However, programs are usually licensed under a "GNU GPLv2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation", as per the recommendation of the FSF. This makes the licensing terms of a vast majority of Free software compatible with version 3 of the GNU GPL: it is one of the "later versions published by the Free Software Foundation".
The most prominent project that is licensed (with the exception of a number of source files contained in it) under "GPLv2 _only_" terms is Linux. But rest assured that Linux is in a definite minority there, and that there is a vast amount of code in Linux that is licensed in a way that is, at the end of the day, explicitly compatible with version 3 of the GNU GPL.
It does not count as "conveyance" either. "Conveyance" is, in the US, exactly the same thing as distribution according to US copyright law. The word was changed between major versions of the license because "distribute" has specific, incompatible meanings in jurisdictions outside the US which "convey" does not.
You should go read the GPL FAQ. These things are plainly stated there.
On the other hand, a pet budgie can hardly cause any injury past the superficial. Well there is a mild infection risk if the beak pierces the skin (think "very small pinprick"), but everyone knows to treat cat scratches too.
And no one has their pet turtle killed for snapping at some dumbasses' finger.
But yeah, MediaDefender needs a good whackin' with "the book".
Forced labour. That's what's common with the US penal system and a gulag. Seriously, you yanks ought to read up on your stuff before calling people names.
no country is going to toss even one percent of their population in jail for something that was not previously a crime.
Must... resist... Godwin.... Right, I'll amend that statement.
No western country currently in existence wants to be seen as a place where even one percent of their population may be tossed in jail for something that was not previously a crime.
Seriously man, if you want to dig around, there were times in which witches were burned in a wood fire and/or drowned to prove their innocence. Both in Europe and (later) in the US. Dig far enough back and you'll find all kinds of abuses that woul^W should provoke modern people to armed revolt.
On the other hand, one can hardly set up a military junta government with a conscription army. I suppose they could just be waiting until the fascists have installed electronic voting and stolen a couple of elections: the military has little motivation to care about the people and thus can just bide their time.
Capitalism is the dangerous cult. Consider: thick holy books written by a mysterious class of people supposedly gifted with hidden understanding of how the world works. These books are written in language that is not understood by the layman, who are in fact discouraged from attempting to read them without being sufficiently enlightened -- otherwise they would reach the "wrong conclusions".
Based on these continually evolving writings we are told by the economicianist priesthood what to do and above all why we behave like humans usually do. According to them, a mother will breastfeed their child because it offers her an economic incentive: she will put the child to work as soon as it is possible and thus gain financially. Yet has anyone ever met a mother whose stated motivation is this?
If the economists' instructions are not followed, they say, terrible consequences will result as a direct consequence of disobedience to God's will. Such as the Sun being extinguished and the Moon turning into a hairy dark sack of bristles. Above all, these are not consequences produced by people but by "the unseen", i.e. God.
Of course they will never mention God explicitly: instead Adam Smith's Invisble Hand, the Spirit of the Markets, is alluded to. Much like the god of the Abrahamic religions, the Invisible Hand promises great rewards for those acting in its favour and dire punishments for heretics who do not. Like God, the Invisible Hand occasionally demands (through the priesthood) war, conquest, suspension of justice, torture and murder.
Whenever the holy books turn out to not predict the future, they are revised so that they always predicted the past with 20/20 hindsight. Thus it continues to be possible to justify any proposition from those writings as they have never been wrong.
That, or an explosion of trackers. Perhaps meta-trackers or some such. There's already hundreds of torrent sites around, and the number of open trackers and trackers that aren't well known is greater still.
It's like any central warezing service. The tendency is toward decentralization, once the technology has stabilized in its centralized form.
And then son-of-Bittorrent will again be publicized and gain another order of magnitude in userbase. Only this time around there will not be enough users on the Internet, and thus we will have to make do with "everyone with net access". Not really a shame, that.
Indeed. Especially when these international agreements are more commonly a vehicle for overriding the national legislature, i.e. what little there is left of democracy.
Of course in any western country there are people who, while the Soviet Union and the GDR and such still existed, touted democracy and freedom in their own countries while secretly envying the power to "get shit done" and the power to repress their opponents that the leaders of both the USSR and the GDR wielded. And now that those two aren't here any more, they can feel liberated to do as they please: the media will no longer entertain even apt comparisons between current leaders and Stalinism just as it was in the Soviet Union with regard to Fascism.
tl;dr -- shit's fucked up still, even in Finland (lol). (also don't believe the statistics that say there's no corruption here; we've just adapted to more subtle forms of corruption. "it's the way things have been done around here since forever!")
no country is going to toss even one percent of their population in jail for something that was not previously a crime. Does this include the United States' prohibition of some drugs, starting with bans on cocaine, alcohol (repealed), and marijuana? At the time it was not understood that the prohibition would result in millions of prisoners. Things change with time, and the drug war has been going on for generations now. It's basically incomparable.
However, those people were not convicted based on an international treaty. The US was the originator of the "war on drugs", and not merely a signatory to some paper: that treaty came later and was just a vehicle for making the war global in scope. (Sounds pretty evil, right? It is.)
What I'm trying to say here is that even if the treaty goes through and is ratified by the EU, the US, mexico et al, it will still be a long, long way until national legislatures revise the local laws. Given the political momentum of the pirate parties and pro-piracy organizations and the ongoing generation switch, it's doubtful that the treaty would see faithful ratification in even most of the EU. There's simply too many hoops to jump through in order to force extremely unpopular legislation such as this.
So perhaps they'll move to get rid of democracy next, or anyway the last vestiges that exist today. It's only the logical next move.
Remember, the EU is not a federation. Yet. And until it becomes that way, I will not entertain speculation in this direction. Keep your hallucinations and what-ifs private, please.
While I agree with your comments, the US government has a way of forcing their views on it's economic partners. That's pretty rich, given the way the US economy is heading. Just wait until the arab states start selling their oil exclusively for Euros... the US will suddenly rediscover their humility. (or start threatening with nukes. highway robbery has always been an option for them.)
It doesn't take many sanctions or even the threat of souring relations between countries for the law-makers to decide that they'll only piss off a small portion of the population by passing laws like these - especially when you can paint the affected portion of the population as sword toting, parrot wearing pirates.
Yar. But that's the thing, isn't it? Millions of europeans are downloading already. Politicians certainly cannot afford to piss them off. Every politician is frightened of the possibility that the non-voting 40% suddenly becomes angry enough to vote, and vote for some other party.
As for the pirate defamation, well. The international pro-piracy movement has done pretty well changing the image. Everyone up here either warezes or has friends who do: they know that these people aren't in fact "supporting terrorism" any more than the guy who grows pot in his walk-in closet does. Several countries have MPs who've come out, saying that there is nothing wrong with warezing.
Please don't permit the mass media to draw thick wool over your eyes. They'll tell you otherwise, but your own eyes and ears and yeah, even your genuine conscience are valid sources of knowledge with regard to the world.
Then your (our, really) problem is not the agreements but your dickless administration. In my native Finland it is legally forbidden for the state to turn a finnish citizen over to a foreign state for any reason. If it's lawsuit blood they want, they can come to this country and try to make their case here... or bribe some cabinet ministers into pressing the matter and telling the courts what to do, that works pretty well too with the current openly fascist cabinet.
(The reason behind this "no turning over finnish citizens" law is, surprise surprise, those few hundred jews and communists and such that were turned over to Nazi Germany. Bit of an embarrassment to say the least.)
Tell me. Are you frightened of being struck by lightning? Enough to stop going outside?
Because becoming the target of a downloading lawsuit is currently less likely than being struck by lightning. This state of matters would remain even if the cartels increased their efforts tenfold. Even if they could persuade all police operations to be directed into copyright enforcement, the ordinary citizen could very justifiably not give a hoot.
The copyright cartels are already broken. Musicians, moviemakers and other participants of creative industries are already exploiting the Internet as a means of distribution. This genie certainly won't go back into the bottle unless another "trade agreement" enacts a system of strong guilds such as that found in Mussolini's Italy.
Besides, one international agreement does not make enforcement any easier. Millions of people just in northern europe have come to accept torrent downloading etc. as an everyday thing; international agreement or not, no country is going to toss even one percent of their population in jail for something that was not previously a crime. Not to mention actually catching and prosecuting etc. those people... matter of scale, really.
Also, trade agreements such as these don't have the power to override national legislation. Even if the EU signs and ratifies this, it will only be at the level of the EU -- i.e. they can pass a directive which EU member nations are perfectly free to implement as laxly as they please. Remember, the EU is not a federation. Not to mention how this would meet rather stiff resistance in the euro parliament, members of which have lately been strongly turning pro-privacy and pro-free culture.
Yeah, the quip was somewhat dampened by this damn slashdot software not permitting me to post anonymously twice in a row. Stupid piece of shit slarsedot. Argh.
Wakey wakey. The site gets 500 million pageviews a month. Is that a practical application enough for you? Becoming an unforeseen new media for communication?
And removed from reality? Dude, 2ch is very mainstream in Japan. It practically makes its own reality.
This is where internet communication is going. Bulletin boards and imageboards where anonymity is the default and where pointless individualism is deprecated, even derided. (ever been called a namefag? well now you have, namefag.)
While I have not seen the videos in question I would guess that many terrorist videos, or at least parts of them, cross over the line of free speech and into threats of death or severe bodily harm.
This is the exact same thing as "while I have not seen the videos in question, I would guess that many if not most of them are morally irredeemable and their authors should be punished just to be safe". That is the same goddamn argument as any moral crusader who has heard of a computer game that involves shooting people who are not ragheads or slanties or whichever enemy du jour you yanks are chasing right now.
Parts of licenses being struck down in this manner to the damage of the copyright holder is essentially unheard of in German, where the case was to take place before Skype tucked their tail between their legs. You would do well to ground your claims in precendent next time, so as to appear slightly less of a complete idiot.
It's likely that they contracted for the platform work from somewhere in East Asia (PRC or Taiwan are two popular countries of origin). These companies are as close as you can get to fly-by-night as possible without going to a Russian company.
Of course this does not exempt Skype from the GNU GPL's obligations any less than hiring a hitman would make one not a murderer.
Slashdot Mirror
However, programs are usually licensed under a "GNU GPLv2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation", as per the recommendation of the FSF. This makes the licensing terms of a vast majority of Free software compatible with version 3 of the GNU GPL: it is one of the "later versions published by the Free Software Foundation".
The most prominent project that is licensed (with the exception of a number of source files contained in it) under "GPLv2 _only_" terms is Linux. But rest assured that Linux is in a definite minority there, and that there is a vast amount of code in Linux that is licensed in a way that is, at the end of the day, explicitly compatible with version 3 of the GNU GPL.
It does not count as "conveyance" either. "Conveyance" is, in the US, exactly the same thing as distribution according to US copyright law. The word was changed between major versions of the license because "distribute" has specific, incompatible meanings in jurisdictions outside the US which "convey" does not.
You should go read the GPL FAQ. These things are plainly stated there.
Wow man, dig it.
On the other hand, a pet budgie can hardly cause any injury past the superficial. Well there is a mild infection risk if the beak pierces the skin (think "very small pinprick"), but everyone knows to treat cat scratches too.
And no one has their pet turtle killed for snapping at some dumbasses' finger.
But yeah, MediaDefender needs a good whackin' with "the book".
Forced labour. That's what's common with the US penal system and a gulag. Seriously, you yanks ought to read up on your stuff before calling people names.
Must
No western country currently in existence wants to be seen as a place where even one percent of their population may be tossed in jail for something that was not previously a crime.
Seriously man, if you want to dig around, there were times in which witches were burned in a wood fire and/or drowned to prove their innocence. Both in Europe and (later) in the US. Dig far enough back and you'll find all kinds of abuses that woul^W should provoke modern people to armed revolt.
That'd be a horrible precedent however.
On the other hand, one can hardly set up a military junta government with a conscription army. I suppose they could just be waiting until the fascists have installed electronic voting and stolen a couple of elections: the military has little motivation to care about the people and thus can just bide their time.
Capitalism is the dangerous cult. Consider: thick holy books written by a mysterious class of people supposedly gifted with hidden understanding of how the world works. These books are written in language that is not understood by the layman, who are in fact discouraged from attempting to read them without being sufficiently enlightened -- otherwise they would reach the "wrong conclusions".
Based on these continually evolving writings we are told by the economicianist priesthood what to do and above all why we behave like humans usually do. According to them, a mother will breastfeed their child because it offers her an economic incentive: she will put the child to work as soon as it is possible and thus gain financially. Yet has anyone ever met a mother whose stated motivation is this?
If the economists' instructions are not followed, they say, terrible consequences will result as a direct consequence of disobedience to God's will. Such as the Sun being extinguished and the Moon turning into a hairy dark sack of bristles. Above all, these are not consequences produced by people but by "the unseen", i.e. God.
Of course they will never mention God explicitly: instead Adam Smith's Invisble Hand, the Spirit of the Markets, is alluded to. Much like the god of the Abrahamic religions, the Invisible Hand promises great rewards for those acting in its favour and dire punishments for heretics who do not. Like God, the Invisible Hand occasionally demands (through the priesthood) war, conquest, suspension of justice, torture and murder.
Whenever the holy books turn out to not predict the future, they are revised so that they always predicted the past with 20/20 hindsight. Thus it continues to be possible to justify any proposition from those writings as they have never been wrong.
That, or an explosion of trackers. Perhaps meta-trackers or some such. There's already hundreds of torrent sites around, and the number of open trackers and trackers that aren't well known is greater still.
It's like any central warezing service. The tendency is toward decentralization, once the technology has stabilized in its centralized form.
And then son-of-Bittorrent will again be publicized and gain another order of magnitude in userbase. Only this time around there will not be enough users on the Internet, and thus we will have to make do with "everyone with net access". Not really a shame, that.
Indeed. Especially when these international agreements are more commonly a vehicle for overriding the national legislature, i.e. what little there is left of democracy.
Of course in any western country there are people who, while the Soviet Union and the GDR and such still existed, touted democracy and freedom in their own countries while secretly envying the power to "get shit done" and the power to repress their opponents that the leaders of both the USSR and the GDR wielded. And now that those two aren't here any more, they can feel liberated to do as they please: the media will no longer entertain even apt comparisons between current leaders and Stalinism just as it was in the Soviet Union with regard to Fascism.
tl;dr -- shit's fucked up still, even in Finland (lol). (also don't believe the statistics that say there's no corruption here; we've just adapted to more subtle forms of corruption. "it's the way things have been done around here since forever!")
However, those people were not convicted based on an international treaty. The US was the originator of the "war on drugs", and not merely a signatory to some paper: that treaty came later and was just a vehicle for making the war global in scope. (Sounds pretty evil, right? It is.)
What I'm trying to say here is that even if the treaty goes through and is ratified by the EU, the US, mexico et al, it will still be a long, long way until national legislatures revise the local laws. Given the political momentum of the pirate parties and pro-piracy organizations and the ongoing generation switch, it's doubtful that the treaty would see faithful ratification in even most of the EU. There's simply too many hoops to jump through in order to force extremely unpopular legislation such as this.
So perhaps they'll move to get rid of democracy next, or anyway the last vestiges that exist today. It's only the logical next move. Remember, the EU is not a federation. Yet. And until it becomes that way, I will not entertain speculation in this direction. Keep your hallucinations and what-ifs private, please.
Keywords being "going to toss" and "not previously a crime". Moreover the US gulag system is unique in the western world.
Yar. But that's the thing, isn't it? Millions of europeans are downloading already. Politicians certainly cannot afford to piss them off. Every politician is frightened of the possibility that the non-voting 40% suddenly becomes angry enough to vote, and vote for some other party.
As for the pirate defamation, well. The international pro-piracy movement has done pretty well changing the image. Everyone up here either warezes or has friends who do: they know that these people aren't in fact "supporting terrorism" any more than the guy who grows pot in his walk-in closet does. Several countries have MPs who've come out, saying that there is nothing wrong with warezing.
Please don't permit the mass media to draw thick wool over your eyes. They'll tell you otherwise, but your own eyes and ears and yeah, even your genuine conscience are valid sources of knowledge with regard to the world.
Then your (our, really) problem is not the agreements but your dickless administration. In my native Finland it is legally forbidden for the state to turn a finnish citizen over to a foreign state for any reason. If it's lawsuit blood they want, they can come to this country and try to make their case here... or bribe some cabinet ministers into pressing the matter and telling the courts what to do, that works pretty well too with the current openly fascist cabinet.
(The reason behind this "no turning over finnish citizens" law is, surprise surprise, those few hundred jews and communists and such that were turned over to Nazi Germany. Bit of an embarrassment to say the least.)
Yet even in the US, no one is sentenced according to an international trade agreement. That's what I meant.
Not to mention the multitude of international agreements which the US has signed but not ratified. Such as the conventions against torture.
Tell me. Are you frightened of being struck by lightning? Enough to stop going outside?
Because becoming the target of a downloading lawsuit is currently less likely than being struck by lightning. This state of matters would remain even if the cartels increased their efforts tenfold. Even if they could persuade all police operations to be directed into copyright enforcement, the ordinary citizen could very justifiably not give a hoot.
The copyright cartels are already broken. Musicians, moviemakers and other participants of creative industries are already exploiting the Internet as a means of distribution. This genie certainly won't go back into the bottle unless another "trade agreement" enacts a system of strong guilds such as that found in Mussolini's Italy.
Besides, one international agreement does not make enforcement any easier. Millions of people just in northern europe have come to accept torrent downloading etc. as an everyday thing; international agreement or not, no country is going to toss even one percent of their population in jail for something that was not previously a crime. Not to mention actually catching and prosecuting etc. those people... matter of scale, really.
Also, trade agreements such as these don't have the power to override national legislation. Even if the EU signs and ratifies this, it will only be at the level of the EU -- i.e. they can pass a directive which EU member nations are perfectly free to implement as laxly as they please. Remember, the EU is not a federation. Not to mention how this would meet rather stiff resistance in the euro parliament, members of which have lately been strongly turning pro-privacy and pro-free culture.
Yeah, the quip was somewhat dampened by this damn slashdot software not permitting me to post anonymously twice in a row. Stupid piece of shit slarsedot. Argh.
Oh you whiny libertarian bitch you.
Wakey wakey. The site gets 500 million pageviews a month. Is that a practical application enough for you? Becoming an unforeseen new media for communication?
And removed from reality? Dude, 2ch is very mainstream in Japan. It practically makes its own reality.
This is where internet communication is going. Bulletin boards and imageboards where anonymity is the default and where pointless individualism is deprecated, even derided. (ever been called a namefag? well now you have, namefag.)
They finally realized that OOXML is in fact an abortion and not implementable even on a hypothetical level?
Well imagine that!
Perhaps they're frightened of Neelie Kroes. I'd be. Finally there's something that the EU is good for, i.e. standing up to fuck-huge money.
This is the exact same thing as "while I have not seen the videos in question, I would guess that many if not most of them are morally irredeemable and their authors should be punished just to be safe". That is the same goddamn argument as any moral crusader who has heard of a computer game that involves shooting people who are not ragheads or slanties or whichever enemy du jour you yanks are chasing right now.
What a coincidence, I was not actually arguing against you. More like... with you in fact.
But geez, these people have the nerve to try something dumb like software-based lock-in with Linux. Dumb, dumb, dumb.
Parts of licenses being struck down in this manner to the damage of the copyright holder is essentially unheard of in German, where the case was to take place before Skype tucked their tail between their legs. You would do well to ground your claims in precendent next time, so as to appear slightly less of a complete idiot.
It's likely that they contracted for the platform work from somewhere in East Asia (PRC or Taiwan are two popular countries of origin). These companies are as close as you can get to fly-by-night as possible without going to a Russian company.
Of course this does not exempt Skype from the GNU GPL's obligations any less than hiring a hitman would make one not a murderer.