Especially that section when they started talking about region encoding. I do believe that was a rather lengthy section.
But overall, Mr. Valenti was consistent on one thing. It is his belief that if you bypass the encryption you are breaking the law. Of course, he also maintains that none of this infringes upon fair use. I don't agree with him but that's besides the point.
Bubblegum Crisis Akira Five Star Stories Black Magic 666 Kite - kinda like Le Femme Nikta Guyver - Interesting Dirty Pair - Funny as hell Fist of the North Star
Others: Totoro - Kid's movie but it's fun Lum - If you get into that Golgo13 Crying Freeman Baoh - But the magna is much better imo
Does anybody know if they made Mai the Psychic Girl anime? My wife would probably watch that with me.:)
So by that logic, it's OK to walk into Borders and steal "I, Robot" by Asimov if you then go out and purchase other Asimov books?
Hmmm, I can go to a Borders or a Barnes and Nobles, sit in a nice plush comfy chair, open the book and over a period of time read it. I haven't paid a cent but I have read the book. Hell, I've seen people go into the store, grab a comp sci. text and drink a latte while taking notes on what they are reading.
The information is being taken from these books. The authors are not getting a cent from these people. Shouldn't authors like Stephen King or better yet Radia Perlman file suit against these companies to change their buisness practices? Why isn't B&N tracking these copyright infringers?
I can't believe I missed something so obvious. You are right. I just went through my copy of West's Business Law and in what little there is on pages 171 - 173 (just before the section on computer crime no less) it talks about how things that are not or cannot be trademarked, patented, or copywrit(?) can be a trade secret.
MS cannot have it both ways. The EULA refers to the document as a trade secret and tries to effect a click-through "NDA". This copywrite and violating the DMCA *is* a load of crap.
Looks like Project BananaRama ended up in the same boat as the Alan Parsons Project. Bolluxed by an inept guard^H^H^H^H^Hparalegal.
It is special protection for those companies which have to abide by a competitor's/outside party's patent. After a shorter period of time the industry would have unfettered use of the technology. This would be a benefit that other industries would not have. i.e. Companies into plastics would still have to abide by a 20 year term for say some patent that speeds up the setting time in moulds. From a larger perspective, the statement makes sense.
you certainly don't have any "right" to involve yourselves in the legal and political processes of our country
You are right. We don't have a right. We have a responsibility to be involved. By not shouldering this duty you risk forfeiting your rights and the opprotunities of letting your concerns be heard.
That you are so completely ignorant of civic responsibility and the basic principles upon which this country was founded upon honestly makes me despair. You seem to think that the only people we vote into office are those with poli sci or jurisprudence degrees. Hell, we have had an actor in the White House and the people have elected a professional wrestler as governor. And look at some of the bad law passed by those who have prepared themselves to be professional politicians.
Not being involved makes you worse than an anarchist. I have more respect for a sheep or a lemming than for a human being who consciously lives the position you advocate.
While this news out of HP is commendable I still wish they would reverse their stance when it comes to their DeskJet models.
I actually took the time to try and get some information out of HP to see if I could maybe get some added functionality out of my DeskJet 970Cse. Specifically, using the duplex module and getting a resolution higher than 300x300. I've learned the following things:
HP does not support using DeskJets in a *nix environment as they consider printer usage will be higher than what they reccomend. They run under the assumption that the printer will be networked and, I guess, not on a workstation.
Requesting info on extended PCL codes and technical info on how the duplex module is initialized was a bust. Even though I informed them that I knew HP's policy re: linux but simply wanted information about the printer I got an email back with the policy statement, a responce that in order to change the printer's resolution I should click a tab and select 'Best', and a link to a list of regular PCL codes used in DOS (actually the only useful bit of info I have currently.)
Next was going to the community board for my printer and requesting more info. Someone else had posted an inquiry for pretty much the same info I wanted and the moderator provided a phone number to another division. As the number was long distance I requested an email addy and the responce can be summed up as "Not familiar with that department. The number is it." Checking the other posts, I noted the common theme was check with your vendor. For linux, that pretty much means Ghostscript.
Looked around Alladin's site and finally got around to downloading version 5.99 so I could look into the documentation. I read the comments re: the deskjet drivers and have pretty much given up on the idea of improving the drivers. Making a long story short (too late), the documentation for the driver reports:
However, HP will not support user-level programming of this resolution-enhanced mode, one reason being that (I understand) all the dot spacing has to be done by the driver, and if you get it wrong, you can actually damage the print head.
I really do like the printer. I am glad I bought it and considering my original purpose in buying it was not for use under linux I don't feel too bad as it looks like I'm stuck with less than optimal print quality. However, the bullet issue for my next printer will be linux support and unless HP rectifies this issue I don't think I could reccommend any of their DeskJet products to another linux user.
Can we describe the algorithm in such a way that any basic programmer could replicate it? *This* would be free speech. If the Progressive can descibe how to build an atomic weapon and get away with it under the principles of free speech how in the world can we be persecuted for reverse engineering a pitiful encryption scheme to play a fsking movie under a giftware OS?
Don't you think Apple deserves to be able to protect Aqua's GUI?
IIRC, this issue has seen a courtroom and the answer was "No." Look and Feel is not protected. It's why I'm surprised they sent those cease and desist orders out. AFAIK, Apple doesn't have a leg to stand on.
Gnome works well and I am much more comfortable with it than I am with KDE. I also think it is a good idea for some competition. Both sides are working on interesting ways to provide a desktop environment.
IMNSHO, there are enough distros out there that focus on KDE. And quite honestly, you'll have to pry my cold, dead fingers off my computer to remove Gnome from it.:)
I'd rather see them copywrite their own code than patent the algorithm. Heck, they'd probably pay less to get it, the copywrite would last longer and the families could retain rights for 50 years after all the coders died.
Anyway, if you took the time to setup an account and set your prefs you wouldn't have to be bothered by stuff that doesn't interest you. You only have yourself to blame.
IMO, your attitude sucks. You're offensive, so why should I even give your opinion any weight at all? You're obviously not "above it" as clearly indicated by your childish rant and personally this "I'm a normal programmer/engineer/knows what's going on in the real world" hedge doesn't wash.That type of person would have enough experience to know you don't hit the submit button on a post like yours and would have written something halfway civil if they had a real point to make.
So under further review I suggest that the moderators give you troll and flamebait as well. Normally I would not feed a troll but I'm in a fanciful mood today. Moderate as needed.
I know this has probably been aid before, but.... Why doesn't members of the open source community patent things?
1 - Money. Getting a patent is expensive.
2 - Inconvienance. You don't simply go to the patent office with your pile of papers and get a patent. Doing it yourself is a good way to be rejected. You need to hire a patent lawyer.
3 - Hassle. We now have to keep a team of lawyers on retainer to track and litigate offenders. Mo' money, mo' money, mo' money.
4 - We're new fish in the game. Think about what would be our goals in cross-licensing agreements. "Yeah, I want to use your technology and I will use it to write a program that will be freely available and, oh yeah, we'll give the source away too. That way every platform can have our free program, including the platform you are targeting for profit. In return we will allow you access to our IP which is already available for no cost." If there was ever a time I'd expect a buisnessman to blurt out FOAD that would be it.
For a corporation, it costs them virtually nothing to pay the fee and get the USPTO to re-review a patent. Simply look at what is happening with the Y2K windowing patent. All I ever hear is that to negate a patent you have to go to court. Well, if you have the green I guess you can be seen by the USPTO. And if we go under the assumption that nearly all IP patents are obvious or have prior art behind them how many of our patents would survive review?
Our best bet is to publish and code all we can. I also still think we need to level a class action lawsuit against the USPTO. If they cannot handle looking over all of the IP patents and doing a good job of seperating the wheat from the chaff then they are a liability to the industry and to the emerging OSS market. It is not acceptable that they drain resources and profits from industry because they feel it is the court's responsibility to ferret out the mistakes. A patent is *nothing* but a societal tool to foster the spread of innovation just as IP is nothing but a tool. A tool, *not* a weapon.
So why haven't they been served? Response to the people making the software was near immediate but we haven't heard one thing re: legal action against the company who allegedly broke their agreement with the DVD consortium and left a key unencrypted.
Seems they have their scapegoats. I'm almost willing to bet nothing happens to Xing.
And Mr. "People have too many rights" Bush is any better?
The problem is we as a society have created this problem. *Look* at the Republicans. There is only one canidate being talked about because he has amassed such a war chest that no one wants to compete against him. Elizabeth Dole didn't quit because she wanted to. She quit because it was a waste of time trying to get as much money as Bush.
Without that money, canidates can't innudate us with political advertising. Of course, what would be better is to have more debates but the problem is we as a society don't watch them. It is so much easier to nibble on our 30-sec sound bite and buy a bullet issue or two.
And considering Bush's ties and relationships with MS could you honestly say he'd be keeping his nose out of the settlement talks if he was in Gore's shoes? Don't think so.
In all honesty, if all you want to do is WATCH THE MOVIE WHILE RUNNING LINUX, why would it matter if it was a freely obtainable, freely distributable binary as opposed to an opensource one that was allowing the viewing of the movie? That'd probably appease a lot of people out there, and everybody (except RMS) wins...
A binary distribution would have to be constantly maintained and could be broken by a new kernel at any time. Without the source for the driver how could you determine why it has broken. Is it due to a bug in the new kernel code or one in the driver. Or has a new feature been added that causes the driver to now be obsolete. Even if I have a clue what might be wrong, how do I reasonably go about fixing it?
This is one of the reasons why binary drivers are considered a bad thing in the linux community. Creative was nice enough to provide binary drivrs for some of their cards but, after hearing many of the complaints regarding those drivers, it does not dissuade me from the opinion that Linus was right in stressing that drivers should be open sourced.
It's only really a library everyone needs, isn't it? And once it's done, there's no real point to enhancing it, because it's not going to make more frames in the movie or anything like that... And other people could write their own interfaces and controllers.
Not all drivers are created equal. Work could be done to remove bugs, get performance increases by reducing CPU usage, etc.. If a new hardware architecture came up and tweaks needed to be made to the driver, it could be done faster and more efficiently by using an open sourced driver.
You have to realize this isn't Windows or a programming department like they have in Apple. The culture works much more efficiently when it has the source code available.
I vote we ask Redhat for the financial help. They've got the clout to do it.
I vote we don't. We don't want any distro vendor to start having sole access to non-OSS drivers to something like DVD. Even if they did give the binary away for free to all the other vendors.
What would be of more use is to have a vendor, like RH, spent the money and did a clean room reverse-engineering of the DVD spec and then open source their efforts. A linux distro company would have an easier time proving that this effort is important to keep them competitive than a small group of talented enthusiasts. By being an Open Source company, someone like RH could reasonably argue that they cannot commit to the restrictions of the DVD consortium.
Hrmm, Gore "I founded the Internet" or Bush "People have too many rights"?
Personally I'd take Gore. I can forgive that faux pas. I will never, under any circumstance forget hearing that I have too many rights.
I prefer to wait and see. We basically have a year before elections and I cannot see a canidate getting away with not voicing an opinion of the MS trial. The antitrust suit could become a bullet issue for voters.
Oh yeah. Let's see, the Consortium is investigating ways of punishing those who have cracked their weak-ass copyprotection and to show them our displeasure at being vindictive for their own damn stupidity we should throw money to them.
How they shall tremble in terror upon their pile of money which we gave them knowing the size of the market who will buy DVD products. I am most assured that if people had not boycotted tuna but instead used your plan we could save twice as many dolphins from the nets. I can hear Flipper cheering now.
Serious for but a moment. Unless you send them a reciept and a letter voicing that you would never buy a DVD again all they will see is a sudden spike in purchases as they begin to harrass the people foiling their encryption scheme. Profits==Good to any company. Also keep in mind that those profits will partially go towards prosecuting the people we want to defend.
Your idea will send a message that they are doing what consumers want them to do.
This is why you want to boycott DVD and send well written, non-flamelike letters to the Consortium! This way you send a clear signal that explains to the comapnies involved why they are experiencing a loss of profits. Just to make sure we understand the point here. Making money gives a company the impression they are doing something right. Losing money starts a company investigating what is going wrong with their business.
Slashdot Mirror
Especially that section when they started talking about region encoding. I do believe that was a rather lengthy section.
But overall, Mr. Valenti was consistent on one thing. It is his belief that if you bypass the encryption you are breaking the law. Of course, he also maintains that none of this infringes upon fair use. I don't agree with him but that's besides the point.
Hackers saw the need
Time and code broke trade secret
RE is legal!
I don't know if they are out on DVD but...
:)
Bubblegum Crisis
Akira
Five Star Stories
Black Magic 666
Kite - kinda like Le Femme Nikta
Guyver - Interesting
Dirty Pair - Funny as hell
Fist of the North Star
Others:
Totoro - Kid's movie but it's fun
Lum - If you get into that
Golgo13
Crying Freeman
Baoh - But the magna is much better imo
Does anybody know if they made Mai the Psychic Girl anime? My wife would probably watch that with me.
Hmmm, I can go to a Borders or a Barnes and Nobles, sit in a nice plush comfy chair, open the book and over a period of time read it. I haven't paid a cent but I have read the book. Hell, I've seen people go into the store, grab a comp sci. text and drink a latte while taking notes on what they are reading.
The information is being taken from these books. The authors are not getting a cent from these people. Shouldn't authors like Stephen King or better yet Radia Perlman file suit against these companies to change their buisness practices? Why isn't B&N tracking these copyright infringers?
nt
MS cannot have it both ways. The EULA refers to the document as a trade secret and tries to effect a click-through "NDA". This copywrite and violating the DMCA *is* a load of crap.
Looks like Project BananaRama ended up in the same boat as the Alan Parsons Project. Bolluxed by an inept guard^H^H^H^H^Hparalegal.
It is special protection for those companies which have to abide by a competitor's/outside party's patent. After a shorter period of time the industry would have unfettered use of the technology. This would be a benefit that other industries would not have. i.e. Companies into plastics would still have to abide by a 20 year term for say some patent that speeds up the setting time in moulds. From a larger perspective, the statement makes sense.
You are right. We don't have a right. We have a responsibility to be involved. By not shouldering this duty you risk forfeiting your rights and the opprotunities of letting your concerns be heard.
That you are so completely ignorant of civic responsibility and the basic principles upon which this country was founded upon honestly makes me despair. You seem to think that the only people we vote into office are those with poli sci or jurisprudence degrees. Hell, we have had an actor in the White House and the people have elected a professional wrestler as governor. And look at some of the bad law passed by those who have prepared themselves to be professional politicians.
Not being involved makes you worse than an anarchist. I have more respect for a sheep or a lemming than for a human being who consciously lives the position you advocate.
It made the Monday morning addition in the paper I read. So it was being sent out by AP on Sunday. Guess more than /. is "behind" on this one.
href=http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~pam/papers/Sa muelson_IP_dig_eco_htm.htm
This law was destined for a courtroom.
Arggh, my bad. I misread the article. I'll refine my original question. With the judge's current views what form of defense do we use to fight this?
Title says it all.
I actually took the time to try and get some information out of HP to see if I could maybe get some added functionality out of my DeskJet 970Cse. Specifically, using the duplex module and getting a resolution higher than 300x300. I've learned the following things:
HP does not support using DeskJets in a *nix environment as they consider printer usage will be higher than what they reccomend. They run under the assumption that the printer will be networked and, I guess, not on a workstation.
Requesting info on extended PCL codes and technical info on how the duplex module is initialized was a bust. Even though I informed them that I knew HP's policy re: linux but simply wanted information about the printer I got an email back with the policy statement, a responce that in order to change the printer's resolution I should click a tab and select 'Best', and a link to a list of regular PCL codes used in DOS (actually the only useful bit of info I have currently.)
Next was going to the community board for my printer and requesting more info. Someone else had posted an inquiry for pretty much the same info I wanted and the moderator provided a phone number to another division. As the number was long distance I requested an email addy and the responce can be summed up as "Not familiar with that department. The number is it." Checking the other posts, I noted the common theme was check with your vendor. For linux, that pretty much means Ghostscript.
Looked around Alladin's site and finally got around to downloading version 5.99 so I could look into the documentation. I read the comments re: the deskjet drivers and have pretty much given up on the idea of improving the drivers. Making a long story short (too late), the documentation for the driver reports:
I really do like the printer. I am glad I bought it and considering my original purpose in buying it was not for use under linux I don't feel too bad as it looks like I'm stuck with less than optimal print quality. However, the bullet issue for my next printer will be linux support and unless HP rectifies this issue I don't think I could reccommend any of their DeskJet products to another linux user.
Can we describe the algorithm in such a way that any basic programmer could replicate it? *This* would be free speech. If the Progressive can descibe how to build an atomic weapon and get away with it under the principles of free speech how in the world can we be persecuted for reverse engineering a pitiful encryption scheme to play a fsking movie under a giftware OS?
IIRC, this issue has seen a courtroom and the answer was "No." Look and Feel is not protected. It's why I'm surprised they sent those cease and desist orders out. AFAIK, Apple doesn't have a leg to stand on.
IMNSHO, there are enough distros out there that focus on KDE. And quite honestly, you'll have to pry my cold, dead fingers off my computer to remove Gnome from it. :)
I'd rather see them copywrite their own code than patent the algorithm. Heck, they'd probably pay less to get it, the copywrite would last longer and the families could retain rights for 50 years after all the coders died.
Anyway, if you took the time to setup an account and set your prefs you wouldn't have to be bothered by stuff that doesn't interest you. You only have yourself to blame.
IMO, your attitude sucks. You're offensive, so why should I even give your opinion any weight at all? You're obviously not "above it" as clearly indicated by your childish rant and personally this "I'm a normal programmer/engineer/knows what's going on in the real world" hedge doesn't wash.That type of person would have enough experience to know you don't hit the submit button on a post like yours and would have written something halfway civil if they had a real point to make.
So under further review I suggest that the moderators give you troll and flamebait as well. Normally I would not feed a troll but I'm in a fanciful mood today. Moderate as needed.
1 - Money. Getting a patent is expensive.
2 - Inconvienance. You don't simply go to the patent office with your pile of papers and get a patent. Doing it yourself is a good way to be rejected. You need to hire a patent lawyer.
3 - Hassle. We now have to keep a team of lawyers on retainer to track and litigate offenders. Mo' money, mo' money, mo' money.
4 - We're new fish in the game. Think about what would be our goals in cross-licensing agreements. "Yeah, I want to use your technology and I will use it to write a program that will be freely available and, oh yeah, we'll give the source away too. That way every platform can have our free program, including the platform you are targeting for profit. In return we will allow you access to our IP which is already available for no cost." If there was ever a time I'd expect a buisnessman to blurt out FOAD that would be it.
For a corporation, it costs them virtually nothing to pay the fee and get the USPTO to re-review a patent. Simply look at what is happening with the Y2K windowing patent. All I ever hear is that to negate a patent you have to go to court. Well, if you have the green I guess you can be seen by the USPTO. And if we go under the assumption that nearly all IP patents are obvious or have prior art behind them how many of our patents would survive review?
Our best bet is to publish and code all we can. I also still think we need to level a class action lawsuit against the USPTO. If they cannot handle looking over all of the IP patents and doing a good job of seperating the wheat from the chaff then they are a liability to the industry and to the emerging OSS market. It is not acceptable that they drain resources and profits from industry because they feel it is the court's responsibility to ferret out the mistakes. A patent is *nothing* but a societal tool to foster the spread of innovation just as IP is nothing but a tool. A tool, *not* a weapon.
Seems they have their scapegoats. I'm almost willing to bet nothing happens to Xing.
The problem is we as a society have created this problem. *Look* at the Republicans. There is only one canidate being talked about because he has amassed such a war chest that no one wants to compete against him. Elizabeth Dole didn't quit because she wanted to. She quit because it was a waste of time trying to get as much money as Bush.
Without that money, canidates can't innudate us with political advertising. Of course, what would be better is to have more debates but the problem is we as a society don't watch them. It is so much easier to nibble on our 30-sec sound bite and buy a bullet issue or two.
And considering Bush's ties and relationships with MS could you honestly say he'd be keeping his nose out of the settlement talks if he was in Gore's shoes? Don't think so.
A binary distribution would have to be constantly maintained and could be broken by a new kernel at any time. Without the source for the driver how could you determine why it has broken. Is it due to a bug in the new kernel code or one in the driver. Or has a new feature been added that causes the driver to now be obsolete. Even if I have a clue what might be wrong, how do I reasonably go about fixing it?
This is one of the reasons why binary drivers are considered a bad thing in the linux community. Creative was nice enough to provide binary drivrs for some of their cards but, after hearing many of the complaints regarding those drivers, it does not dissuade me from the opinion that Linus was right in stressing that drivers should be open sourced.
It's only really a library everyone needs, isn't it? And once it's done, there's no real point to enhancing it, because it's not going to make more frames in the movie or anything like that... And other people could write their own interfaces and controllers.
Not all drivers are created equal. Work could be done to remove bugs, get performance increases by reducing CPU usage, etc.. If a new hardware architecture came up and tweaks needed to be made to the driver, it could be done faster and more efficiently by using an open sourced driver.
You have to realize this isn't Windows or a programming department like they have in Apple. The culture works much more efficiently when it has the source code available.
I vote we ask Redhat for the financial help. They've got the clout to do it.
I vote we don't. We don't want any distro vendor to start having sole access to non-OSS drivers to something like DVD. Even if they did give the binary away for free to all the other vendors.
What would be of more use is to have a vendor, like RH, spent the money and did a clean room reverse-engineering of the DVD spec and then open source their efforts. A linux distro company would have an easier time proving that this effort is important to keep them competitive than a small group of talented enthusiasts. By being an Open Source company, someone like RH could reasonably argue that they cannot commit to the restrictions of the DVD consortium.
At least that's my take on the matter.
How he could have said that and still get millions in contributions is beyond me. I'd rather see "I invented the Internet" Gore for the next 8 years.
Personally I'd take Gore. I can forgive that faux pas. I will never, under any circumstance forget hearing that I have too many rights.
I prefer to wait and see. We basically have a year before elections and I cannot see a canidate getting away with not voicing an opinion of the MS trial. The antitrust suit could become a bullet issue for voters.
How they shall tremble in terror upon their pile of money which we gave them knowing the size of the market who will buy DVD products. I am most assured that if people had not boycotted tuna but instead used your plan we could save twice as many dolphins from the nets. I can hear Flipper cheering now.
Serious for but a moment. Unless you send them a reciept and a letter voicing that you would never buy a DVD again all they will see is a sudden spike in purchases as they begin to harrass the people foiling their encryption scheme. Profits==Good to any company. Also keep in mind that those profits will partially go towards prosecuting the people we want to defend.
Your idea will send a message that they are doing what consumers want them to do.
This is why you want to boycott DVD and send well written, non-flamelike letters to the Consortium! This way you send a clear signal that explains to the comapnies involved why they are experiencing a loss of profits. Just to make sure we understand the point here. Making money gives a company the impression they are doing something right. Losing money starts a company investigating what is going wrong with their business.