I would like to point out again, as I have in another branch of this thread, that programs such as Spector, which I personally despise, are not spyware.
Either your employer gave permission to install it on the system you use at work, or someone with access to your home computer gave permission.
In the first case, it's not your computer, so tough noogies. In the second case, you may have some recourse against said person. For what it's worth, the EULA of Spector requires employers to notify employees, and individuals to only install on a machine they own.
These programs are not "surreptitious" in the least about their function or about their use of the dreaded "backchannel". Again, this means they are not spyware.
The issue of whether it can legally modify other programs such as Who's Watching Me, is a completely separate issue, albeit an important one.
As much as I despise these "snooping" programs, I don't think "spyware" is the right term for them.
If the software is installed on the computer you use at work (which is their primary target), then it is not your machine. Your employer, presumably, gave consent for the software to be installed by the IT guys. You may not have been informed of it, but it isn't using the network without permission, so it's not spyware.
Less importantly, most of the software that is considered spyware collects and sends information that will help the collector without particularly harming me (loss of bandwidth aside). This might include how often I run the program, or the type of information I'm searching for, etc.
Programs like Spector and WinWhatWhere are explicitly intended to bring about harm (e.g., get me fired, prove I'm cheating on my wife, etc.). In this sense, their use can have much more direct effects on your life than a stranger finding out I searched for Britney Spears MP3s.
Stores have it much easier in determining losses due to theft, since they have physical inventory. Record companies don't have any such physical inventory to use to track copyright violations, and so any estimates of loss are nebulous at best.
If stores raise their prices for losses due to shoplifting and employee theft, you have to wonder how much record companies already raise their prices to compensate for their "losses".
I suspect that we're already paying for the cost of their perceived losses due to copyright violations. Adding another government-approved levy to line their already velvet-lined pockets is just absurd.
The money certainly won't go to who "deserves" it. Will game publishers get any? Software publishers? TV and movie publishers? CDs can and are used to copy all of these things, and more, illegally.
I'm a game developer, so if this goes through, and I hope it doesn't, then I expect a nice fat cheque from the government every month.
We're so used to the idea of "pay more to get more". How about thinking about the total cost of telecommuting for a minute?
If we pay for a "business line", what we're really doing is paying the provider more money so that it can pay us that same money back when the service goes down.
If the residential service is as reliable as mine (my cable modem down during the work day only twice last year) I'd say that $40/month for a high-speed "residential line" is a whole lot more cost effective for most telecommuters than a $500/month T1 that "never" goes down.
And as other have mentioned, you can easily have a backup plan or two for the few days when you have problems connecting.
Of course, your mileage may vary if your provider has lousy uptime for residential lines.
I say pay for the cheaper line and lump it if there are a few down days.
Exactly correct. To further your point, in this guy's case, Windows was around long before their hardware, so the onus is on them to ensure it works with the software it needs to run.
Nobody is forcing your company to make Windows-approved hardware.
If your hardware doesn't work on Windows and Windows is a large part of your target market, why WOULDN'T you want to do the work necessary to make it compatible?
The following are the most prominent commercial validation suites. It might be worth contacting them to see if they will grant you some sort of "educational use" license.
Slashdot Mirror
The press release refers to Diego's Motorola-based settop box as being the current product focus.
Unfortunately, I suspect we won't see any single product with Moxi's fully-integrated features for some time.
ReplayTV doesn't have a built-in cable box.
Having the cable box integrated with the PVR is a HUGE advantage because it lets you record more than one digital cable program.
Without some communication between the cable box and the PVR you can't change to the right channel at the right time.
I would like to point out again, as I have in another branch of this thread, that programs such as Spector, which I personally despise, are not spyware.
Either your employer gave permission to install it on the system you use at work, or someone with access to your home computer gave permission.
In the first case, it's not your computer, so tough noogies. In the second case, you may have some recourse against said person. For what it's worth, the EULA of Spector requires employers to notify employees, and individuals to only install on a machine they own.
These programs are not "surreptitious" in the least about their function or about their use of the dreaded "backchannel". Again, this means they are not spyware.
The issue of whether it can legally modify other programs such as Who's Watching Me, is a completely separate issue, albeit an important one.
The spyware is simply software meant to perform a task. If someone uses a video camera to spy on someone, is the video camera manufacturer liable?
And Morpheus is just a program meant to allow sharing of music files. If someone uses Morpheus to share copyrighted files, is MusicCity liable?
I would hope not, but the RIAA doesn't seem to think so, and logic may not prevail here either.
As much as I despise these "snooping" programs, I don't think "spyware" is the right term for them. If the software is installed on the computer you use at work (which is their primary target), then it is not your machine. Your employer, presumably, gave consent for the software to be installed by the IT guys. You may not have been informed of it, but it isn't using the network without permission, so it's not spyware.
Less importantly, most of the software that is considered spyware collects and sends information that will help the collector without particularly harming me (loss of bandwidth aside). This might include how often I run the program, or the type of information I'm searching for, etc.
Programs like Spector and WinWhatWhere are explicitly intended to bring about harm (e.g., get me fired, prove I'm cheating on my wife, etc.). In this sense, their use can have much more direct effects on your life than a stranger finding out I searched for Britney Spears MP3s.
Just because Ethernet is used PRIMARILY for networking doesn't mean that it can't be used for other purposes. It is just a data transfer medium.
Look at what Gibson Guitars is doing with it in their MaGIC technology.
Clearly it COULD be used as a hard drive interface. In fact, the whole Network Attached Storage (NAS) business basically uses it that way.
You can be sure that record companies have made estimates of their losses due to copyright violations.
You can further be sure that they already factor in these losses into the prices they charge their distributors.
That's what makes this proposed levy even more ridiculous. It's to pay them for something that they are already getting paid for.
Stores have it much easier in determining losses due to theft, since they have physical inventory. Record companies don't have any such physical inventory to use to track copyright violations, and so any estimates of loss are nebulous at best.
If stores raise their prices for losses due to shoplifting and employee theft, you have to wonder how much record companies already raise their prices to compensate for their "losses".
I suspect that we're already paying for the cost of their perceived losses due to copyright violations. Adding another government-approved levy to line their already velvet-lined pockets is just absurd.
The money certainly won't go to who "deserves" it. Will game publishers get any? Software publishers? TV and movie publishers? CDs can and are used to copy all of these things, and more, illegally. I'm a game developer, so if this goes through, and I hope it doesn't, then I expect a nice fat cheque from the government every month.
>In Canada, almost every product is subject to a 15% HST tax.
Actually, each province has its own tax rate. BC's is 7% (maybe 7.5% soon).
We're so used to the idea of "pay more to get more". How about thinking about the total cost of telecommuting for a minute?
If we pay for a "business line", what we're really doing is paying the provider more money so that it can pay us that same money back when the service goes down.
If the residential service is as reliable as mine (my cable modem down during the work day only twice last year) I'd say that $40/month for a high-speed "residential line" is a whole lot more cost effective for most telecommuters than a $500/month T1 that "never" goes down.
And as other have mentioned, you can easily have a backup plan or two for the few days when you have problems connecting.
Of course, your mileage may vary if your provider has lousy uptime for residential lines.
I say pay for the cheaper line and lump it if there are a few down days.
Exactly correct. To further your point, in this guy's case, Windows was around long before their hardware, so the onus is on them to ensure it works with the software it needs to run.
Nobody is forcing your company to make Windows-approved hardware.
If your hardware doesn't work on Windows and Windows is a large part of your target market, why WOULDN'T you want to do the work necessary to make it compatible?
It's a free signup. Just do it!
So, if I'm rich gamer, and I decide to buy a high-end system, why wouldn't I get the best video card?
An extra $150-$200 isn't going to make any difference to me, and I'll be able to play my 3D games in a higher resolution!
I don't think that's insane at all.
The following are the most prominent commercial validation suites. It might be worth contacting them to see if they will grant you some sort of "educational use" license.
Plum Hall: http://www.plumhall.com/stec.html
Perennial: http://www.peren.com/pages/cvsa.htm
-----
What I want to see is some company like Walmart try to register walmartsuckssucks.com.
Then I want the WIPO to rule that walmartsuckssucks.com is 'confusingly similar' to walmartsucks.com, and yank the domain away from Walmart.
Bytenik