In a legal action, a legally qualified target can often have less latitude afforded them in their defense than unqualified targets.
Going after NYCL for, say, defamation not only ties up a thorn in their side in a court case, but is harder to defend because it is expected that NYCL should know the law precisely.
The idea that "ignorance of the law is not a defense" may be true, but only in a criminal suit, it affords you some breathing room in a civil suit, to my knowledge.
Going after the FSF gets them money from places other than the recording industry, if it is believed credible. Stallman has pissed off a few too many corporate magnates, and they have money and the will. Microsoft might put cash into this, for instance.
Seriously, the game just got kicked up a notch, and it is possible for the RIAA to prevail simply because of the "torrents" of money they might receive from these sorts of actions. Justice can be bought.
The opening is over. The average Joe is undoubtedly aware that copying is illegal, and will no longer be afforded any breathing room. It's time for mid-game. They're trying to take down Joe's advocates.
Watch out. There are many more gambits to be played. This is a long game.
Yes. Congratulations. You've just demonstrated that the C programmming language makes the difference between a hack and an evaluation statement come down to nothing more than an extra "=."
Heh. So _Fahrenheit 451_ isn't too far off? Only we don't have to burn all the books, all we have to do is digitize and encrypt them. Then we can cancel anything in the database, that is current, which we don't like with a simple query. Something like:
[First name of author]! and pre/2 [last name of author] w/7 bush or gore or republican! or democrat! or charg! or accus! or criticiz! or blam! or defend! or iran contra or clinton or spotted owl or florida recount or sex! or controvers! or racis! or fraud! or investigat! or bankrupt! or layoff! or downsiz! or PNTR or NAFTA or outsourc! or indict! or enron or kerry or iraq or wmd! or arrest! or intox! or fired or sex! or racis! or intox! or slur! or arrest! or fired or controvers! or abortion! or gay! or homosexual! or gun! or firearm!
My tongue is in my cheek for now, but I agree with the sentiment: If you hand someone a loaded gun, don't be surprised if it goes off inconveniently.
I reject DRM as long as there are "unencumbered" means to own and trade the media, like a paperback. I jealously protect my own power as a consumer. If we are to surrender that power, we should ensure we're actually getting something for it: better convenience, lower costs, higher quality, lesser environmental impact, whatever.
Then we must make sure it's an equivalent trade, in total convenience, costs and time/fees to manage our legal affairs, or we are being ripped off.
I see most of this stuff as a rip off on the basis of TCO.
This is linked at the bottom of the EFF brief, but seems more credible, as the Atlantic is not litigating, so I'm putting the link directly into the comments thread:
It's the year 2024 and all the ozone above Earth has gone. To protect people from dying, MacLeod helped in the construction of a giant "shield", several years ago. But, since there isn't left anyone Immortal after MacLeod's victory in the previous film, he has stopped being an Immortal himself. Now he is just an old man, until one day some other Immortals arrive on our planet. You see, the Immortals come from another planet... Planet Ziest.
Oh God! We've become a bad movie. There can be only one.
If you want to kill yourself, it's your problem. The stressor will come at some point. It must.
We can't go campaigning to remove all stress from life because some people have a predilection for suicide. It is up to the suicidally inclined to remove pressure from their life through their actions. Doing something illegal will, in sufficient quantity, provide stress. It is just that lack of conscience will eventually produce stress.
I'm not a media sentry fan, and I have a great deal of sympathy for the woman, but her mental illness is irrelevant to the issue. The anecdote is syrupy bathos designed to provoke an emotional response.
I'm not biting. She needs to get some Prozac and that fact does not change the fact that the RIAA needs to be investigated, and charged under RICO. Big deal. (*shrug*)
First off, when the activists at Seabrook said "no nukes," it most certainly did not stand for "nuclear weapons." Look it up. Given the historical meaning of the word "nuke," the headline was a bit shoddy, not Obama. Obama was clear. He's an excellent and deliberate speaker.
1. That takes more work
Our enemies are, if nothing else, patient.
2. Any nation that uses nukes as first-strike weapons will be a pariah
What makes you think we're going to be able to track the "nation" that used the first strike nuke, if it even is a nation, and not some decentralized covertly funded group with an agenda? And what makes you think a retaliatory or tactical use isn't possible?
And what flavor of wingnut kool-aid are you drinking this morning? Whatever happened to the militia types when Bush was spying on Americans and arguing he had the right to lock them up without a warrant or trial, and torture them?
I was decrying the Patriot Act, advocating for Geneva P.O.W. status, opposing the Iraq invasion, and weeping into some very strong coffee, IIRC.
No wingnut Kool-Aid here, sir. Geopolitical games are dangerous, and no one really has the right to play them, especially the incompetant. Barack Obama seems totally naive on that point, judging by the content of his speeches.
The nuclear horse is out of the barn, forever, and I can only pray that Obama knows what he's doing, but is making foolish speeches to mollify the fools. If that's true, this is not a change from Bush. It's the same old "continual campaign." It's the same old, "Say one thing, do another.":^(
Clearly, "no weaponized nukes" is not a possibility in a world where there is any discord. If the technology exists, it will be weaponized, regardless of any attempt to ban the process.
War, contrary to Geneva, doesn't actually have rules. The only road to peace isn't "ban all the weapons," it's "Don't give anyone a reason to kill your people, remain reasonable and as passive as possible, give reason and blessings a chance to work, and after that, annihilate anyone who wants you gone and fails to see reason."
If we do the first steps right, there should be no reason to get to the last step.
A "nuke free" world would be one in which we use no fission/fusion of atoms for the energy. Weaponizing it is one aspect of the technology.
The problem is, a power plant program can (and likely will) be used to make weapons. The horse is out of the barn. Obama is advocating that we can have the knowledge to make steel, but no one will make swords.
It's somewhat naive. We'll see how he executes his plans, or us.
The chain of evidence issues are enormous. How the hell do you secure a crime scene, with probable cause and warrant in hand, when it is potentially critical infrastructure, not to mention that the infrastructure simultaneously serves as physical records, physical assets, forensic evidence and perhaps a common carrier?
What the heck are the "rules of evidence" for that mess? It can't be the same as the rules for shutting down a moonshine operation. I imagine those rules are soon to be written.
Doesn't matter what the motive or rationalization is: Unreasonable seizure by the federal government is forbidden in the Constitution.
There's no way they needed all this "evidence" for some unpaid bills. Nice story, but I call bullshit.
God knows what is really going on here, but I hope it eventually sees the light of day. This is reminding me of Waco, with 98% less people being burned alive involved.
1) Why does this shit always happen in Texas, when the Dems are in power. First Waco, now this?!
2) I hope the EFF and the ACLU form up like some Mecha-Voltron and tear Eric Holder a new one over this.
Holy shit. I don't care *why* they did it, you can't rip up some railroad tracks because someone's smuggling drugs by train. We're going to have to find a subtler, more sensible way to deal with alleged criminals who run data centers.
Yeah. You see that star that's 45 light years away from here? You ain't getting there unless you can become energy and not die. Then it'll take 45 years or so, lord knows what it's like being pure energy, and everyone who remained as matter will be long since dead when you get there.
Get it? Good.
We have a better shot at traveling into "inner space" as gods than we do "outer space," as waveforms. Get out the microscopes, colliders, and deep sea environment suits, there's lots of exploring to be done *right here*, and we aren't getting away from *right here* if we don't solve the problems *right here, right now*.
Yup. My next door neighbor's house appears with its front door open on the Google StreetView. You can bet that burgulars are going to take interest.
Google StreetView is a cool, but bad, idea. Just go there yourself if you're interested in what it looks like, and more importantly, so WE can see what YOU look like, and report any suspicious activity to the police.
I consider any Google StreetView car to be engaging in a "suspicious activity." If I came to your neighborhood and started taking lots of pictures, wouldn't you?
oh for the love of god my post is getting screened for too many caps it's april fools day everyone should post in nothing but caps on april fools day lets see if this messes up your bayesian filters pope turlingdrome banana requiem lameness filter like fer sure
Did anyone else misread this (before reading the summary) as Microsoft is working on an automated program to find *security exploits in open-source projects*?
Man, I had to readjust my tinfoil hat for a second there.
Slashdot Mirror
In a legal action, a legally qualified target can often have less latitude afforded them in their defense than unqualified targets.
Going after NYCL for, say, defamation not only ties up a thorn in their side in a court case, but is harder to defend because it is expected that NYCL should know the law precisely.
The idea that "ignorance of the law is not a defense" may be true, but only in a criminal suit, it affords you some breathing room in a civil suit, to my knowledge.
Going after the FSF gets them money from places other than the recording industry, if it is believed credible. Stallman has pissed off a few too many corporate magnates, and they have money and the will. Microsoft might put cash into this, for instance.
Seriously, the game just got kicked up a notch, and it is possible for the RIAA to prevail simply because of the "torrents" of money they might receive from these sorts of actions. Justice can be bought.
The opening is over. The average Joe is undoubtedly aware that copying is illegal, and will no longer be afforded any breathing room. It's time for mid-game. They're trying to take down Joe's advocates.
Watch out. There are many more gambits to be played. This is a long game.
--
Toro
And even funnier. I have mod points and didn't realize it. DUH.
Hopefully I will make a full recovery as well. ;^)
--
Toro
That is EXACTLY what I thought.
It seems the RIAA is getting better at picking targets. Your job just became harder, NYCL. They *can* learn.
--
Toro
Yes. Congratulations. You've just demonstrated that the C programmming language makes the difference between a hack and an evaluation statement come down to nothing more than an extra "=."
Every OS sucks, because C sucks.
--
Toro
(Spot the syntax error in this post!)
Heh. So _Fahrenheit 451_ isn't too far off? Only we don't have to burn all the books, all we have to do is digitize and encrypt them. Then we can cancel anything in the database, that is current, which we don't like with a simple query. Something like:
[First name of author]! and pre/2 [last name of author] w/7 bush or gore or republican! or democrat! or charg! or accus! or criticiz! or blam! or defend! or iran contra or clinton or spotted owl or florida recount or sex! or controvers! or racis! or fraud! or investigat! or bankrupt! or layoff! or downsiz! or PNTR or NAFTA or outsourc! or indict! or enron or kerry or iraq or wmd! or arrest! or intox! or fired or sex! or racis! or intox! or slur! or arrest! or fired or controvers! or abortion! or gay! or homosexual! or gun! or firearm!
My tongue is in my cheek for now, but I agree with the sentiment: If you hand someone a loaded gun, don't be surprised if it goes off inconveniently.
I reject DRM as long as there are "unencumbered" means to own and trade the media, like a paperback. I jealously protect my own power as a consumer. If we are to surrender that power, we should ensure we're actually getting something for it: better convenience, lower costs, higher quality, lesser environmental impact, whatever.
Then we must make sure it's an equivalent trade, in total convenience, costs and time/fees to manage our legal affairs, or we are being ripped off.
I see most of this stuff as a rip off on the basis of TCO.
--
Toro
This is linked at the bottom of the EFF brief, but seems more credible, as the Atlantic is not litigating, so I'm putting the link directly into the comments thread:
http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/04/shut_up_its_still_a_secret.php
--
Toro
First thought? "My God, it's full of stars."
Highlander II:
It's the year 2024 and all the ozone above Earth has gone. To protect people from dying, MacLeod helped in the construction of a giant "shield", several years ago. But, since there isn't left anyone Immortal after MacLeod's victory in the previous film, he has stopped being an Immortal himself. Now he is just an old man, until one day some other Immortals arrive on our planet. You see, the Immortals come from another planet... Planet Ziest.
Oh God! We've become a bad movie. There can be only one.
--
Toro
That was a very sensible and cogent analysis of an intractable problem.
Thanks.
--
Toro
If you want to kill yourself, it's your problem. The stressor will come at some point. It must.
We can't go campaigning to remove all stress from life because some people have a predilection for suicide. It is up to the suicidally inclined to remove pressure from their life through their actions. Doing something illegal will, in sufficient quantity, provide stress. It is just that lack of conscience will eventually produce stress.
I'm not a media sentry fan, and I have a great deal of sympathy for the woman, but her mental illness is irrelevant to the issue. The anecdote is syrupy bathos designed to provoke an emotional response.
I'm not biting. She needs to get some Prozac and that fact does not change the fact that the RIAA needs to be investigated, and charged under RICO. Big deal. (*shrug*)
--
Toro
All it would take is to lengthen Twitter messages to 616 characters. That would bring the whole thing down.
The truth is "out there."
--
Toro
First off, when the activists at Seabrook said "no nukes," it most certainly did not stand for "nuclear weapons." Look it up. Given the historical meaning of the word "nuke," the headline was a bit shoddy, not Obama. Obama was clear. He's an excellent and deliberate speaker.
1. That takes more work
Our enemies are, if nothing else, patient.
2. Any nation that uses nukes as first-strike weapons will be a pariah
What makes you think we're going to be able to track the "nation" that used the first strike nuke, if it even is a nation, and not some decentralized covertly funded group with an agenda? And what makes you think a retaliatory or tactical use isn't possible?
And what flavor of wingnut kool-aid are you drinking this morning? Whatever happened to the militia types when Bush was spying on Americans and arguing he had the right to lock them up without a warrant or trial, and torture them?
I was decrying the Patriot Act, advocating for Geneva P.O.W. status, opposing the Iraq invasion, and weeping into some very strong coffee, IIRC.
No wingnut Kool-Aid here, sir. Geopolitical games are dangerous, and no one really has the right to play them, especially the incompetant. Barack Obama seems totally naive on that point, judging by the content of his speeches.
The nuclear horse is out of the barn, forever, and I can only pray that Obama knows what he's doing, but is making foolish speeches to mollify the fools. If that's true, this is not a change from Bush. It's the same old "continual campaign." It's the same old, "Say one thing, do another." :^(
Clearly, "no weaponized nukes" is not a possibility in a world where there is any discord. If the technology exists, it will be weaponized, regardless of any attempt to ban the process.
War, contrary to Geneva, doesn't actually have rules. The only road to peace isn't "ban all the weapons," it's "Don't give anyone a reason to kill your people, remain reasonable and as passive as possible, give reason and blessings a chance to work, and after that, annihilate anyone who wants you gone and fails to see reason."
If we do the first steps right, there should be no reason to get to the last step.
--
Toro
Yeah, after all, it could have been an elaborate PRaNK. ;^)
--
Toro
A "nuke free" world would be one in which we use no fission/fusion of atoms for the energy. Weaponizing it is one aspect of the technology.
The problem is, a power plant program can (and likely will) be used to make weapons. The horse is out of the barn. Obama is advocating that we can have the knowledge to make steel, but no one will make swords.
It's somewhat naive. We'll see how he executes his plans, or us.
--
Toro
The chain of evidence issues are enormous. How the hell do you secure a crime scene, with probable cause and warrant in hand, when it is potentially critical infrastructure, not to mention that the infrastructure simultaneously serves as physical records, physical assets, forensic evidence and perhaps a common carrier?
What the heck are the "rules of evidence" for that mess? It can't be the same as the rules for shutting down a moonshine operation. I imagine those rules are soon to be written.
--
Toro
Doesn't matter what the motive or rationalization is: Unreasonable seizure by the federal government is forbidden in the Constitution.
There's no way they needed all this "evidence" for some unpaid bills. Nice story, but I call bullshit.
God knows what is really going on here, but I hope it eventually sees the light of day. This is reminding me of Waco, with 98% less people being burned alive involved.
--
Toro
You don't understand how intelligence is gathered, do you?
You may also not understand intelligence. Dunno. ;^)
--
Toro
1) Why does this shit always happen in Texas, when the Dems are in power. First Waco, now this?!
2) I hope the EFF and the ACLU form up like some Mecha-Voltron and tear Eric Holder a new one over this.
Holy shit. I don't care *why* they did it, you can't rip up some railroad tracks because someone's smuggling drugs by train. We're going to have to find a subtler, more sensible way to deal with alleged criminals who run data centers.
--
Toro
Yeah. You see that star that's 45 light years away from here? You ain't getting there unless you can become energy and not die. Then it'll take 45 years or so, lord knows what it's like being pure energy, and everyone who remained as matter will be long since dead when you get there.
Get it? Good.
We have a better shot at traveling into "inner space" as gods than we do "outer space," as waveforms. Get out the microscopes, colliders, and deep sea environment suits, there's lots of exploring to be done *right here*, and we aren't getting away from *right here* if we don't solve the problems *right here, right now*.
--
Toro
Yup. My next door neighbor's house appears with its front door open on the Google StreetView. You can bet that burgulars are going to take interest.
Google StreetView is a cool, but bad, idea. Just go there yourself if you're interested in what it looks like, and more importantly, so WE can see what YOU look like, and report any suspicious activity to the police.
I consider any Google StreetView car to be engaging in a "suspicious activity." If I came to your neighborhood and started taking lots of pictures, wouldn't you?
--
Toro
oh for the love of god my post is getting screened for too many caps it's april fools day everyone should post in nothing but caps on april fools day lets see if this messes up your bayesian filters pope turlingdrome banana requiem lameness filter like fer sure
IANALAFAIKYMMVYASNDBASHGREPJUYEDAWKYAKK
Did anyone else misread this (before reading the summary) as Microsoft is working on an automated program to find *security exploits in open-source projects*?
Man, I had to readjust my tinfoil hat for a second there.
--
Toro
This would be a great way to run black ops, with all the benefits of plausible deniability.
Oh wait, this is about the UK? It's a cock-up. ;^)
--
Toro
But not if you have self-incriminating evidence. You can't be compelled to provide that under fifth amendment protections. Discovery be damned.
The really relevant problem is once it's on Facebook's servers, it's no longer you being compelled to give the evidence, it's Facebook.
Sounds like the perfect end run around the fifth amendment.
Don't put anything you wouldn't want the whole world to see into "the cloud."
--
Toro