Apparently you don't get CNN and have been living under a rock since the last iraq war. Collateral damage happens, yeah it sucks when it does, but it's necessary and inevitable or else the job isn't going to get done.
It's not the spammers who are really getting hurt here. The collateral damage caused by MAPS' brain-dead sledgehammer approach is not justified.
Until you come up with a better solution I don't think you're qualified to say it's unjustified. The point of RBL's banning whole ISPs IP blocks *IS* to cause stress, time and money for that ISP and it's customers (who will therefore put pressure on the ISP) so they will solve it.
The patches are unreleased and private, which is why you don't know about them.
Don't speak about things you don't know about.
Re:Of course its on hold!
on
CherryOS On Hold
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
This is actually quite true. There are non-public and unreleased patches for pearpc which include features for sound, etc. They are unreleased because of the potential for CherryOS to steal them and will continue to be private until such time as the CherryOS threat is negated.
I'm a Canadian which is pretty close to the US border, I've been from NY/MI all the way down to TN and clear across west to WA. I don't have, nor have I ever had, a passport. Nobody that I know who has travelled to the states has a passport. Passport ownership isn't common up here either, it's quite the exception and not the rule.
I really don't see how they could have pushed OpenStep/Cocoa any harder. No one interested in creating cross-platform software can use it as an API, at least not directly.
That's what I mean, there was a point in which you could write openstep api apps and have it run on nextstep, openstep, solaris, hp-ux, linux and even windows. Imagine a.NET framework that used Obj-C and was available for every major platform and was a good 2-3 years earlier. If apple had pushed it that way and there was a wealth of applications available then all of these ipod enamoured people would switch even faster to macs as not only would their ipod and ilife software be available, but all their other apps aswell.
Apple missed the huge ship and is settling for a dingy.
I just finished the Using and Managing mysql course in Boston. VERY much worth it btw if you're like me -- A developer and not a true DBA who supports the Database because there's noone else.
Right, why not try PostgreSQL which has had these features forever and is also Free software.
The difference between professional and amature is that professionals do it for money. There seems to be this sense in the world that if you get paid to do something you're automatically better than someone who doesn't and that's just plain fallacy.
I am a professional myself however I was an amature for a lot longer and truthfully I felt like I knew more as an amature than as a professional because now I am specialised.
Frequent read/write of a hard drive does not damage it, infact the platters would be better off the more you use it. MTBF take into account the circuitry, servos, etc. In other words-nothing to worry about.
Remember kids, if you can replace your their or there with "they are" and have it make sense, it's really "they're". If you can replace your "theve" (?) with "they have" and have it make sense, it's really "they've". Contractions!
Agreed 100%. However, whenever the subject of lawsuits comes up, the standard Slashbot response is "what kind of business sues its own customers?".
I know, but as you'll see from my userid I've been around slashdot for awhile.
And for the subject at hand -- stripping DRM from iTMS-purchased music -- it opens up the possibility for Apple's own customers to break copyright law much more easily.
Same as owning a nail gun or a chainsaw allows me to kill people much more easily. Again, innocent until proven guilty. Those who are guilty should be sued.
Stick around long enough and you'll see that the so-called "sue your customers" tactic ain't such a hot concept here on Slashdot, either
They're not customers if they're breaking copyright and not paying for copies.
You're correct that the bulk of it goes to the "giants" of the songwriting profession who write the most popular songs (I don't know which Canadian songwriters are big right now, so I can't give any examples) but I'm not sure what you mean about "dying."
Unfortunately the two are mutually exclusive. You cannot have both first sale doctrine rights with a digital format that cannot be freely distributed without payment. This is the problem and unfortunately I don't see a solution. Perhaps some wise man will come up with one someday, until then we will have a digital arms race.
I guess what I'm getting at is: why patronize this store?
I personally don't for various reasons, however you shouldn't rail those who do for standing up for their rights. That being said, on to the show:
As a content owner, how can I be sure you've deleted the copy you owned when you "sell" it to your friend?
You can't, however if you suspect me of breaking the law on your copyright sue me. Innocent until proven guilty my friend.
They'd just be downloading it for free in the first place, regurgitating something they read on slashdot about a "dying business model" justifying their behavior.
In the states this is a big issue and I agree it is morally wrong however where I live, in Canada, it's a bit different. I pay a levy on all my blank media to prop up the dying recording giants. I figure if I'm going to have to pay them so I can back up my hard drive and burn linux distro ISOs then I'm going to get a little something from them. You can try to argue this point with me all you wish, but if I'm giving them money for essentially nothing then I want something in return.
And in the case of iTunes Music Store, you can
- copy for personal backup, including burning to CD in an uncompressed, non-DRM format - "timeshift" the content (which is admittedly meaningless in this context) - however, iTunes Music Store's license (fuck the DMCA) prohibits reverse engineering
Since you're able to copy for personal backup to an unencumbered format I don't really have a problem with iTMS as the rest of the rights can effectively be done from that unencumbered format. Right to Timeshift means more than just playback at a later time and does apply here. It means allowing playback on other devices, for example: CD music copied to cassette tape for play in non-CD equipped cars.
Right of reverse engineering for interoperability means the interoperability of the copyright work, not the distribution medium. In this case interoperability for the music to play on non-ipod/non-itunes players. I'm not sure if Apple is legally allowed to restrict interoperability of the iTMS protocols or not as IANAL.
Look, I understand these arguments (and have for a long time). But I can't help but consider that your arguments invalidate something else which you no doubt support, which is encryption for your own personal privacy. Why is that "okay", and DRM isn't? And further, why is DRM not okay simply because you have a key embedded in software or a device for playback?
Because encryption for my personal privacy doesn't infringe on any of your rights whereas DRM infringes yours, mine and everyone elses rights to copy for personal backup, right of resale (doctrine of first sale), right to timeshift and right to reverse engineer for interoperability.
Your arguments and contrasting of issues are not congruent.
Slashdot Mirror
Apparently you don't get CNN and have been living under a rock since the last iraq war. Collateral damage happens, yeah it sucks when it does, but it's necessary and inevitable or else the job isn't going to get done.
The answer is simple, if you don't trust RBLs then don't use them, you have that option.
It's not the spammers who are really getting hurt here. The collateral damage caused by MAPS' brain-dead sledgehammer approach is not justified.
Until you come up with a better solution I don't think you're qualified to say it's unjustified. The point of RBL's banning whole ISPs IP blocks *IS* to cause stress, time and money for that ISP and it's customers (who will therefore put pressure on the ISP) so they will solve it.
The patches are unreleased and private, which is why you don't know about them.
Don't speak about things you don't know about.
This is actually quite true. There are non-public and unreleased patches for pearpc which include features for sound, etc. They are unreleased because of the potential for CherryOS to steal them and will continue to be private until such time as the CherryOS threat is negated.
I'm a Canadian which is pretty close to the US border, I've been from NY/MI all the way down to TN and clear across west to WA. I don't have, nor have I ever had, a passport. Nobody that I know who has travelled to the states has a passport. Passport ownership isn't common up here either, it's quite the exception and not the rule.
Talking about the end user side, not the developer side of things.
I really don't see how they could have pushed OpenStep/Cocoa any harder. No one interested in creating cross-platform software can use it as an API, at least not directly.
.NET framework that used Obj-C and was available for every major platform and was a good 2-3 years earlier. If apple had pushed it that way and there was a wealth of applications available then all of these ipod enamoured people would switch even faster to macs as not only would their ipod and ilife software be available, but all their other apps aswell.
That's what I mean, there was a point in which you could write openstep api apps and have it run on nextstep, openstep, solaris, hp-ux, linux and even windows. Imagine a
Apple missed the huge ship and is settling for a dingy.
OS X is based on nextstep, you can trace the lineage pretty directly: nextstep -> openstep -> rhapsody -> OS X.
You can't go wrong with a BSD Unix base like nextstep, although they should have pushed Objective-C and the openstep API harder.
hahaha just kidding APRIL FOOLS!
I just finished the Using and Managing mysql course in Boston. VERY much worth it btw if you're like me -- A developer and not a true DBA who supports the Database because there's noone else.
Right, why not try PostgreSQL which has had these features forever and is also Free software.
Unfortunately, Apple's Mac OS X license agreement specifically states it can only be installed on an Apple-branded computer.
Which I'm sure is illegal product tying and as such is unenforcable. Of course IANAL so this is not legal advice.
They may label you that way, however that is incorrect useage of the words. In both cases since you are being paid you are still a professional.
The difference between professional and amature is that professionals do it for money. There seems to be this sense in the world that if you get paid to do something you're automatically better than someone who doesn't and that's just plain fallacy.
I am a professional myself however I was an amature for a lot longer and truthfully I felt like I knew more as an amature than as a professional because now I am specialised.
Frequent read/write of a hard drive does not damage it, infact the platters would be better off the more you use it. MTBF take into account the circuitry, servos, etc. In other words-nothing to worry about.
The kernel isn't written in C?
s/their/they're/
s/theve/they've/
Remember kids, if you can replace your their or there with "they are" and have it make sense, it's really "they're". If you can replace your "theve" (?) with "they have" and have it make sense, it's really "they've". Contractions!
The whole purpose of a (cassette|8 track|CD) player is to not have to listen to the radio...
Don't you realise how dumb your statement is?
In this case, private copying refers to copying for your friend, not for yourself, which is personal copying.
In the past I would agree with you, these days however Real Player 10 is not spyware and is free of malware.
Agreed 100%. However, whenever the subject of lawsuits comes up, the standard Slashbot response is "what kind of business sues its own customers?".
I know, but as you'll see from my userid I've been around slashdot for awhile.
And for the subject at hand -- stripping DRM from iTMS-purchased music -- it opens up the possibility for Apple's own customers to break copyright law much more easily.
Same as owning a nail gun or a chainsaw allows me to kill people much more easily. Again, innocent until proven guilty. Those who are guilty should be sued.
Stick around long enough and you'll see that the so-called "sue your customers" tactic ain't such a hot concept here on Slashdot, either
They're not customers if they're breaking copyright and not paying for copies.
You're correct that the bulk of it goes to the "giants" of the songwriting profession who write the most popular songs (I don't know which Canadian songwriters are big right now, so I can't give any examples) but I'm not sure what you mean about "dying."
Tongue-in-cheek sarcastic reference.
Unfortunately the two are mutually exclusive. You cannot have both first sale doctrine rights with a digital format that cannot be freely distributed without payment. This is the problem and unfortunately I don't see a solution. Perhaps some wise man will come up with one someday, until then we will have a digital arms race.
I guess what I'm getting at is: why patronize this store?
I personally don't for various reasons, however you shouldn't rail those who do for standing up for their rights. That being said, on to the show:
As a content owner, how can I be sure you've deleted the copy you owned when you "sell" it to your friend?
You can't, however if you suspect me of breaking the law on your copyright sue me. Innocent until proven guilty my friend.
They'd just be downloading it for free in the first place, regurgitating something they read on slashdot about a "dying business model" justifying their behavior.
In the states this is a big issue and I agree it is morally wrong however where I live, in Canada, it's a bit different. I pay a levy on all my blank media to prop up the dying recording giants. I figure if I'm going to have to pay them so I can back up my hard drive and burn linux distro ISOs then I'm going to get a little something from them. You can try to argue this point with me all you wish, but if I'm giving them money for essentially nothing then I want something in return.
And in the case of iTunes Music Store, you can
- copy for personal backup, including burning to CD in an uncompressed, non-DRM format
- "timeshift" the content (which is admittedly meaningless in this context)
- however, iTunes Music Store's license (fuck the DMCA) prohibits reverse engineering
Since you're able to copy for personal backup to an unencumbered format I don't really have a problem with iTMS as the rest of the rights can effectively be done from that unencumbered format. Right to Timeshift means more than just playback at a later time and does apply here. It means allowing playback on other devices, for example: CD music copied to cassette tape for play in non-CD equipped cars.
Right of reverse engineering for interoperability means the interoperability of the copyright work, not the distribution medium. In this case interoperability for the music to play on non-ipod/non-itunes players. I'm not sure if Apple is legally allowed to restrict interoperability of the iTMS protocols or not as IANAL.
Look, I understand these arguments (and have for a long time). But I can't help but consider that your arguments invalidate something else which you no doubt support, which is encryption for your own personal privacy. Why is that "okay", and DRM isn't? And further, why is DRM not okay simply because you have a key embedded in software or a device for playback?
Because encryption for my personal privacy doesn't infringe on any of your rights whereas DRM infringes yours, mine and everyone elses rights to copy for personal backup, right of resale (doctrine of first sale), right to timeshift and right to reverse engineer for interoperability.
Your arguments and contrasting of issues are not congruent.