had actually occured: i.e., my total karma didn't decrease by one, and I didn't see any -1 overated/troll/flamebait, etc. attached to the comment, which is usually the case when a comment is moderated down.
What gives? I've been using/. for a while, and I've never seen anything like this phenomona before.
IBM is one of the prime beneficiaries of the US PTO's controversial (especially in the free-software community) practice of extending patent protection to software.
Now, I'm a happy consumer of several IBM products. I'm not seeking to question the validity of the Big Blue intellectual property vault, nor am I doubting IBM's ability to develop innovative products.
I've looked at several of your corporation's software patents. In my humble, uneducated opinion, patents such as these (and others) owned by IBM might conceivably either be enforced against, or hinder (just by their existence, prima facie validity and the implied, interpreted threat of an infringement suit)the work of a free-software developer.
We've heard what Bruce Perens has to say about software patents. I'd like to ask you just how far is IBM willing to go in embracing Linux and/or the free-software movement? Specifically, is IBM willing to take a hard look at its patent practices, and potentially committ to sharing its intellectual property with free software developers?
For the record, the first time IPIX threatened Mr. Dersch (in 1999), it was over a specious claim of alleged copyright infringement.
IPIX has been involved in several tangled intellectual-property disputes. In '97, IPIX went after the Live Picture Corporation for patent infringement, and eventually secured an out-of-court settlement resulting in Live Picture's agreement to stop using fisheye lenses.
IPIX was also the defendant in a March 2000 patent infringement suit involving alleged willful infringement of U.S. patent 5,903,782 concerning "spherical visual technology".
If anyone is interested, I threw up a page a while back that contains more information about IPIX-related intellectual property disputes.
Here's why I think anti-reverse engineering clauses in shrinkwrapped licenses are insidious.
Theoretically, your assertion about contracts is valid. The legal term "contract" means "meeting of the minds."
However, in the case of mass-market, boilerplate shrinkwrapped EULAs, there really isn't any meeting of the minds. If I download or purchase software as a consumer, I don't sit across the table from the software publisher's lawyers and hammer out a mutually agreeable resolution. EULAs are considered "contracts of adhesion" -- meaning they're unilateral, take-it-or-leave-it "agreements".
Before shooting your mouth off about "communists", why don't you take a look at a few software EULAs (I've put up a few here).
Even though reverse-engineering (for the most part, DMCA excluded) may be a legally-sanctioned practice in the US, UCITA has a sinister way of blocking it.
Specifically, UCITA gives software publishers wide lattitude to create so-called "contractual use restrictions" -- such as the "no reverse engineering, decompilation, etc" clauses that appear in most EULAs.
Since anyone using a EULA'ed program "agrees" to the terms of the license agreement, reverse engineering becomes not a matter of copyright, but a contractual issue.
Interesting that VirtualDub is enmeshed in yet another Intellectual Property dispute. In 2000, Avery Lee (the creator of VirtualDub)was forced to remove support for Microsoft's patented ASF (Active Stream Format) file format from his GPL'd program. Apparently, Lee had reverse-engineered the ASF format for compatibility purposes.
Here's a little summary of the VirtualDub/ Microsoft patent dispute with links to more comprehensive articles.
"
(such as why they think they can claim OUR inputs are THEIR intellectual propery, among others)."
"
There is a worldwide trend of granting intellectual property protections to databases and compilations of information. This is especially prevelant in European nations, given the EU Database Directive.
For instance, check out the Terms of Use adhesion contract used by the Irish affiliate of Monster.com.
"
The contents of the TMP Sites, such as text,
graphics, images, logos, button icons, software
and other material (collectively, "Material"), are
protected under European Union, Irish and
international copyright, database right, sui generis right, trademark and other intellectual property
laws. Except as provided in the Agreement, all
Material is the property of TMP or its content
suppliers or clients. The compilation (meaning the
collection, arrangement and assembly) of all
content on each TMP Site (other than on Private
Label pages of Monster.ie) is the exclusive
property of TMP, subject to any and all intellectual
property rights that Customer may have in the
materials prepared and posted by Customer on a
TMP Site and all other prior intellectual property
rights that Customer may have, and may be
protected by European Union, Irish and
international copyright laws.
"
Why would this be of signifcance to residents outside the EU? Well, consider the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction. The purpose of the Convention is to make foreign civil and commercial judgements recognizable and enforceable in other nations. One of the most controversial aspects of the Convention regards Intellectual Property, as different nations have different IP regimes -- like Database Protections and Sui Generis rights.
Now, if you're an American, you shouldn't have to be worried about European style Database Protections, other than considering them faraway, European oddities. Under the Hague Convention, a judgement regarding Database Protections against you held in an European court under European law can be enforced against you in America.
There are costs associated with researching U.S. patents, even though (as previous/.ers have sagely pointed out) obtaining the patent itself remains free, courtesy the U.S. PTO.
I've found that the actual patent document only tells a small part of the patent-saga. More revealing is the patent's file wrapper - a hefty folder (or in the case of some software patents, not so hefty) kept by the PTO that contains official correspondence between the inventor (or inventor's representatives, i.e. lawyers) and the patent examiner.
By scrutinizing documents in the file wrapper, you can discern the amount of effort put in by the examiner, the examiner's conception of related prior art (which might, unsurprisingly, be quite limited), and whether or not the original claims were rejected/amended.
While the patent itself might be freely accessible, expect to pay the PTO for access to the patent's documentation.
Slashdot Mirror
-V
Naw. Dioxin is formed when you incinerate PVC. When you're bic pen lands in the municipal trash burner, dioxin is made.
and pie
I've always viewed my friends who are especially into Linux and ham radio (Rob Carlson -- radio callsign KC2AEI -- is one friend of mine who's fluent in both fields) as advanced hobbyists, the type of folks who might have scoured mall Radio Shacks for 6.5536 mhz crystals and dabbled in Heathkit
catelogues several decades ago. Tinkerers, in other words, passionate about tweaking the miniscule component constituents of their electronics to achieve a personal, customized result.
On the other hand, the similarities between radio "consumers" and Windows users are too tempting not to make. Unlike the Linux/ham radio enthusiasts, these folks operate their store-bought PCs/radio receivers as black boxes, strictly according to the design intended by the devices' manufacturer and rarely cracking open cases out of curiousity. Of course, I'm painting w/ a broad metaphorical brush here, lumping swaths of individuals into overly generalized categories.
In my opinion, a thriving gray market -- where consumers seek out cheaper products/services in other districts/countries -- is evidence of a healthy, competitive global economy.
Sincerely,
Vergil
Speaking of updates for OSX, I've been pleased a number of ibook/Powerbook wielding staff members (seems as if every other sysadmin has at least one) have been happily using Fink, which closely resembles one of my favorite Linux utilities -- Debian's apt-get.
I work at the IT office of a state-run public university that focuses on research. UMBC's 24-hour student computer labs contain hundreds of terminals with a variety of hardware/OS configurations (PCs, Macs [ranging from G3/4s to eMacs] and a smattering of SGI Indigos/Indys dating back to the mid 90's, when the state budget allowed for such purchases).
Gradually, our student terminals -- PCs and Mac -- are shifting towards a "common platform": Unix. Our Macs are being upgraded to OSX, and each PC (most are Dell Optiplex GX-110s, GX150s and newer 270s) can be booted into either Windows 2000 or a customized RedHat lab image.
Although I don't have any moral objections to any arrangements made between Slashdot and one particular online retailer, I feel that any website that purports to be in the business of disseminating "news" ought to be obligated to voluntarily divulge any links to for-profit enterprises that appear appended to articles and reviews.
While an arrangement between Slashdot and Barnes & Nobel might not necessarily alter the objectivity of an article/review, it introduces some interesting questions. For instance, does Slashdot receive compensation for links to Barnes & Nobel merchandise appearing in published reviews? Would Slashdot turn down a reader submitted book review if a book was sold by Amazon -- but not stocked or sold by Barnes & Noble?
Again, there isn't anything inherently wrong (in my mind) with Slashdot consistently linking to one retailer's products. However, if Slashdot readers consistently ask about the nature of any alleged relation between the Slashdot news site and another company, then perhaps Slashdot editors should make an effort to disclose any relevant details.
someone flips the switch and cedes control of our robotic protectors to SkyNet ;)
-V
Most tech journalists fail to understand this -- evidenced by the ever-popular "New EULA Disclaims Implied Warranty of Merchantability!" articles.
Most EULAs do not contain new, inventive or clever language. After all, they're essentially standard form contracts -- otherwise known as boilerplate -- meaning that one choice of forum/ anti-reverse engineering clause looks pretty much like another.
I spent around a year (while at the Consumer Project on Technology) sifting through EULAs and contract related law, such as UCITA. Occaisionally, I would find an odd clause that appeared particularly draconian. I archived a few of those here.
The EULA clauses I found most fascinating were the ones that: 1. purported to limit benchmarks/criticism of a software title (McAfee), 2. Specified favorable choice of law/forum jurisdictions, 3. attempted to squelch parodies of a software publisher's title (Microsoft).
(yeah, I was the guy that submitted the previous, EULA harvesting Slashdot article). If you want any help dealing w/ EULAs, drop me a line.
Sincerely,
Vergil
I'm really interested in knowing how, exactly, you arrived at that comfortable little conclusion. Did "we the people" draft the DMCA/UCITA/RIP (in Britain) to represent and protect our interests? Did "we the people" pass such shortsighted legislation into law by popular referendum?
"I guess that Orwell didn't predict the geek ... Maybe he was just wrong about the POWER of the geek." (spelling corrected)
Your post seems to reference some unspecified, inherent ability of "the geek" to circumvent any use of technology to limit freedom. While such a reductively Katzian assertion of geek power is heartening, it is hardly grounded in political reality. When's the last time you wrote a letter to your elected representative? Organized a protest? Sat across a table from a government official and explained your views? Some geeks regularly engage in such activities -- but not enough. Orwell may have failed to predict the "power" of the geek. But he certainly didn't misunderstand the inertia of comfortable complacency.
Then again, your curious notion of controlling technology seems to hinge on a group's ability to acquire or purchase technological products. In other words, you seem to equate a complex concept --"technology" -- with a tangible good, such as a stereo or CD-RW drive. Hate to burst your bubble, pal, but your ability to buy consumer electronics has very, very little to do with your ability to exercise control what you can -- and cannot do with said technology.
Sincerely,
After wandering around the city, I found a well-stocked Internet cafe that sold decent coffee and fairly decent cigarettes (Mild Sevens). The per-hour price wasn't bad, and it wasn't exactly difficult to master the Korean language keyboards. This particular cafe was classy, boasting a waxed wood floor and decorative plants. The drop-down Windows "run" menus of its 3-4 PCs were full of Ivy League servers, vestiges of touring American bluebloods.
Unfortunately, this particular cafe shuttered relatively early in the evening. Later in the night (when I wasn't occupied w/ meetings), I'd frequent an entirely different sort of Internet cafe accessible through a alleyway door and a staircase. This dim, windowless cafe was crammed wall-to-wall with high end PCs -- almost all manned by a stooped Korean teens mesmerized by StarCraft. For some reason, the beefy proprietor always waved away my cash, never accepting any of my proferred payment.
I haven't thought about Korean Internet cafes (or posted to slashdot) for some time, until encountering this article. Good to be back, and props to the trollaxor crew.
Last time I checked, the RIAA was in the business of copyright enforcement.
Perhaps
Sincerely,
Vergil
Here's a write-up and pix, courtesy DC Indymedia.
A relevant email list for subsequent Washington, DC activities concerning Dmitry and the DMCA can be found here (might be temp. offline).
Sincerely,
Vergil
Vergil Bushnell
I posted the above comment originally at 2. A little while afterwards, it had been moderated up +1 to 3, Insightful.
Around 10 minutes later (around 3:03), the moderation attached to my comment was down to 2, Insightful.
However, there was no evidence any change in moderation had actually occured: i.e., my total karma didn't decrease by one, and I didn't see any -1 overated/troll/flamebait, etc. attached to the comment, which is usually the case when a comment is moderated down.
What gives? I've been using /. for a while, and I've never seen anything like this phenomona before.
Sincerely,
Vergil
Vergil Bushnell
Now, I'm a happy consumer of several IBM products. I'm not seeking to question the validity of the Big Blue intellectual property vault, nor am I doubting IBM's ability to develop innovative products.
I've looked at several of your corporation's software patents. In my humble, uneducated opinion, patents such as these (and others) owned by IBM might conceivably either be enforced against, or hinder (just by their existence, prima facie validity and the implied, interpreted threat of an infringement suit)the work of a free-software developer.
We've heard what Bruce Perens has to say about software patents. I'd like to ask you just how far is IBM willing to go in embracing Linux and/or the free-software movement? Specifically, is IBM willing to take a hard look at its patent practices, and potentially committ to sharing its intellectual property with free software developers?
Sincerely,
Vergil
Vergil Bushnell
Sincerely,
Vergil
Vergil Bushnell
IPIX has been involved in several tangled intellectual-property disputes. In '97, IPIX went after the Live Picture Corporation for patent infringement, and eventually secured an out-of-court settlement resulting in Live Picture's agreement to stop using fisheye lenses.
IPIX was also the defendant in a March 2000 patent infringement suit involving alleged willful infringement of U.S. patent 5,903,782 concerning "spherical visual technology".
If anyone is interested, I threw up a page a while back that contains more information about IPIX-related intellectual property disputes.
Sincerely,
Vergil
Vergil Bushnell
Theoretically, your assertion about contracts is valid. The legal term "contract" means "meeting of the minds."
However, in the case of mass-market, boilerplate shrinkwrapped EULAs, there really isn't any meeting of the minds. If I download or purchase software as a consumer, I don't sit across the table from the software publisher's lawyers and hammer out a mutually agreeable resolution. EULAs are considered "contracts of adhesion" -- meaning they're unilateral, take-it-or-leave-it "agreements".
Before shooting your mouth off about "communists", why don't you take a look at a few software EULAs (I've put up a few here).
sincerely,
vergil
Vergil Bushnell
Even though reverse-engineering (for the most part, DMCA excluded) may be a legally-sanctioned practice in the US, UCITA has a sinister way of blocking it.
Specifically, UCITA gives software publishers wide lattitude to create so-called "contractual use restrictions" -- such as the "no reverse engineering, decompilation, etc" clauses that appear in most EULAs.
Since anyone using a EULA'ed program "agrees" to the terms of the license agreement, reverse engineering becomes not a matter of copyright, but a contractual issue.
Insidious, eh?
Sincerely,
Vergil
Vergil Bushnell
Here's a little summary of the VirtualDub/ Microsoft patent dispute with links to more comprehensive articles.
Sincerely,
vergil
Vergil Bushnell
There is a worldwide trend of granting intellectual property protections to databases and compilations of information. This is especially prevelant in European nations, given the EU Database Directive.
For instance, check out the Terms of Use adhesion contract used by the Irish affiliate of Monster.com.
" The contents of the TMP Sites, such as text, graphics, images, logos, button icons, software and other material (collectively, "Material"), are protected under European Union, Irish and international copyright, database right, sui generis right, trademark and other intellectual property laws. Except as provided in the Agreement, all Material is the property of TMP or its content suppliers or clients. The compilation (meaning the collection, arrangement and assembly) of all content on each TMP Site (other than on Private Label pages of Monster.ie) is the exclusive property of TMP, subject to any and all intellectual property rights that Customer may have in the materials prepared and posted by Customer on a TMP Site and all other prior intellectual property rights that Customer may have, and may be protected by European Union, Irish and international copyright laws. "
Why would this be of signifcance to residents outside the EU? Well, consider the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction. The purpose of the Convention is to make foreign civil and commercial judgements recognizable and enforceable in other nations. One of the most controversial aspects of the Convention regards Intellectual Property, as different nations have different IP regimes -- like Database Protections and Sui Generis rights.
Now, if you're an American, you shouldn't have to be worried about European style Database Protections, other than considering them faraway, European oddities. Under the Hague Convention, a judgement regarding Database Protections against you held in an European court under European law can be enforced against you in America.
Hope that sheds a little light on your question.
Sincerely,
Vergil
Vergil Bushnell
I've found that the actual patent document only tells a small part of the patent-saga. More revealing is the patent's file wrapper - a hefty folder (or in the case of some software patents, not so hefty) kept by the PTO that contains official correspondence between the inventor (or inventor's representatives, i.e. lawyers) and the patent examiner.
By scrutinizing documents in the file wrapper, you can discern the amount of effort put in by the examiner, the examiner's conception of related prior art (which might, unsurprisingly, be quite limited), and whether or not the original claims were rejected/amended.
While the patent itself might be freely accessible, expect to pay the PTO for access to the patent's documentation.
Vergil Bushnell
Don't u ever answer ur email?
Vergil Bushnell