DMOZ - http://www.dmoz.org/ Advogato - http://advogato redirects to https://web.archive.org/web/20170715120119/http://advogato.org/ . [*Forever as a journeyer in limbo] (now) LinuxJournal.
There are certain standards that contain patented algorithms. We can not comply with industry standards without infringing on these patented algorithms. Thus we are unable to compete. You may try to invoke the Sherman Act, however, this may not work as that patent may not be seen as an attempt to monopolize but an attempt to protect work.
* Section 2 of the Sherman Act makes it unlawful for a company to "monopolize, or attempt to monopolize," trade or commerce. As that law has been interpreted, it is not necessarily illegal for a company to have a monopoly or to try to achieve a monopoly position. The law is violated only if the company tries to maintain or acquire a monopoly position through unreasonable methods. For the courts, a key factor in determining what is unreasonable is whether the practice has a legitimate business justification.
* Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act outlaws "unfair methods of competition" but does not define unfair. The Supreme Court has ruled that violations of the Sherman Act also are violations of Section 5, but Section 5 covers some practices that are beyond the scope of the Sherman Act. It is the FTC's job to enforce Section 5.
While some may collect royalties on software, we don't. Not that the rep would care, but we can't pay royalties on an algorithm. Thus we might be expected to stop distributing and developing code. This brings a level of monopoly to the patent holder as we can not compete. Of course, we might be able to hack around some patented algorithm, but when it comes down to a patent suit, how can we fight it?
Unless the developer is independently wealthy, this person will fold. The cost of a defense is well into the 100s of thousands of dollars.
The fact is that music copies... for non commercial purposes are immune from lawsuits.
Title 17 Chapter 10 Subchapter D Sec. 1008
No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium,
or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings
such a DEVICE or MEDIUM for making digital recordings or analog music recordings -
In definition of device or medium
Title 17 Chapter 10 Subchapter A Section 1001
A ''digital audio recording device'' is any machine or device of a type commonly distributed to individuals for use by individuals, whether or not included with or as part of some other machine or device, the digital recording function of which is designed or marketed for the primary purpose of, and that is capable of, making a digital audio copied recording for private use, except for -
professional model products and dictation machines, etc...
(4) (A)
A ''digital audio recording medium'' is any material object in a form commonly distributed for use by individuals, that is primarily marketed or most commonly used by consumers for the purpose of making digital audio copied recordings by use of a digital audio recording device.
(B) Such term does not include any material object -
(i) that embodies a sound recording at the time it is first distributed by the importer or manufacturer; or
(ii) that is primarily marketed and most commonly used by consumers either for the purpose of making copies of motion pictures or other audiovisual works or for the purpose of making copies of nonmusical literary works, including computer programs or data bases.
I daresay that noone would say that a computer is primarily marketed and most commonly used for the purpose of making motion picture copies. The MPAA would go after DELL, etc.
A computer is not primarily designed to make copies of nonmusical literary works - that would be a copyright violation and computer manufacturers and distributors would be in trouble for that.
So, since that means software on your computer is not in the not included category, the computer and software could be considered a medium... therefore non commercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings is immune from lawsuits.
I am very sick of this. Screw you OSDN slashdot. I liked you before there were ads and this gd system. Cmdr Taco, this *was* a cool site. But obviously, I am NOT going to post anymore.
Screw you all, I hope you end up settling with the RIAA.
I am sick of telling people about the DMCA in 2000...noone listened.
Now I tell you, hey, there are these things called laws.
This loser threw away a monitor because of a bad vid card and then wanted to reinstall the O/S because he installed the wrong driver and I put the right driver in and it worked fine! Andrew Vandine is a "linux hater". I couldn't believe it! My first encounter with a linux hater was on the job. Needless to say, I didn't last very long, about a week.
I have moved around a lot doing temp work just to get the bills paid and have never seen such a sorry bunch of IT "professionals" in my life. I say everyone get laptops and fucking reduce the IT support to janitorial work.
Actually Certron, (Hi) in some states it is illegal to use photo radar because like in AZ, the statutes state there needs to be a signed issued document by an officer present at the scene. The only people, if any are there in the photo van, or photo red light is a technician. The tickets here are signed by using a rubber stamp signature and thus fall out of the legal limits, even for "the law"!!
While I understand universities don't want any liabilities, the people who are enforcing these DMCA "violations" need to abide by the DMCA. This means there needs to be proper notification, etc.
The college may believe they have the ultimate right to suspend an account, but there are also legal issues as far as whether a university has the right to suspend an account and why.
To suspend an account based on a DMCA complaint about MUSIC downloads is not right and could be considered DMCA abuse, to which there is a section in the DMCA that covers that. The Music sections of the DMCA cover subscription services, etc... NOT consumer audio downloads.
A computer is NOT a device specifically designed for recording and storing audio files!
Oh My! Using a computer to copy???? It's just shocking.
I gotta go shut down my cache!
Or let's get jobs at MS and trade files!!!
-aicra
The computer is NOT a device specifically designed for the copying and storage of audio files... according to the law....(DMCA) these people didn't violate squat and their lawyers SUCK ASS and gave away millions to the RIAA.
Liability for contributory infringement (9th Circuit 2001):
'Liability for contributory infringement attaches to "one who, with knowledge of the infringing activity, induces, causes or materially contributes to the infringing conduct of another . . . [L]iability exists if the defendant engages in personal conduct that encourages or assists the infringement." A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004,1014
(9th Cir. 2001)'
Since the RIAA is:
"one who, with knowledge of the infringing activity"
and the RIAA:
"induces, causes or materially contributes to the infringing conduct of another . . . " by placing their work in a format easily available to those when RIAA knows there is infringing...
RIAA is liable as well.
"[L]iability exists if the defendant engages in personal conduct that encourages or assists
the infringement."
emphasis added
of course people will argue that RIAA is the copyright owner/holder and therefore has a right to provide works and find others liable, but RIAA needs to take some responsibility too. They are not totally "off the hook".
Precedents make for expedient justice so defendants don't spend too long detained. Left overe from way back when getting mail/decisions from place to place took weeks.
Slashdot Mirror
Here. Here! ;)
This year we lost:
DMOZ - http://www.dmoz.org/
Advogato - http://advogato redirects to https://web.archive.org/web/20170715120119/http://advogato.org/ . [*Forever as a journeyer in limbo]
(now) LinuxJournal.
I really wish he could accept this award in person. If we can't do anything, next best...someone accepts it for him.
There are certain standards that contain patented algorithms. We can not comply with industry standards without infringing on these patented algorithms. Thus we are unable to compete.
You may try to invoke the Sherman Act, however, this may not work as that patent may not be seen as an attempt to monopolize but an attempt to protect work.
* Section 2 of the Sherman Act makes it unlawful for a company to "monopolize, or attempt to monopolize," trade or commerce. As that law has been interpreted, it is not necessarily illegal for a company to have a monopoly or to try to achieve a monopoly position. The law is violated only if the company tries to maintain or acquire a monopoly position through unreasonable methods. For the courts, a key factor in determining what is unreasonable is whether the practice has a legitimate business justification.
* Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act outlaws "unfair methods of competition" but does not define unfair. The Supreme Court has ruled that violations of the Sherman Act also are violations of Section 5, but Section 5 covers some practices that are beyond the scope of the Sherman Act. It is the FTC's job to enforce Section 5.
While some may collect royalties on software, we don't. Not that the rep would care, but we can't pay royalties on an algorithm. Thus we might be expected to stop distributing and developing code.
This brings a level of monopoly to the patent holder as we can not compete. Of course, we might be able to hack around some patented algorithm, but when it comes down to a patent suit, how can we fight it?
Unless the developer is independently wealthy, this person will fold. The cost of a defense is well into the 100s of thousands of dollars.
Very interesting insight. I never really thought about it in those terms.
The fact is that music copies... for non commercial purposes are immune from lawsuits.
Title 17 Chapter 10 Subchapter D Sec. 1008
No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium,
or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings
such a DEVICE or MEDIUM for making digital recordings or analog music recordings -
In definition of device or medium
Title 17 Chapter 10 Subchapter A
Section 1001
A ''digital audio recording device'' is any machine or device of a type commonly distributed to individuals for use by individuals, whether or not included with or as part of some other machine or device, the digital recording function of which is designed or marketed for the primary purpose of, and that is capable of, making a digital audio copied recording for private use, except for -
professional model products and
dictation machines, etc...
(4) (A)
A ''digital audio recording medium'' is any material object in a form commonly distributed for use by individuals, that is primarily marketed or most commonly used by consumers for the purpose of making digital audio copied recordings by use of a digital audio recording device.
(B)
Such term does not include any material object -
(i)
that embodies a sound recording at the time it is first distributed by the importer or manufacturer; or
(ii)
that is primarily marketed and most commonly used by consumers either for the purpose of making copies of motion pictures or other audiovisual works or for the purpose of making copies of nonmusical literary works, including computer programs or data bases.
I daresay that noone would say that a computer is primarily marketed and most commonly used for the purpose of making motion picture copies. The MPAA would go after DELL, etc.
A computer is not primarily designed to make copies of nonmusical literary works - that would be a copyright violation and computer manufacturers and distributors would be in trouble for that.
So, since that means software on your computer is not in the not included category, the computer and software could be considered a medium... therefore non commercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings is immune from lawsuits.
I am very sick of this. Screw you OSDN slashdot. I liked you before there were ads and this gd system. Cmdr Taco, this *was* a cool site. But obviously, I am NOT going to post anymore.
Screw you all, I hope you end up settling with the RIAA.
I am sick of telling people about the DMCA in 2000...noone listened.
Now I tell you, hey, there are these things called laws.
Screw this mod crap.
Do you know why? There is a thing called the AHRA.. the audio home recording act. It's not illegal if it's for noncommercial use....
http://www.riaa.com/news/newsletter/060303.asp
-yeah, I'm blue in the face...
I'd like to graciously offer MY services as a replacement to Hilary.
nice analogy, can I get permission to use it?
A caravan is a GREAT idea! Will someone come get me in AZ.
Trust me, that
NEVER works!
You live near Andover, get a job with osdn
I'm game for the first three! :)
Desperately seeking a gad about bon vivant for #2.
Yeah, well, I tried to get a job using my sad ass experience.
Things I learned about trying to get a job:
You can't ask questions, you can't be intelligent, education doesn't mean jack, experience doesn't mean jack.
If you can be dicated to and told what to do and never question anything, take a 2 day job and stretch it into 4 weeks, then... you can have a job!!!
All I did was piss off a lot of loser IT "professionals".
This loser threw away a monitor because of a bad vid card and then wanted to reinstall the O/S because he installed the wrong driver and I put the right driver in and it worked fine! Andrew Vandine is a "linux hater". I couldn't believe it!
My first encounter with a linux hater was on the job. Needless to say, I didn't last very long, about a week.
I have moved around a lot doing temp work just to get the bills paid and have never seen such a sorry bunch of IT "professionals" in my life. I say everyone get laptops and fucking reduce the IT support to janitorial work.
I go where the sexy programmers are.
Does anyone keep a record of how often this happens? I know this isn't the first or last state and time.
Actually Certron, (Hi) in some states it is illegal to use photo radar because like in AZ, the statutes state there needs to be a signed issued document by an officer present at the scene. The only people, if any are there in the photo van, or photo red light is a technician. The tickets here are signed by using a rubber stamp signature and thus fall out of the legal limits, even for "the law"!!
While I understand universities don't want any liabilities, the people who are enforcing these DMCA "violations" need to abide by the DMCA. This means there needs to be proper notification, etc.
The college may believe they have the ultimate right to suspend an account, but there are also legal issues as far as whether a university has the right to suspend an account and why.
The FACT of the matter is that downloading music, is LEGAL -- see AHRA... or go to my site:
http://www.electroniclaw.org/rockon.html
To suspend an account based on a DMCA complaint about MUSIC downloads is not right and could be considered DMCA abuse, to which there is a section in the DMCA that covers that.
The Music sections of the DMCA cover subscription services, etc... NOT consumer audio downloads.
A computer is NOT a device specifically designed for recording and storing audio files!
I gotta go shut down my cache!
Or let's get jobs at MS and trade files!!!
-aicra
The computer is NOT a device specifically designed for the copying and storage of audio files... according to the law....(DMCA) these people didn't violate squat and their lawyers SUCK ASS and gave away millions to the RIAA.
try the 14th
why is it that you didn't protest with us in San Fran that day with RMS, Perens, Marti and myself?
Just curious.
-marcia
There is considerations, unfortunately.
So I should pay Ben Franklin's descendants for the power that runs through the house?
'Liability for contributory infringement attaches to "one who, with knowledge of the infringing activity, induces, causes or materially contributes to the infringing conduct of another . . . [L]iability exists if the defendant engages in personal conduct that encourages or assists the infringement." A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004,1014
(9th Cir. 2001)'
Since the RIAA is:
"one who, with knowledge of the infringing activity"
and the RIAA:
"induces, causes or materially contributes to the infringing conduct of another . . . " by placing their work in a format easily available to those when RIAA knows there is infringing...
RIAA is liable as well.
"[L]iability exists if the defendant engages in personal conduct that encourages or assists
the infringement."
emphasis added
of course people will argue that RIAA is the copyright owner/holder and therefore has a right to provide works and find others liable, but RIAA needs to take some responsibility too. They are not totally "off the hook".
Precedents make for expedient justice so defendants don't spend too long detained. Left overe from way back when getting mail/decisions from place to place took weeks.