Strong encryption is obviously the answer to keeping data safe from prying eyes. What I don't think is legal is the government keeping an image of the disk just for having passewd through customs with encrypted data.
I think its more commercially oriented. If you wanted to play a movie for your neighborhood, I think you'd be OK. If you charged admission, you might have a problem. When in doubt, follow the money.
That's PPT. You're still free (as in freedom) to do it by buying your stock outright. PPT was a method to satisfy great initial demand for a release, with a quick fall in demand. This resulted in studios sucking up the PPT copies and selling new ones at Walmart.
It's all about controlling the market, you see. They had their finger in every pie. Why do you think they're freaking hard about modern media distribution? If they don't control the market, they can't get their vampire fangs into it.
These people know no shame in protecting their cash cow. The funny thing is, they're losing it anyway! (FU MPAA/RIAA!)
Public performance is a right outside of copyright and first sale. You are correct that I cannot exhibit a copyrighted film (video) work without permission, regardless of who owns the copy.
Public performance is a seperate right than renting, however. As an owner of a copyrighted work (except for phono recordings and computer software, I guess they have better lobbiests!), I can rent to whomever I please without permission of the copyright holder. Why you would confuse the two is a mystery.
Actually, they do. They buy their copies of the movies through a distributor who acts as the studios' agent.
There is only one circumstance within which video rental stores have a contract (indirectly) with studios, and that's for PPT, or Pay Per Transaction. That is a voluntary agreement where the studios get a cut of every rental.
Otherwise, any legally owned copy of a copyrighted video work may be rented without any permission from the studios. My qualifications? I was an independent video store owner for 15 years, a long-standing member of the VSDA, and have worked with all the major distributors. I'm afraid you are completely and utterly wrong.
Apart from that, my slashdot UID is lower, my kids smarter, my wife prettier, and my crap smells like cinnamon rolls.
That rental company has no right to do that under the First-sale doctrine. If they are truly doing so you need to take action to stop them. It's funny that you tried to argue against the First-sale doctrine protections by providing an example of something that isn't protected by said doctrine. A rental company must have a contract with the copyright owner in order to rent out their copyrighted works
B*LLSH!T. There are exceptions for phono records and computer software, but otherwise, it is perfectly legal to rent copyrighted works. Do you think your local video store has a contract with all the movie studios?
It's funny that you have no clue what the heck you're talking about.
The article has a photo of a drive that's supposed to be the ST506. It looks more like an ST225, as the ST506 was full height. Jeez, you'd think Computer World would get the technical details right!
Of course, maybe you have to be over forty to know the difference...;) Get off my lawn!
While I would hate to see Yahoo! bite the dust (more for historical reasons), it would be great for MS to flush a stack of cash, as I can see MS doing nothing but destroying what little is left of them.
Yes, MS, cash out everyone still hanging on to that sinking tub! The faster MS runs out of cash, the sooner we get to enjoy a world without them.
As for Yahoo!, I remember when you all didn't suck. Yep, you and HP...
Okay, and your point is? You are suggesting that there is a corruption so pervasive in law enforcement that your complaint will make an enemy of the entire police force who will them abdicate their sworn duty to the public in order to be vindictive about a complaint so minor you didn't bother to actually take it up with someone who could actually do something about it.
If that's true, your worry is not how many minutes it will take the police to arrive, but when they're going to shoot you dead for parking in a handicapped spot or mouthing off to one of their friends.
Yes. That is exactly what he is saying. And your followup point is spot-on as well. Since this wasn't obvious to you, I must assume you're under 20 years old.
My personal experience is that most law enforcement officers are unintelligent, lying, corrupt, self-serving jerks. You see, they support a corrupt system. The powerful need them to be this way. Follow the money.
I really can't blame local/county beat cops. They don't know any better. (You'll note, most local cops are ex-military. That's an advantage, as their sense of right and wrong has already been replaced with a misplaced sense of "duty".)
Feds (and politicians), on the other hand, are smart enough to know better. They are truly evil.
There are just too many risks of ever outing a covert agent.
Additional criteria not withstanding, fifty to a hundred years after-the-fact is about right. Of course, spies never really come in from the cold, do they....
I believe you are missing one small nuance. Even in regard to nationsl security issues, nothing should be secret forever. To maintain a transparent government, even national secrets such as covert agents should eventually be made public.
It's kind of like encryption. Encryption is not for keeping your secrets secret forever; it's for keeping your secrets secret long enough to be effective.
You should see the looks I get at Barnes & Noble when I check out with a CD... "May I have your assurance that this product is a CD?" I do it so that if I find the disk is boogered up with DRM, I can return it with the claim, "I was assured that this product is a CD, and it clearly isn't!"
I never have gotten one that had DRM, so thusfar it has been for naught...
Just an off-topic shout-out to the memory of Phil Katz, designer of the zip file format and related compression routines, now found everywhere in the industry. Phil died in 2000 as a result of alcoholism/depression.
Sidenote: He would have made a great/.'er... He hated Windows.
One also wonders why some programs are safe and others problematic. If a program uses "standard" API calls, is it safe? Since some of the unsafe programs are Microsoft's, could it be that some of the "unpublished" APIs aren't implemented correctly? If Quicken is on that list, could it be they paid "homage" to Microsoft to get the "unpublished" APIs?
Boy, if that's the case and Microsoft was screwed by their own unpublished APIs, how can you argue against karma?;)
Don't forget about the trojan that would blow up your IBM CGA monitor by resetting the display frequency to an unsupported value. It definately let the smoke out, as you could smell the result.
Slashdot Mirror
Strong encryption is obviously the answer to keeping data safe from prying eyes. What I don't think is legal is the government keeping an image of the disk just for having passewd through customs with encrypted data.
I'll assume someone paid the ransom at least once. So what key did they use to decrypt? Do us a favor and post it.
As for it being a trick to crack a root signing key, would they not have to have the private key to encrypt with to start?
//wishful thinking...
I think its more commercially oriented. If you wanted to play a movie for your neighborhood, I think you'd be OK. If you charged admission, you might have a problem. When in doubt, follow the money.
That's PPT. You're still free (as in freedom) to do it by buying your stock outright. PPT was a method to satisfy great initial demand for a release, with a quick fall in demand. This resulted in studios sucking up the PPT copies and selling new ones at Walmart.
It's all about controlling the market, you see. They had their finger in every pie. Why do you think they're freaking hard about modern media distribution? If they don't control the market, they can't get their vampire fangs into it.
These people know no shame in protecting their cash cow. The funny thing is, they're losing it anyway! (FU MPAA/RIAA!)
Public performance is a right outside of copyright and first sale. You are correct that I cannot exhibit a copyrighted film (video) work without permission, regardless of who owns the copy.
Public performance is a seperate right than renting, however. As an owner of a copyrighted work (except for phono recordings and computer software, I guess they have better lobbiests!), I can rent to whomever I please without permission of the copyright holder. Why you would confuse the two is a mystery.
Thank God you're not a lawyer...
they can't just pick up copies in bulk and start renting
That's exactly what they do...
Actually, they do. They buy their copies of the movies through a distributor who acts as the studios' agent.
There is only one circumstance within which video rental stores have a contract (indirectly) with studios, and that's for PPT, or Pay Per Transaction. That is a voluntary agreement where the studios get a cut of every rental.
Otherwise, any legally owned copy of a copyrighted video work may be rented without any permission from the studios. My qualifications? I was an independent video store owner for 15 years, a long-standing member of the VSDA, and have worked with all the major distributors. I'm afraid you are completely and utterly wrong.
Apart from that, my slashdot UID is lower, my kids smarter, my wife prettier, and my crap smells like cinnamon rolls.
Have a nice day!
That rental company has no right to do that under the First-sale doctrine. If they are truly doing so you need to take action to stop them. It's funny that you tried to argue against the First-sale doctrine protections by providing an example of something that isn't protected by said doctrine. A rental company must have a contract with the copyright owner in order to rent out their copyrighted works
B*LLSH!T. There are exceptions for phono records and computer software, but otherwise, it is perfectly legal to rent copyrighted works. Do you think your local video store has a contract with all the movie studios?
It's funny that you have no clue what the heck you're talking about.
Ah yes... The days of MFM hard drives, when real mem low-level formatted their drives, and Steve Gibson was relevant...
Any one else remember using an RLL controller with an MFM drive to get 50% more capacity? (And 200% more failures? ;)
Don't get me started on Perstor controllers... Those things were voodoo...
The article has a photo of a drive that's supposed to be the ST506. It looks more like an ST225, as the ST506 was full height. Jeez, you'd think Computer World would get the technical details right!
;) Get off my lawn!
Of course, maybe you have to be over forty to know the difference...
While I would hate to see Yahoo! bite the dust (more for historical reasons), it would be great for MS to flush a stack of cash, as I can see MS doing nothing but destroying what little is left of them.
Yes, MS, cash out everyone still hanging on to that sinking tub! The faster MS runs out of cash, the sooner we get to enjoy a world without them.
As for Yahoo!, I remember when you all didn't suck. Yep, you and HP...
Buying the upgrade version when your not entitled to it doesn't make you copy any more legal than a pirated copy.
But before you can get in trouble, they have to prove you don't own a prior version. Good luck with that!
Recall that Herman Hollerith came up with punched cards for the 1890 census. He founded the company that became IBM. Here's some linky goodness.
Okay, and your point is? You are suggesting that there is a corruption so pervasive in law enforcement that your complaint will make an enemy of the entire police force who will them abdicate their sworn duty to the public in order to be vindictive about a complaint so minor you didn't bother to actually take it up with someone who could actually do something about it.
If that's true, your worry is not how many minutes it will take the police to arrive, but when they're going to shoot you dead for parking in a handicapped spot or mouthing off to one of their friends.
Yes. That is exactly what he is saying. And your followup point is spot-on as well. Since this wasn't obvious to you, I must assume you're under 20 years old.
My personal experience is that most law enforcement officers are unintelligent, lying, corrupt, self-serving jerks. You see, they support a corrupt system. The powerful need them to be this way. Follow the money.
I really can't blame local/county beat cops. They don't know any better. (You'll note, most local cops are ex-military. That's an advantage, as their sense of right and wrong has already been replaced with a misplaced sense of "duty".)
Feds (and politicians), on the other hand, are smart enough to know better. They are truly evil.
http://www.theagitator.com/
...it's almost a badge of honor to have a Web site name that only hints at what the user will find there...
Like slashdot?
There are just too many risks of ever outing a covert agent.
Additional criteria not withstanding, fifty to a hundred years after-the-fact is about right. Of course, spies never really come in from the cold, do they....
I believe you are missing one small nuance. Even in regard to nationsl security issues, nothing should be secret forever. To maintain a transparent government, even national secrets such as covert agents should eventually be made public.
It's kind of like encryption. Encryption is not for keeping your secrets secret forever; it's for keeping your secrets secret long enough to be effective.
You should see the looks I get at Barnes & Noble when I check out with a CD... "May I have your assurance that this product is a CD?" I do it so that if I find the disk is boogered up with DRM, I can return it with the claim, "I was assured that this product is a CD, and it clearly isn't!"
I never have gotten one that had DRM, so thusfar it has been for naught...
Just an off-topic shout-out to the memory of Phil Katz, designer of the zip file format and related compression routines, now found everywhere in the industry. Phil died in 2000 as a result of alcoholism/depression.
/.'er... He hated Windows.
Sidenote: He would have made a great
Katz Obit
Katz Remembrance
To the Bill-Shill that modded the parent "Troll"... Huh?
;)
(Bill-Shill... That's got a nice ring to it!
One also wonders why some programs are safe and others problematic. If a program uses "standard" API calls, is it safe? Since some of the unsafe programs are Microsoft's, could it be that some of the "unpublished" APIs aren't implemented correctly? If Quicken is on that list, could it be they paid "homage" to Microsoft to get the "unpublished" APIs?
;)
Boy, if that's the case and Microsoft was screwed by their own unpublished APIs, how can you argue against karma?
Killing the Windows load on a laptop sounds like progress to me...
Don't forget about the trojan that would blow up your IBM CGA monitor by resetting the display frequency to an unsupported value. It definately let the smoke out, as you could smell the result.