The Belkin router had not only a non compliant routing algorithm, but it had also a backdoor. Remember, if you clicked on "No Thanks", then a flag INSIDE THE ROUTER would be modified to disallow the misbehavior. Namely CLICKING AN EXTERNAL WEBPAGE MODIFIED THE INSIDES OF YOUR ROUTER!!!!! Is Belkin fixing this security hole also?
Now we know who pays who to learn how to spam. Cry havoc and unleash the spammers!!!!
From the article: "The deliberately generic-sounding URLs for the service are publicized over Radio Farda broadcasts and through bulk e-mails that Anonymizer sends to addresses in the country. The addresses are provided by human rights groups and other sources, says Anonymizer president Lance Cottrell."
A better suggestion is the Gator way. Make the updater/installer Nagware that in case of a critical update will not simply let you go until you apply the patch.
If you tell it NO, it should print a DIRE WARNING of DOOM that makes you pay notice.
People are not fools, and proper disclosure of the dangers they face should be enough. If i am reckless/fool enough to disregard due notice, then I am to blame, not Microsoft. Taking away my right/ability to control what goes into my computer is not the solution.
According to DMCA, all you have to claim under penalty of perjury is that you have legal authority to act on behalf of whoever holds the copyright on whatever you're complaining about.
There is nothing in the law that says that you cannot lie about the existance of the infringing material. Why do you thing they are trigger-happy about it?
I remember something I read on Baen Bar. Although there is a lot of music, nobody have the time to sort through it in order to find out what is cool and what is crap according to his own likes and dislikes. Therefore the recording companies CAN and should start that kind of personal indexing services and charge for it.
I read your article and I do not agree. Your solution will throw out also the inherent privacy of the Internet. By requiring certificates, you are advocating creation of a Universal ID.
If they want to use DRM to prevent me from sharing CuteWallpaper1 with everyone, then I think it is ok.
If the want to use DRM to prevent me from downloading CuteWallpaper from a NON-APPROVED content provider, then I am totally against it. I will go to the firt judge I can find and sue them on Antitrust basis.
If they want to use DRM to 'expire' the CuteWallpaper1 which I paid good $$$ for so that I have to purchase it again, then I want to go to a judge and sue them for breach of trust. Once I pay for something they do not or should not have the right to artificially expire it.
This cartoon is a Marketeer idea, not a film maker's idea. They want the cartoons because it gives them the opportunity to sell any number of things to KIDS. Get it? They can invent very cheaply any new vessel, weapon, you name it and put it on the cartoon in order to sell it to the parents of small kids. Just look at Pokemon and that is the model they are following, in my opinion.
Not everyone who deserves to win wins, and not all who win deserved to win. Can you make them win? Then do not be too eager to deal winning in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends.
Re:Interesting possibilities...
on
Cross-Site-TRACE
·
· Score: 1
The reason nobody complains about the cost of hardbound books is because there are LIBRARIES. You can go to a library, borrow a book, read it and returning it without paying a cent to anybody. The author was compensated just on the purchase of the book from the library.
RIAA wants to charge you for every time that you listen to a song.
Sorry but I do not agree to this.
By doing this, you are creating a new right, a new business model whereby Libraries, which do not currently pay anything beyond the initial purchase price for the book, now have to pay the equivalent to a licensing fee for the books it owns. This is a rotten deal, because even if at the beginning it is 1/10, it will eventually go up to 1/1.
If we combine this with the forever extended copyright, then we have the equivalent of Stallman's short story. I'd rather have libraries pay full price on initial purchase so that everyone can read for free forever.
There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or a corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years , the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped,or turned back, for their private benefit. ---The Judge in Life-Line
Sorry but I do not agree. Deep linking is more like a post it note to a page in a book. It helps to mark a place of interest among several similar places. Shall we rule postit notes illegal because we want people to read the whole book instead of going directly to the section we want them to see? I do not think so.
Also, your side door example is not a good analogy. A better analogy would be if I tell you to enter the movie on the minute 45 because that is when the main character is killed, and that were the only scene on the movie that you wanted to watch.
The problem with your analogy is the familiar one when we try to extrapolate notions of common property to "intellectual property". They simply do not carry over
Most important is the fact that they explicitly say that they decided to sue in Germany because they ALREADY know that they do not stand a chance in a U.S. Court. Therefore they will go to whichever court (in this case, German) that will give them the ruling they want. Talk about boutique justice.
When he/she first put his/her idea in a forma medium for the rest of the world to see, he/she already decided to share.
Once you have said something, there is no un-saying it.
I am mighty sorry but that is the way our society has progressed so far. Were it not because of "sharing" and "appropriation" we would not have today an oral tradition as the basis for the culture of many societies. It is not theft.
copyright is a very recent development, less than 400 years old which came into consideration when 1. it became possible to mass duplicate ideas and 2. only a few had the means for duplicating them (printing presses, recording studios, whatever you want to name it)
Internet and Digitalization has changed the whole equation, to the better of the society at large because the means for mass duplication of ideas now are very cheap and to the worsement of that small group who made a living out of duplicating ideas for us (music dealers, printers, etc.). The question now is, where will the balance be? and what kind of shape will it have?
Your artificial distintion of ideas and their physical expression does not hold water.
Slashdot Mirror
You should read Skipping Christmas
The Belkin router had not only a non compliant routing algorithm, but it had also a backdoor. Remember, if you clicked on "No Thanks", then a flag INSIDE THE ROUTER would be modified to disallow the misbehavior. Namely CLICKING AN EXTERNAL WEBPAGE MODIFIED THE INSIDES OF YOUR ROUTER!!!!! Is Belkin fixing this security hole also?
Too Late, now I need the Mastering Fedora FC 1 Book
I totally agree with you. Those willing to forsake basic rights for false security does not deserve neither rights nor security.
Now we know who pays who to learn how to spam.
Cry havoc and unleash the spammers!!!!
From the article:
"The deliberately generic-sounding URLs for the service are publicized over Radio Farda broadcasts and through bulk e-mails that Anonymizer sends to addresses in the country. The addresses are provided by human rights groups and other sources, says Anonymizer president Lance Cottrell."
Sorry, but I do not agree.
A better suggestion is the Gator way. Make the updater/installer Nagware that in case of a critical update will not simply let you go until you apply the patch.
If you tell it NO, it should print a DIRE WARNING of DOOM that makes you pay notice.
People are not fools, and proper disclosure of the dangers they face should be enough. If i am reckless/fool enough to disregard due notice, then I am to blame, not Microsoft. Taking away my right/ability to control what goes into my computer is not the solution.
Let's port the Apache server into the ATARI 800 and do some serious web gaming.
According to DMCA, all you have to claim under penalty of perjury is that you have legal authority to act on behalf of whoever holds the copyright on whatever you're complaining about.
There is nothing in the law that says that you cannot lie about the existance of the infringing material. Why do you thing they are trigger-happy about it?
How soon until someone makes a virus to blow up PCs? The virus will run, replicate and torch your PC while you look at a Barney cartoon :)
Lame Copyrighter: No sir, sorry sir, I thought the file was violating my copyright, I did not know that was the only recording of your wedding.
Let me make up by giving you a one year free subscription to Weddings and Everything....
I remember something I read on Baen Bar. Although there is a lot of music, nobody have the time to sort through it in order to find out what is cool and what is crap according to his own likes and dislikes. Therefore the recording companies CAN and should start that kind of personal indexing services and charge for it.
I read your article and I do not agree. Your solution will throw out also the inherent privacy of the Internet. By requiring certificates, you are advocating creation of a Universal ID.
Not Funny
This is exactly the first thing that came to my mind when I read it.
If they want to use DRM to prevent me from sharing CuteWallpaper1 with everyone, then I think it is ok.
If the want to use DRM to prevent me from downloading CuteWallpaper from a NON-APPROVED content provider, then I am totally against it. I will go to the firt judge I can find and sue them on Antitrust basis.
If they want to use DRM to 'expire' the CuteWallpaper1 which I paid good $$$ for so that I have to purchase it again, then I want to go to a judge and sue them for breach of trust. Once I pay for something they do not or should not have the right to artificially expire it.
This cartoon is a Marketeer idea, not a film maker's idea. They want the cartoons because it gives them the opportunity to sell any number of things to KIDS. Get it? They can invent very cheaply any new vessel, weapon, you name it and put it on the cartoon in order to sell it to the parents of small kids. Just look at Pokemon and that is the model they are following, in my opinion.
Not everyone who deserves to win wins, and not all who win deserved to win. Can you make them win? Then do not be too eager to deal winning in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends.
The reason nobody complains about the cost of hardbound books is because there are LIBRARIES. You can go to a library, borrow a book, read it and returning it without paying a cent to anybody. The author was compensated just on the purchase of the book from the library.
RIAA wants to charge you for every time that you listen to a song.
Sorry but I do not agree to this.
By doing this, you are creating a new right, a new business model whereby Libraries, which do not currently pay anything beyond the initial purchase price for the book, now have to pay the equivalent to a licensing fee for the books it owns. This is a rotten deal, because even if at the beginning it is 1/10, it will eventually go up to 1/1.
If we combine this with the forever extended copyright, then we have the equivalent of Stallman's short story. I'd rather have libraries pay full price on initial purchase so that everyone can read for free forever.
This is unbelievable. If they do not want you on their Xbox Live Network, how difficult is it to create an alternate Xbox Live Network?
There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or a corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years , the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped ,or turned back, for their private benefit. ---The Judge in Life-Line
Sorry but I do not agree. Deep linking is more like a post it note to a page in a book. It helps to mark a place of interest among several similar places. Shall we rule postit notes illegal because we want people to read the whole book instead of going directly to the section we want them to see? I do not think so.
Also, your side door example is not a good analogy. A better analogy would be if I tell you to enter the movie on the minute 45 because that is when the main character is killed, and that were the only scene on the movie that you wanted to watch.
The problem with your analogy is the familiar one when we try to extrapolate notions of common property to "intellectual property". They simply do not carry over
Most important is the fact that they explicitly say that they decided to sue in Germany because they ALREADY know that they do not stand a chance in a U.S. Court. Therefore they will go to whichever court (in this case, German) that will give them the ruling they want. Talk about boutique justice.
When he/she first put his/her idea in a forma medium for the rest of the world to see, he/she already decided to share.
Once you have said something, there is no un-saying it.
I am mighty sorry but that is the way our society has progressed so far. Were it not because of "sharing" and "appropriation" we would not have today an oral tradition as the basis for the culture of many societies. It is not theft.
copyright is a very recent development, less than 400 years old which came into consideration when
1. it became possible to mass duplicate ideas and
2. only a few had the means for duplicating them (printing presses, recording studios, whatever you want to name it)
Internet and Digitalization has changed the whole equation, to the better of the society at large because the means for mass duplication of ideas now are very cheap and to the worsement of that small group who made a living out of duplicating ideas for us (music dealers, printers, etc.). The question now is, where will the balance be? and what kind of shape will it have?
Your artificial distintion of ideas and their physical expression does not hold water.
I think PJ made a good movie, but boy, he had to take more of a sabbatical than an artistic license :)Still, I really enjoyed it