I suspect that, if Napster is shut down because it has no substantial non-infringing use - as Judge Patel has ruled - the universities will have a much tougher time justifying their stand.
Well, I think the ideal here is that if napster does get shut down, then the problem has been cut off at the root. There is nothing that the universities would need to justify, they left their services as open as any ISP, and in the case that Napster IS shut down, then the RIAA has had their way and will wish no further action from the universities. "Please ban something that doesn't exist any longer" just doesn't make any sense.
On the other hand, it will set a precident for gnutella or other file sharing methods to be blocked by ISPs. However, they must take resonable means to contact ALL of these internet service providers -- that is if the DMCA is still around when the time comes, which I'm sure all here are hoping it isn't.
Revelation Zero - The beginning of the end.
Well, you can make this statement only by the assumption that we do consider the source that we are opening up "confidential", which most of us probably don't. My new recommendation is this, which I will also propose to those on the samba dev team and list -
Build (maybe fork?) a new version of samba which complies with the new standards set by this document. Publish it under a different name (GPL'd of course) anonymously overseas for those wishing to intergrate other *nix servers on their windows network.
The only reason I deem this remotely necessary is because of Microsoft's conduct in all other fields, and I'm sure most will agree. If we do allow them to take this format, make it proprietary, killing all interoperability, there are those corporations who will begin the migration and be stuck with a Microsoft exclusive platform. WHY allow this, when we have the means and the resources to defeat it? If working in a corporation, and I wish to install a new file server and choose some random linux distribution to do the job, only to find out that it won't integrate with our current network because of the standards imposed by previous system admin's, there should be some way out. Standards and interoperability have created a boom in the computer industry, let's not see it fall victim to Microsoft's sword.
Soldier in the field: This is Post 3921 reporting, we are in need of medical assitance! Our coordinates are...I'm sorry, but Windows has preformed an illegal operation Place your life in the hands of Micro$oft, now thats a scary situation. A whole new way to look at the advantages of reliability.
This topic of napster is driving me up a wall. What napster provides is esentially a search of links to files on other individuals computers, which in and of itself is completely legal. They do primarily the same thing that mp3.lycos.com or a quick multimedia search for MP3's at AltaVista would do as well. Now it may provide an easier way of doing this by making much of the process transparent, but it is in no way different. Why not sue these other companies for providing links to the information? Because linking is LEGAL. And once Napster proves to the courts that they are not hosting any copywritten material on their servers, they have simply a database that is similar to the ones above, the RIAA and the other ignorant bands may get it through their thick skulls that they can't get companies like napster for this.
Well, seems that Microsoft doesn't like correct HTML (there are no FORM tags around the button to download it) so if you want it in tar.gz format goto www.contractmanager.net/sif.tar.gz. That should get you the source code, the.dll's from the dist. were lost. Hope that helps.
Slashdot Mirror
I suspect that, if Napster is shut down because it has no substantial non-infringing use - as Judge Patel has ruled - the universities will have a much tougher time justifying their stand.
Well, I think the ideal here is that if napster does get shut down, then the problem has been cut off at the root. There is nothing that the universities would need to justify, they left their services as open as any ISP, and in the case that Napster IS shut down, then the RIAA has had their way and will wish no further action from the universities. "Please ban something that doesn't exist any longer" just doesn't make any sense.
On the other hand, it will set a precident for gnutella or other file sharing methods to be blocked by ISPs. However, they must take resonable means to contact ALL of these internet service providers -- that is if the DMCA is still around when the time comes, which I'm sure all here are hoping it isn't. Revelation Zero - The beginning of the end.
Well, you can make this statement only by the assumption that we do consider the source that we are opening up "confidential", which most of us probably don't. My new recommendation is this, which I will also propose to those on the samba dev team and list -
Build (maybe fork?) a new version of samba which complies with the new standards set by this document. Publish it under a different name (GPL'd of course) anonymously overseas for those wishing to intergrate other *nix servers on their windows network.
The only reason I deem this remotely necessary is because of Microsoft's conduct in all other fields, and I'm sure most will agree. If we do allow them to take this format, make it proprietary, killing all interoperability, there are those corporations who will begin the migration and be stuck with a Microsoft exclusive platform. WHY allow this, when we have the means and the resources to defeat it? If working in a corporation, and I wish to install a new file server and choose some random linux distribution to do the job, only to find out that it won't integrate with our current network because of the standards imposed by previous system admin's, there should be some way out. Standards and interoperability have created a boom in the computer industry, let's not see it fall victim to Microsoft's sword.
- Rev -
Soldier in the field: This is Post 3921 reporting, we are in need of medical assitance! Our coordinates are... I'm sorry, but Windows has preformed an illegal operation Place your life in the hands of Micro$oft, now thats a scary situation. A whole new way to look at the advantages of reliability.
This topic of napster is driving me up a wall. What napster provides is esentially a search of links to files on other individuals computers, which in and of itself is completely legal. They do primarily the same thing that mp3.lycos.com or a quick multimedia search for MP3's at AltaVista would do as well. Now it may provide an easier way of doing this by making much of the process transparent, but it is in no way different. Why not sue these other companies for providing links to the information? Because linking is LEGAL . And once Napster proves to the courts that they are not hosting any copywritten material on their servers, they have simply a database that is similar to the ones above, the RIAA and the other ignorant bands may get it through their thick skulls that they can't get companies like napster for this.
Well, seems that Microsoft doesn't like correct HTML (there are no FORM tags around the button to download it) so if you want it in tar.gz format goto www.contractmanager.net/sif.tar.gz. That should get you the source code, the .dll's from the dist. were lost. Hope that helps.