While we're being nitpicky, I have plenty of audio files (ogg/wav/flac, not mp3. As if it makes a difference) which I never downloaded (or ripped from a CD). Nor are the copyrights owned by the RIAA--unless you think they own the birds outside my window...
For that matter, just because a file is on Kazaa doesn't mean it's illegal RIAA child pr0n music. Kazaa isn't any different (in terms of what files will work on it) than the web, Usenet, M$'s file sharing, NFS, or any other systems which will send files across a network. Only idiots who believe the RIAA's propaganda think this.
Even if the virus sends the information to the logs, it doesn't mean the entry will be read. Many high load servers generate megabytes of log entries per server per day. A message sent to log files is probably less likely to be read than one sent to a display. My point was the message isn't likely to be read until after the server has been trashed, and someone goes to find the problem.
His "law" wasn't a "law", it was an "opinion"
He is a senator, and a powerful one at that. His opinions are often formed into bills, which may become law. If you don't get this, then you have no clue how the US Government works. A congressman's opinion is never just an opinion, they have the ability to directly do something about it.
Why can't people understand that I'm not defending his stupid idea; criticize his opinion all you want, just don't call him a hypocryte *on this issue*
If you read all of my previos post, you would have seen this: "It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with Hatch being a hypocrite, but it does illustrate how he is wrong and how your limo analogy was way off." If you read this entire thread, you would see I wasn't the one to call him a "hypocrite." This is the post. My username is not werdna.
I was responding to you limo analogy (which was far off), and your silly "Orrin Hatch can call for whatever the hell he wants to." statement. He's a senator and supposed to represent the people. He shouldn't call for things which are contrary to the rights of the people, and giving "copyright holders" a legal loophole to destroy people's computers is quite contrary to the rights of the general public. So is a DRM mandate--which some say he was using this as a threat to get the mandate. Especially when those "copyright holders" have used various laws and loopholes to attack innocent people. He can't just call out for any law he wants.
Unless I misunderstood the article, he made this statement in a Senate meeting. You know, where they make laws. Also go to opensecrets.org, and look up Hatch's contributors. You'll see why he has turned anti-p2p and pro-DRM.
Note the words "the technology." Hatch's javascript was stored on a server. If they were using the virus "technology" to warn the "user", then likely no one will have seen the warning. Most servers don't even have monitors, and even if they do, no one looks at them until there is a problem.
How I understand his statements, he said the virus should pop up two warnings on the computer which is running. The computer which contained the infringing material was a server, and who says those warnings have to be specific enough so the user will know what the cyberterrorist claims to be infringing. It's unlikely anyone will see any warnings "displayed" on a server, many servers don't even have video cards!
His "law" will most likely be screwed up. That was my point. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with Hatch being a hypocrite, but it does illustrate how he is wrong and how your limo analogy was way off.
Maybe I made a mistake, but I read your post and the parent, and drteknikal wasn't replying to any post. It just seems to be a "I don't 'steal' software, so I don't have to worry" reply to the main article.
Yeah, he's trying to make sure the RIAA and other "copyright holders" will be able to censor anyone they want (such as competitors and naysayers) using a mandated DRM system. Who cares about free speech when a few shitheads are "violating the copyrights" of the cartel!
So what is your point in saying all this? You mentioned you use Red Hat Linux. SCO alleges the Linux kernel contains their copyrighted code. According to Hatch, SCO should be allowed to trash your computer just because they think (or claim to think) you may be infringing on their copyrights. Don't you get it?
So you're saying if a senator says: "The victims should be allowed to blow up the house of anyone caught with the stolen property." Later on, someone discovers the stolen part in the senator's limo, so if the senator's law passed, the victims of the thief could legally blow up the senators house.
I didn't hear Hatch saying it would be okay for the people at Milonic Solutions Ltd. to destroy the US Senate's servers. Nor should he be allowed to permit them. Yet his statement suggested they can. Don't you see the problem?
So the copyright owners should have hacked into the server and shown two warnings on the government's server (just like Hatch suggested) before they destroyed it?
So what about the fact they are helping a company violate anti-trust law? A huge portion of M$'s anti-trust violations were due to deliberately making M$ products not work with competing products. It doesn't look good when the US government assists them.
What the hell? Since when was the Music/Movie industry more important than the electronics/PC industry?
Bribes. Go to opensecrets.org, and check out Hatch's contributors. AOL/TW, Disney, Viacom.
The main cause of PC industry growth right now is Piracy, File sharing, whatever you want to call it
I find that comment inflammatory. There are many more reasons to buy a computer than "piracy" as the cartel calls it. Word processing, email, video games, the web, etc. Yeah sure, Joe Blow may have heard he can get some "free" music with a computer and internet access, but for the same price he can buy 20 CDs and a gun to shoot himself when they all suck ass.
The Movie Industry is immune to this because the theaters are selling more tickets than ever, I've went to see more movies this year than I ever have in my life.
Funny, there is becoming nearly as much "piracy" of movies as music. The same amount if you count all the short video/audio clips and screen captures. So why do so many people attribute lower music sales with "piracy"? Could it be the music "industry" is really just selling a buch of crap?
Funny, a few years ago, Hatch was pro Napster and anti-Microsoft. What bribes can do.
I truly wish that more of us would vote.
You know little about Utah politics. 99% of the time, the Republican candidate wins by default, with a Democrat or Libertarian candidate far behind--assuming one bothered to run. I have to wonder if they sometimes put shill candidates in the Dem. box. Take for example the last election and Rep. Cannon's competition: Nancy Jane Woddside. Reading her material, it seemed if she became elected, there would be curfews and soldiers on the streets ready to shoot anyone on sight. May as well have been voting for Hitler.
The profit margins in movies/entertainment are great.
This is what happens when a cartel controls the market, and a cartel does control movies and music. A fair market will usually translate into "profit margins in area X suck." Luckily one can completely do without movies and music, however if they start restricting and committing acts of terrorism against communication technologies (such as the internet), then we are all screwed.
You may not think the internet is an essential communication system, but you are wrong. Just think of the slammer worm and how it caused all sorts of problems--such as ATMs not working. Essential services are thousands of times more important than entertainment. There are also many ways copyright law has been abused to suppress free speech. Free speech is thousands of times more important than entertainment. Yet many asshats don't understand or care. What's the point of living in a "free" country if all your freedoms will be taken away, or you/your property will be attacked if you exercise your supposed freedoms?
It is possible now. Luckily, everyone who is smart enough to do so isn't stupid enough to try.
This does raise an interesting question: if the pro-"cyber"terrorists in congress pass a law making it legal to damage a computer for alleged copyright infringement, will they also force Microsoft and other OS developers to put in security holes which terrorists can use?
I heard Hatch published some hymns on Napster. Is he stupid? Doesn't he realize even if he owns copyright or has permission, he will be attacked by the cartel--assuming they don't realize he is a senator? Everyone who publishes is at risk under such a system. The cartel doesn't care if they destroy an innocent person's computer. In fact, they have a huge incentive to do so: any form of publishing they don't have control over is competition.
What about the editor? Are the videos watchable with Linux or are they some ultra secret DRM format? The site requires registration, so I didn't bother. Though I need to upgrade my home computer before I can play it anyway...ancient 500MHz piece of junk. UT2003 is a good excuse for a new computer!:+)
..."medical insurance" is where the KGB break your legs, and the health ministry offers to fix them for free.
In Soviet USA..."copyright" is where the RIAA uses such laws to take away your right to copy your original free speech and offers to sell it back to you for an inflated price.
Breaking someone's legs so a big organization can help is not a valid operation. Do not create artificial dependence!
If DRM provided for (a) traditional fair uses and (b) was required to be field-upgradable to permit newly recognized fair-uses, I could live with it.
You forget (c): guarantees you can do anything with original content you created.
It can't be far off when consumer grade camcorders, digital cameras, audio recorders, word processors will be locked up in some sort of DRM/copy protection where the person who recorded their own content won't legally be able to buy tools to edit/extract the data and do what they want with it. If you create it, it's yours, but the DRM cartel doesn't want it that way.
I doubt most Linux users even use SMP or JFS. The vast majority of IA32 "PC" computers only have one processor--even the people running Linux for servers use these types of machines. Just about everyone I've talked to/read posts on message boards uses ext3 for journaling, some reiserfs, none JFS. I've never used journaling myself, except to try out reiser (hated it). I bet 90% of Linux users won't miss this code if it is just yanked out...
Free? Do the math. The poster probably bought the CDs at prices between $15-$20. Assuming he/she bought 100 CDs, he/she values them between $2-$7. Not free.
Maybe $2 is a low figure, but $7 isn't. The costs for the disk, packaging, shipping, and operating a retail chain can't be more than $2 per CD. If it is, they are a bunch of stupid fucktards who can't run a business and should be smothered into the ground. A $5 profit split between the musician, label, and store is more than plenty.
Slashdot Mirror
While we're being nitpicky, I have plenty of audio files (ogg/wav/flac, not mp3. As if it makes a difference) which I never downloaded (or ripped from a CD). Nor are the copyrights owned by the RIAA--unless you think they own the birds outside my window...
For that matter, just because a file is on Kazaa doesn't mean it's illegal RIAA child pr0n music. Kazaa isn't any different (in terms of what files will work on it) than the web, Usenet, M$'s file sharing, NFS, or any other systems which will send files across a network. Only idiots who believe the RIAA's propaganda think this.
Even if the virus sends the information to the logs, it doesn't mean the entry will be read. Many high load servers generate megabytes of log entries per server per day. A message sent to log files is probably less likely to be read than one sent to a display. My point was the message isn't likely to be read until after the server has been trashed, and someone goes to find the problem.
He is a senator, and a powerful one at that. His opinions are often formed into bills, which may become law. If you don't get this, then you have no clue how the US Government works. A congressman's opinion is never just an opinion, they have the ability to directly do something about it.
If you read all of my previos post, you would have seen this: "It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with Hatch being a hypocrite, but it does illustrate how he is wrong and how your limo analogy was way off." If you read this entire thread, you would see I wasn't the one to call him a "hypocrite." This is the post. My username is not werdna.
I was responding to you limo analogy (which was far off), and your silly "Orrin Hatch can call for whatever the hell he wants to." statement. He's a senator and supposed to represent the people. He shouldn't call for things which are contrary to the rights of the people, and giving "copyright holders" a legal loophole to destroy people's computers is quite contrary to the rights of the general public. So is a DRM mandate--which some say he was using this as a threat to get the mandate. Especially when those "copyright holders" have used various laws and loopholes to attack innocent people. He can't just call out for any law he wants.
Unless I misunderstood the article, he made this statement in a Senate meeting. You know, where they make laws. Also go to opensecrets.org, and look up Hatch's contributors. You'll see why he has turned anti-p2p and pro-DRM.
Note the words "the technology." Hatch's javascript was stored on a server. If they were using the virus "technology" to warn the "user", then likely no one will have seen the warning. Most servers don't even have monitors, and even if they do, no one looks at them until there is a problem.
How I understand his statements, he said the virus should pop up two warnings on the computer which is running. The computer which contained the infringing material was a server, and who says those warnings have to be specific enough so the user will know what the cyberterrorist claims to be infringing. It's unlikely anyone will see any warnings "displayed" on a server, many servers don't even have video cards!
His "law" will most likely be screwed up. That was my point. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with Hatch being a hypocrite, but it does illustrate how he is wrong and how your limo analogy was way off.
Maybe I made a mistake, but I read your post and the parent, and drteknikal wasn't replying to any post. It just seems to be a "I don't 'steal' software, so I don't have to worry" reply to the main article.
You don't get the point. According to Hatch, Milonic sould have just destroyed the US Senate's server and not bothered to contact him.
Yeah, he's trying to make sure the RIAA and other "copyright holders" will be able to censor anyone they want (such as competitors and naysayers) using a mandated DRM system. Who cares about free speech when a few shitheads are "violating the copyrights" of the cartel!
So what is your point in saying all this? You mentioned you use Red Hat Linux. SCO alleges the Linux kernel contains their copyrighted code. According to Hatch, SCO should be allowed to trash your computer just because they think (or claim to think) you may be infringing on their copyrights. Don't you get it?
So you're saying if a senator says: "The victims should be allowed to blow up the house of anyone caught with the stolen property." Later on, someone discovers the stolen part in the senator's limo, so if the senator's law passed, the victims of the thief could legally blow up the senators house.
I didn't hear Hatch saying it would be okay for the people at Milonic Solutions Ltd. to destroy the US Senate's servers. Nor should he be allowed to permit them. Yet his statement suggested they can. Don't you see the problem?
So the copyright owners should have hacked into the server and shown two warnings on the government's server (just like Hatch suggested) before they destroyed it?
Ever hear of automation?
So what about the fact they are helping a company violate anti-trust law? A huge portion of M$'s anti-trust violations were due to deliberately making M$ products not work with competing products. It doesn't look good when the US government assists them.
Now that is a suggestion I would vote for!
Utah sucks! Down with the Taliban!
Look at numbers 7, 15, 21
Bribes. Go to opensecrets.org, and check out Hatch's contributors. AOL/TW, Disney, Viacom.
I find that comment inflammatory. There are many more reasons to buy a computer than "piracy" as the cartel calls it. Word processing, email, video games, the web, etc. Yeah sure, Joe Blow may have heard he can get some "free" music with a computer and internet access, but for the same price he can buy 20 CDs and a gun to shoot himself when they all suck ass.
Funny, there is becoming nearly as much "piracy" of movies as music. The same amount if you count all the short video/audio clips and screen captures. So why do so many people attribute lower music sales with "piracy"? Could it be the music "industry" is really just selling a buch of crap?
Funny, a few years ago, Hatch was pro Napster and anti-Microsoft. What bribes can do.
You know little about Utah politics. 99% of the time, the Republican candidate wins by default, with a Democrat or Libertarian candidate far behind--assuming one bothered to run. I have to wonder if they sometimes put shill candidates in the Dem. box. Take for example the last election and Rep. Cannon's competition: Nancy Jane Woddside. Reading her material, it seemed if she became elected, there would be curfews and soldiers on the streets ready to shoot anyone on sight. May as well have been voting for Hitler.
This is what happens when a cartel controls the market, and a cartel does control movies and music. A fair market will usually translate into "profit margins in area X suck." Luckily one can completely do without movies and music, however if they start restricting and committing acts of terrorism against communication technologies (such as the internet), then we are all screwed.
You may not think the internet is an essential communication system, but you are wrong. Just think of the slammer worm and how it caused all sorts of problems--such as ATMs not working. Essential services are thousands of times more important than entertainment. There are also many ways copyright law has been abused to suppress free speech. Free speech is thousands of times more important than entertainment. Yet many asshats don't understand or care. What's the point of living in a "free" country if all your freedoms will be taken away, or you/your property will be attacked if you exercise your supposed freedoms?
It is possible now. Luckily, everyone who is smart enough to do so isn't stupid enough to try.
This does raise an interesting question: if the pro-"cyber"terrorists in congress pass a law making it legal to damage a computer for alleged copyright infringement, will they also force Microsoft and other OS developers to put in security holes which terrorists can use?
I heard Hatch published some hymns on Napster. Is he stupid? Doesn't he realize even if he owns copyright or has permission, he will be attacked by the cartel--assuming they don't realize he is a senator? Everyone who publishes is at risk under such a system. The cartel doesn't care if they destroy an innocent person's computer. In fact, they have a huge incentive to do so: any form of publishing they don't have control over is competition.
What about the editor? Are the videos watchable with Linux or are they some ultra secret DRM format? The site requires registration, so I didn't bother. Though I need to upgrade my home computer before I can play it anyway...ancient 500MHz piece of junk. UT2003 is a good excuse for a new computer! :+)
..."medical insurance" is where the KGB break your legs, and the health ministry offers to fix them for free.
In Soviet USA..."copyright" is where the RIAA uses such laws to take away your right to copy your original free speech and offers to sell it back to you for an inflated price.
Breaking someone's legs so a big organization can help is not a valid operation. Do not create artificial dependence!
You forget (c): guarantees you can do anything with original content you created.
It can't be far off when consumer grade camcorders, digital cameras, audio recorders, word processors will be locked up in some sort of DRM/copy protection where the person who recorded their own content won't legally be able to buy tools to edit/extract the data and do what they want with it. If you create it, it's yours, but the DRM cartel doesn't want it that way.
Cool. Does it run on Linux? ;-)
I doubt most Linux users even use SMP or JFS. The vast majority of IA32 "PC" computers only have one processor--even the people running Linux for servers use these types of machines. Just about everyone I've talked to/read posts on message boards uses ext3 for journaling, some reiserfs, none JFS. I've never used journaling myself, except to try out reiser (hated it). I bet 90% of Linux users won't miss this code if it is just yanked out...
That's a bunch of bullshit. The kernel is the hardest part!
Free? Do the math. The poster probably bought the CDs at prices between $15-$20. Assuming he/she bought 100 CDs, he/she values them between $2-$7. Not free.
Maybe $2 is a low figure, but $7 isn't. The costs for the disk, packaging, shipping, and operating a retail chain can't be more than $2 per CD. If it is, they are a bunch of stupid fucktards who can't run a business and should be smothered into the ground. A $5 profit split between the musician, label, and store is more than plenty.