The problem with your line of thinking is that it doesn't account for the intangibles. I'm not distraught with grief, nor do I have to worry about who will provide my family with income so they can survive all because I had to delete the 3 or 4 spam messages in my Inbox.
Actually, this is exactly my line of thinking. I'm not for ripping off people of their hard earned work. I'm against locking up large portions of our culture, which is all copyright is doing these days when it comes to entertainment. If we had the copyright laws that we have today in place 100 years ago nobody would have ever heard of Disney, amongst others. At no previous point in American history have corporations had so much sway in our legal system. Sure they might have been able to work loopholes and such, but not in the way of actually getting laws drafted to support their particular business models. The DMCA is a shining example of such legislation.
My point is, if people want cuture to be free then why fight it? Personally, I beleive there is something fundamentally wrong with locking up culture for profit. If you're into music then you should be in it for the music. If you make a buck from it, then you should be grateful someone paid you for doing what you love. The entire entertainment and sports industry are out of their damn minds. And the people that support them by throwing cash at their feet, so to speak, are the ones fueling this madness.
At the end of the day, at what point do we say enough is enough? We've already got copyrights that far exceed their original purpose and software patents that essentially lock up math equations for basically the rest of our natural lives. So I ask, how are our childeren's children going to be able to create new works of art or sotware when all existing ideas are being locked away for decades on end? All we're going to end up with eventually is a lack of creativity in the nation's youth. Mark my words, the effects of todays legisation both in terms of copyright and software patents won't be felt for decades to come. And when this crap does come to fruition I hope we'll all be looking back at this era like we do today with Prohibition.
And yes I know patents and copyrights don't belong in the same post like this, but my point is that the US government has made it clear that it is perfectly willing to bend to the will of the corporations despite how it may harm the citizens. This is not a "Good Thing" by any stretch of the imagination and we need to do our part to make it stop--My part is to encourage others to stop buying movies and music by any organization that doesn't actually support our nation's cultural growth. If it does, then and only then do I consider it a useful art worthy of my money and our governemnt's protection, albeit for a reasonable amount of time.
Our founding fathers had it right, but greedy assholes have slowly messed it up.
If everybody and their brother wants to share, then doesn't that show that the system is in fact broken? If our laws are supposed to prevent "bad" behavior and whatnot, then what constitutes "bad"? In the past "bad" was determined by a general concensus that it was naughty behavior and needed to be corrected/punished. If everyone is alright with file sharing, then why not change the laws to reflect the shifting idealogy that culture shouldn't be locked up? Besides, copyright is meant to facilitate useful arts and sciences. Just how useful is a movie about someone getting their head blown off anyway (which seems to be the bulk of American action flicks these days)?
No, its public in the sense that its broadcasted free and clear just like public television. Don't want people using it without your consent? Then lock it down. This is exactly what happened with Satellite television. When using public spectrum, everyone is allowed to access it by its very nature. You do not own the signal even though you're the person who owns the device that it originated from. Don't like? Then take the signal out of the public spectrum, or secure the damn thing (i.e. encrypt it).
I was going to recommend Global Knowledge, but after reading some of the other posts I see there is plenty of education and training available that I never knew existed. Personally I'd rather save the cash, read a book, and test things out in my lab. But that's just me.
And if the games that were pre-ripped to the HD were sold with the package, then what? For all we know they were all part of a large package deal since the article doesn't seem to mention whether this is the case or not. If the games were part of the deal and were paid for, then we'rve in for an interesting case. Otherwise they were in the wrong, end of story.
I don't think the percentage is anywhere near that high. With the expense of building a HTPC, you can get an XBox, mod it, and have your own multifunction HTPC with integrated movie and music jukebox for a fraction of the cost. This is the main reason I'm entertaining the idea of picking one up soon--so I can watch my DVDs and TV shows compressed on my media server's hard drive. Burning 100's DVDs takes time and money, but ripping one and playing it remotely is quick and easy. When the movie is finished I let it compress overnight for permenant storage (I don't have an HDTV so as long as the video quality is decently better than VHS I'm happy). With a 2 year old in the house its really the way to go IMO. Plus I've fallen in love with content on-demand (a la Comcast).
You know what, I think you're right. Now that I think about it, I had to submit a fingerprint when I got my card for Biometric access (should they ever implement it). I can't believe I forgot about that...even more reason not to lose your ID. With your medical details, military history, and identification details someone could really put a hurtin' on your life if they wanted to.
The military has moved to using Common Access Cards as our IDs, and in a lot of places are required to use it for network access, medical facilities, etc and can act as a PKI smartcard. It was only a matter of time before Biometrics were rolled into it.
SSH probabaly wouldn't work since many networks filter it out. SSL/TLS may work, but then you've got to go about getting certificates and all that mess for the clients to be able to participate.
Before anyone recommends using regular old port 80 or 25, consider this: Most networks that have a web proxy block port 80 outbound from all but the proxy server so nobody can surf without first going through it. Bottom line: this will block the P2P requests. Same can be said for pretty much any secured network using traditional network services (ports 1-1024).
By and large I agree with you. First sale doctrine has been completely bypassed with product-activation and after-the-fact EULAs like HL2 has brought about. And I still don't understand how people are buying into this product activation bullshit. It does nothing to stop illegal use and only punishes the legit customers. Now some may ask, "what punishment?" Well, if you can't play the damn game for days after purchase because the game's manufacturer or publisher's network has gone bonko that's a start. And if you modify the game in any way, they think they can just lock you out from it completely, nevermind the fact that its no longer their property. The entire notion that IP is licensed and isn't sold is hogwash that only the unwashed sheeple seem to have fallen for. Its a crock-o-shit and we know it. Why its going still being accepted is beyond me. In the case of Valve locking people out of the single player, consider this: if you buy a car, does GM have any rights to disabling your keys to it if you change out the stock radio for a Kenwood? I think not!
Its also funny that you mention the monthly fee for Steam as I feel its only a matter of time. In fact we were just discussing this at lunch today. Just imagine how pissed people will be when they can't play a game they paid for because they don't have the subscription that goes with it. Its like buying a Vivendi movie on DVD, but then not being able to play it in your DVD player because you don't have Vivendi's cable service. Talk about the corporations having their cake and eating it to!
When push comes to shove, I'd love to be part of the class-action lawsuit once it rolls around. Then again, I'm not eligable since I'm not going to buy the friggin game.
My question comes from the fact that the law states in black and white in Uniform Commercial Code 2-207 that once you purchase it the transaction is complete and all agreements after the fact are moot and not legally binding.
It appears that the cases that sided with EULAs were simply misinformed judges or lawyers with weak understanding of the UCC. Or maybe that's just me.
Someone explain to me how this is open to interpretation. Once you make the purchase, any and all strings attached to the product from a seller's standpoint ceases to exist. Once you open to box and install the software, any pop-up EULA are moot as the transaction has already been completed at the cashier, which upon sale is the only point that the copyright holder has the right to set limits on the usage. The EULA comes after the sale, hence not binding. Hell, this is one of the core reasons we have copyright laws to begin with!
Heh, some websites have already tried this. But when their hits went into the crapper they relented. 90something percent of all webbrowsing is with IE, and now that it has an integrated popup blocker thanks to SP2 guess how successful mandatory adds will be? (read: not very).
I think this is just what the doctor ordered. Maybe now people will think twice before buying something with strings attached. Product activation, DRM, etc are eventually going to go too far and suffer the backlash of the masses. HL2/Valve is just the start of the mountain of discontent and eventually people will tire of the BS being rammed down their throats and put a stop to it.
For my part, I've given up trying to prevent the corporations from ruining everything. Now I just voice my concerns to friends and family, sit back, and when the shit hits the fan laugh at those that thought it would never happen to them (friends who bought HL2 a week ago and STILL can't play are a prime example). Only though experiencing restrictions to their own personal freedoms will the masses truly understand what we've been fighting for all these years...
Most PHBs misunderstand the results of proactive security, mainly because proactivity breeds less tangible results (because the attacks are mitigated before they do any damage). In the case of a successful security breach the damage is seen, counted, and monetary losses to the company are estimated. For example, when a virus hits and the IT guys are scrambling, the monetary losses are itemized and quantified. If the network is secured and nothing happens the IT folks can't claim one way or the other about how much money they just saved the company from reactionary tactics of such an attck, despite how much you may try. Its scary how many people would rather have the "warm-fuzzy" that their money is being used for something they can actual see. I think their thinking process goes a little something like this: "Phantom security? Bah! Why put up money that may or may not protect us when we can see actually results of the money spent by watching the the workers that have to stay late to disinfect the servers and workstations." Yes its a screwy analogy, but its really that simple in a lot of cases.
The easy solution: release a patch that removes the requirement for the product activation. I mean god forbid people be able to use a product they have leagally purchased.
I'm sorrty, but internal corporate bureaucracy does not trump basic consumer rights. They bought it and now they use it. Period. That's just the way it works, depite how much companies would like for it to be otherwise. The only way they'll get away with it is if we let them.
Congratulations Valve/Vivendi, you've just lost yourselves a customer and gotten yourselves added to very many shit lists the world over.
Slashdot Mirror
For those daring enough, you can download it here.
The problem with your line of thinking is that it doesn't account for the intangibles. I'm not distraught with grief, nor do I have to worry about who will provide my family with income so they can survive all because I had to delete the 3 or 4 spam messages in my Inbox.
This is where common-sense overrides the numbers.
Actually, this is exactly my line of thinking. I'm not for ripping off people of their hard earned work. I'm against locking up large portions of our culture, which is all copyright is doing these days when it comes to entertainment. If we had the copyright laws that we have today in place 100 years ago nobody would have ever heard of Disney, amongst others. At no previous point in American history have corporations had so much sway in our legal system. Sure they might have been able to work loopholes and such, but not in the way of actually getting laws drafted to support their particular business models. The DMCA is a shining example of such legislation.
My point is, if people want cuture to be free then why fight it? Personally, I beleive there is something fundamentally wrong with locking up culture for profit. If you're into music then you should be in it for the music. If you make a buck from it, then you should be grateful someone paid you for doing what you love. The entire entertainment and sports industry are out of their damn minds. And the people that support them by throwing cash at their feet, so to speak, are the ones fueling this madness.
At the end of the day, at what point do we say enough is enough? We've already got copyrights that far exceed their original purpose and software patents that essentially lock up math equations for basically the rest of our natural lives. So I ask, how are our childeren's children going to be able to create new works of art or sotware when all existing ideas are being locked away for decades on end? All we're going to end up with eventually is a lack of creativity in the nation's youth. Mark my words, the effects of todays legisation both in terms of copyright and software patents won't be felt for decades to come. And when this crap does come to fruition I hope we'll all be looking back at this era like we do today with Prohibition.
And yes I know patents and copyrights don't belong in the same post like this, but my point is that the US government has made it clear that it is perfectly willing to bend to the will of the corporations despite how it may harm the citizens. This is not a "Good Thing" by any stretch of the imagination and we need to do our part to make it stop--My part is to encourage others to stop buying movies and music by any organization that doesn't actually support our nation's cultural growth. If it does, then and only then do I consider it a useful art worthy of my money and our governemnt's protection, albeit for a reasonable amount of time.
Our founding fathers had it right, but greedy assholes have slowly messed it up.
Take the GPL and Copyleft. They may not be mainstream, but they're becoming more and more popular.
If everybody and their brother wants to share, then doesn't that show that the system is in fact broken? If our laws are supposed to prevent "bad" behavior and whatnot, then what constitutes "bad"? In the past "bad" was determined by a general concensus that it was naughty behavior and needed to be corrected/punished. If everyone is alright with file sharing, then why not change the laws to reflect the shifting idealogy that culture shouldn't be locked up? Besides, copyright is meant to facilitate useful arts and sciences. Just how useful is a movie about someone getting their head blown off anyway (which seems to be the bulk of American action flicks these days)?
1 in 233 is 0.004 and some change. That's a .4% chance of us getting hit.
Honestly, if that was in the post's title would any of us be reading this right now?
No, its public in the sense that its broadcasted free and clear just like public television. Don't want people using it without your consent? Then lock it down. This is exactly what happened with Satellite television. When using public spectrum, everyone is allowed to access it by its very nature. You do not own the signal even though you're the person who owns the device that it originated from. Don't like? Then take the signal out of the public spectrum, or secure the damn thing (i.e. encrypt it).
I was going to recommend Global Knowledge, but after reading some of the other posts I see there is plenty of education and training available that I never knew existed.
Personally I'd rather save the cash, read a book, and test things out in my lab. But that's just me.
And if the games that were pre-ripped to the HD were sold with the package, then what? For all we know they were all part of a large package deal since the article doesn't seem to mention whether this is the case or not. If the games were part of the deal and were paid for, then we'rve in for an interesting case. Otherwise they were in the wrong, end of story.
I don't think the percentage is anywhere near that high. With the expense of building a HTPC, you can get an XBox, mod it, and have your own multifunction HTPC with integrated movie and music jukebox for a fraction of the cost. This is the main reason I'm entertaining the idea of picking one up soon--so I can watch my DVDs and TV shows compressed on my media server's hard drive. Burning 100's DVDs takes time and money, but ripping one and playing it remotely is quick and easy. When the movie is finished I let it compress overnight for permenant storage (I don't have an HDTV so as long as the video quality is decently better than VHS I'm happy). With a 2 year old in the house its really the way to go IMO. Plus I've fallen in love with content on-demand (a la Comcast).
You know what, I think you're right. Now that I think about it, I had to submit a fingerprint when I got my card for Biometric access (should they ever implement it). I can't believe I forgot about that...even more reason not to lose your ID. With your medical details, military history, and identification details someone could really put a hurtin' on your life if they wanted to.
The military has moved to using Common Access Cards as our IDs, and in a lot of places are required to use it for network access, medical facilities, etc and can act as a PKI smartcard. It was only a matter of time before Biometrics were rolled into it.
They're already working on it.
6 24 4&tid=95
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/02/201
SSH probabaly wouldn't work since many networks filter it out. SSL/TLS may work, but then you've got to go about getting certificates and all that mess for the clients to be able to participate.
Before anyone recommends using regular old port 80 or 25, consider this: Most networks that have a web proxy block port 80 outbound from all but the proxy server so nobody can surf without first going through it. Bottom line: this will block the P2P requests. Same can be said for pretty much any secured network using traditional network services (ports 1-1024).
By and large I agree with you. First sale doctrine has been completely bypassed with product-activation and after-the-fact EULAs like HL2 has brought about. And I still don't understand how people are buying into this product activation bullshit. It does nothing to stop illegal use and only punishes the legit customers. Now some may ask, "what punishment?" Well, if you can't play the damn game for days after purchase because the game's manufacturer or publisher's network has gone bonko that's a start. And if you modify the game in any way, they think they can just lock you out from it completely, nevermind the fact that its no longer their property. The entire notion that IP is licensed and isn't sold is hogwash that only the unwashed sheeple seem to have fallen for. Its a crock-o-shit and we know it. Why its going still being accepted is beyond me. In the case of Valve locking people out of the single player, consider this: if you buy a car, does GM have any rights to disabling your keys to it if you change out the stock radio for a Kenwood? I think not!
Its also funny that you mention the monthly fee for Steam as I feel its only a matter of time. In fact we were just discussing this at lunch today. Just imagine how pissed people will be when they can't play a game they paid for because they don't have the subscription that goes with it. Its like buying a Vivendi movie on DVD, but then not being able to play it in your DVD player because you don't have Vivendi's cable service. Talk about the corporations having their cake and eating it to!
When push comes to shove, I'd love to be part of the class-action lawsuit once it rolls around. Then again, I'm not eligable since I'm not going to buy the friggin game.
Ah, now I see the distinction between the two. Thanks for putting it into perspective.
My question comes from the fact that the law states in black and white in Uniform Commercial Code 2-207 that once you purchase it the transaction is complete and all agreements after the fact are moot and not legally binding.
It appears that the cases that sided with EULAs were simply misinformed judges or lawyers with weak understanding of the UCC. Or maybe that's just me.
Someone mod up this guy's comment!!!
Thank god someone else realizes the absurdity of licensing after the fact. Once money exchanges hands, that's it.
Someone explain to me how this is open to interpretation. Once you make the purchase, any and all strings attached to the product from a seller's standpoint ceases to exist. Once you open to box and install the software, any pop-up EULA are moot as the transaction has already been completed at the cashier, which upon sale is the only point that the copyright holder has the right to set limits on the usage. The EULA comes after the sale, hence not binding. Hell, this is one of the core reasons we have copyright laws to begin with!
Heh, some websites have already tried this. But when their hits went into the crapper they relented. 90something percent of all webbrowsing is with IE, and now that it has an integrated popup blocker thanks to SP2 guess how successful mandatory adds will be? (read: not very).
I think this is just what the doctor ordered. Maybe now people will think twice before buying something with strings attached. Product activation, DRM, etc are eventually going to go too far and suffer the backlash of the masses. HL2/Valve is just the start of the mountain of discontent and eventually people will tire of the BS being rammed down their throats and put a stop to it.
For my part, I've given up trying to prevent the corporations from ruining everything. Now I just voice my concerns to friends and family, sit back, and when the shit hits the fan laugh at those that thought it would never happen to them (friends who bought HL2 a week ago and STILL can't play are a prime example). Only though experiencing restrictions to their own personal freedoms will the masses truly understand what we've been fighting for all these years...
I have already begun such a process. Instead of putting up with the shenanigans of the studios, I've ceased to watch add-based television.
:)
Then I download the shows I want to watch, 100% commerical free
Most PHBs misunderstand the results of proactive security, mainly because proactivity breeds less tangible results (because the attacks are mitigated before they do any damage). In the case of a successful security breach the damage is seen, counted, and monetary losses to the company are estimated. For example, when a virus hits and the IT guys are scrambling, the monetary losses are itemized and quantified. If the network is secured and nothing happens the IT folks can't claim one way or the other about how much money they just saved the company from reactionary tactics of such an attck, despite how much you may try. Its scary how many people would rather have the "warm-fuzzy" that their money is being used for something they can actual see. I think their thinking process goes a little something like this:
"Phantom security? Bah! Why put up money that may or may not protect us when we can see actually results of the money spent by watching the the workers that have to stay late to disinfect the servers and workstations." Yes its a screwy analogy, but its really that simple in a lot of cases.
The easy solution: release a patch that removes the requirement for the product activation. I mean god forbid people be able to use a product they have leagally purchased.
I'm sorrty, but internal corporate bureaucracy does not trump basic consumer rights. They bought it and now they use it. Period. That's just the way it works, depite how much companies would like for it to be otherwise. The only way they'll get away with it is if we let them.
Congratulations Valve/Vivendi, you've just lost yourselves a customer and gotten yourselves added to very many shit lists the world over.