IMO, the slashdot crew should have priviliged posting status - say, karma fixed at 30 (or whatever is needed to get +1 bonus), and immunity to negative moderations. Jon especially needs this, as there enough Katz-hating moderators that I'm not surprised he never gets noticed.
So a couple of stories a year that mention "Jon Katz" might appear, big deal. Do you complain when Rob posts a story that mentions Hemos? I think it's totally fair that Katzfilterers get to see an article about Jon, so that they might be able to take advantage of the unusual situation to review their opinion based on Jon's replies.
Much though I disagree with the MPAA / DVD-CCA, and joined the EFF last month on the back of the recent cases, I disagree that source code is always free speech. The law provides exceptions to freedom of speech for such areas as trade secrets and national security.
Join the EFF and pay attention to the action alerts
I joined the EFF just after Christmas in the aftermath of the initial EFF hearing that the EFF lawyers won on. I'm a little disappointed that I didn't even get an automatic email confirming my membership, all I have to verify that the online transaction worked is a line on my credit card bill. I hope someone from the EFF reads slashdot, because there's been some useful commentary on the case here.
As I understand it, slashdot is one of the named defendants, and is covered by the injunction (CMIIW). What is slashdot's oficial response to the injunction? can Mirror early, mirror often be interpreted as such?
IANAL. "If an employer is allowing it to happen, it is covered" should IMO be interpreted as "If the accident happened because of something the employer wanted the worker to do, then it's primarily their responsibility to ensure that the facilities are provided and conform to the standards". The responsibility of the employee to keep their working environment in safe order, or to report any problems, needs to be clarified. Maybe a quarterly inspecton by a company H&S officer should be recommended.
Then again, the licence agreement may never have been part of the equation. If I buy a CD, and just start dumping it out as hex and/or disassembling the contents, have i broken the licence agreement that I haven't read yet? I am not making a copy for backup purposes, but I am copying their copyrighted material. Then again, reverse engineering for interoperability purposes is allowed. Oh well, the DVD lawyers semed to be floundering, and the EFF (which i just joined) lawyers seemed to know their stuff. Go to it, EFF!
The filters clog with dust, warm air from the dryer rises and warms up the dust, germs breed, and you get a stream of air that is thick with germs onto your wet hands. Luvly!
The registrar keeps the domain on hold for a period, in which it is unavailable for purchase. Network Solutions have been criticised for doing a Sony Bono on the duration of this period.
An obscure bug in Novell Netware 3.22 causes Backup Exec to miscalculate the day of the week after 1 March 2000 (the day after the "extra" leap day), so all scheduled weekday backups start on Sunday instead of Monday, and end on Thursday instead of Friday.
I think I agree. They accessed the crypto key somehow, and most licence agreements disallow disassembly, which I presume was used at some stage in the process. Anyone using the crypto key could therefore be handling stolen intellectual property, so they may be able to make a case. Telling someone where drugs can be acquired has many precedents for convicton, so if all the above are true, then slashdot may have a lot of maintenance work to do.
The key was encrypted. It was forcefully broken. No, I don't think it was, someone forgot to encrypt their key.
On the Net you can't really sell information -- because information is freely copied and redistributed.
I disagree. That's like saying "Because the physical laws of space allows photons to bounce off your work of art, and be received as vision by anyone in the vicinity, or converted into pictures by optomechanical devices, then by displaying it in a public area you lose your copyright". They're foolish for not having a robots.txt file, though, as that could be interpreted as a clear enough "keep out" sign. I look forward with amusement to the contents of robots.txt becoming a legal precedent in a case.
Slashdot Mirror
Who could run this in such a manner as to make it possible for me to participate?
The Electronic Frontiers Foundation?
No.
IMO, the slashdot crew should have priviliged posting status - say, karma fixed at 30 (or whatever is needed to get +1 bonus), and immunity to negative moderations. Jon especially needs this, as there enough Katz-hating moderators that I'm not surprised he never gets noticed.
So a couple of stories a year that mention "Jon Katz" might appear, big deal. Do you complain when Rob posts a story that mentions Hemos? I think it's totally fair that Katzfilterers get to see an article about Jon, so that they might be able to take advantage of the unusual situation to review their opinion based on Jon's replies.
I did. I copied the dvd-hoy-reply.htm and put it on my web site, along with my opinions, and handy links.
My Mirror: http://www.snark.freeserve.co.uk/dvd
Much though I disagree with the MPAA / DVD-CCA, and joined the EFF last month on the back of the recent cases, I disagree that source code is always free speech. The law provides exceptions to freedom of speech for such areas as trade secrets and national security.
Join the EFF and pay attention to the action alerts
I joined the EFF just after Christmas in the aftermath of the initial EFF hearing that the EFF lawyers won on. I'm a little disappointed that I didn't even get an automatic email confirming my membership, all I have to verify that the online transaction worked is a line on my credit card bill. I hope someone from the EFF reads slashdot, because there's been some useful commentary on the case here.
As I understand it, slashdot is one of the named defendants, and is covered by the injunction (CMIIW). What is slashdot's oficial response to the injunction? can Mirror early, mirror often be interpreted as such?
2600 have been hit by a preliminary injunction about the DeCSS, basically banning them from thinking about it.
2600 have been hit by a preliminary injunction about the DeCSS, basically banning them from thinking about it.
I wonder if Doug Adams could sue Altavista for stealing the babelfish concept.
If you have cabling requirements to perform your work, then this should be professionally done by a qualified person.
IANAL. "If an employer is allowing it to happen, it is covered" should IMO be interpreted as "If the accident happened because of something the employer wanted the worker to do, then it's primarily their responsibility to ensure that the facilities are provided and conform to the standards". The responsibility of the employee to keep their working environment in safe order, or to report any problems, needs to be clarified. Maybe a quarterly inspecton by a company H&S officer should be recommended.
Then again, the licence agreement may never have been part of the equation. If I buy a CD, and just start dumping it out as hex and/or disassembling the contents, have i broken the licence agreement that I haven't read yet? I am not making a copy for backup purposes, but I am copying their copyrighted material. Then again, reverse engineering for interoperability purposes is allowed. Oh well, the DVD lawyers semed to be floundering, and the EFF (which i just joined) lawyers seemed to know their stuff. Go to it, EFF!
The filters clog with dust, warm air from the dryer rises and warms up the dust, germs breed, and you get a stream of air that is thick with germs onto your wet hands. Luvly!
The registrar keeps the domain on hold for a period, in which it is unavailable for purchase. Network Solutions have been criticised for doing a Sony Bono on the duration of this period.
We finally got it working on a friend's PC, and watched it. It was great, we all enjoyed it.
An obscure bug in Novell Netware 3.22 causes Backup Exec to miscalculate the day of the week after 1 March 2000 (the day after the "extra" leap day), so all scheduled weekday backups start on Sunday instead of Monday, and end on Thursday instead of Friday.
Yeah, the jerk should have put "IANAMC", for "I Am Not A Movie Critic" at the start.
I think I agree. They accessed the crypto key somehow, and most licence agreements disallow disassembly, which I presume was used at some stage in the process. Anyone using the crypto key could therefore be handling stolen intellectual property, so they may be able to make a case. Telling someone where drugs can be acquired has many precedents for convicton, so if all the above are true, then slashdot may have a lot of maintenance work to do.
The key was encrypted. It was forcefully broken.
No, I don't think it was, someone forgot to encrypt their key.
On the Net you can't really sell information -- because information is freely copied and redistributed.
I disagree. That's like saying "Because the physical laws of space allows photons to bounce off your work of art, and be received as vision by anyone in the vicinity, or converted into pictures by optomechanical devices, then by displaying it in a public area you lose your copyright". They're foolish for not having a robots.txt file, though, as that could be interpreted as a clear enough "keep out" sign. I look forward with amusement to the contents of robots.txt becoming a legal precedent in a case.