I'm suing the RIAA for selling me their audible crack, also known as 'music'. They hooked me with a low quality 'top 40' freebie when I was only eight. I couldn't help myself, all the other kids were doing it. My school teacher even encouraged me to try it. I've been an adict for so many years now that I have no hope of ever quitting. And my supplier keeps raising his prices, complaining about 'piracy' and the cost of advertising. Once I tried using an alternate supplier, a guy named Napster, but the RIAA hired an expensive gang of hit-men call 'the justice department' and had him killed.
The sad part is that some people actual think this is a good idea.
What part of strikeback is going to prevent the offending system from being re-infected and attacking you again?
My two cents:
If you THINK a system is attacking you, then you report it to your ISP. Your ISP does it's job and contacts the "attacker's" ISP, who then checks to see if the offending box is violating the terms of service. If so, the system should be removed from the network and the owner properly notified.
If the issue doesn't get resolved to your satisfaction, then you SUE your ISP for not holding up their end of the contract to provide you with the bandwidth and service that you paid for.
You will probably lose because your own terms of service provide no guarantee on bandwidth or service. So now you complain to the BBB and switch to a new ISP.
Tim Mullen obviously has no clue. Let us draw an analogy with the public phone system.
Your telephone constantly gets calls from one particular number. All hours of the day and night. What do you do (other than turn off the ringer)? You call the phone company and report the problem. The phone company resolves the issue.
EPIC has a good site with information on DRM here.
Personally, I feel that "Hollywood" should be allowed to create and release whatever they want with DRM, but they should be required to call all such media something other than the common name for the medium. For example, they can release a DRM protected CD, but would not be permitted to call it a CD. Nor should they be allowed to use 'CD' in the name, as that would imply some sort of compatibility with existing CD players. This would probably dissuade the average person from adopting the technology without at least understanding the implications.
Further, they ("Hollywood") should be required to support legacy devices such as DVDs and CDs. When I purchased a DVD player last year, it was with the understanding that current and future media would be released in this format. When the industry adopts a standard and implements it, they should be required to support it for 'x' number of years. Otherwise the consumer pays the cost of their R&D for newer technologies.
Without the record companies, you wouldn't have ever heard of any of the artists you listen to today.
That was before the invention of this little thing called the *internet*. It lets anyone distribute content for a fraction of what the cost would have been ten years ago.
... but without the financial backing of a major record company, they have precisely a snowball's chance in Hell of distributing nationwide.
This is exactly what the media giants want us to think. They have created a mystique about the amount of money and power it takes to make you successful, when the reality is you make them successful. They have exploited the relationship between artist and art lover to the point that artists feel they have no alternative to get their art to the art lover and still earn a living.
A quick look at the documentation that came with my version of PGP Freeware:
Network Associates Freeware End User License Agreement
(Non-Commercial Use and Distribution Only)
1. License Grant. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Network Associates hereby grants to you a non-exclusive, non-transferable right to use, copy and distribute solely for Non-Commercial Purposes (as defined below) the specified version of the Software and the accompanying documentation (the "Documentation").
a. For purposes of the foregoing, "non-commercial purposes" means non-commercial, non-governmental use, including, without limitation, home use for personal correspondence, student or academic use, or use by non-profit human rights organizations. The Software is "in use" when it is loaded into the temporary memory (i.e., RAM) or installed into the permanent memory (e.g., hard disk, CD ROM, or other storage device) of a computer for the purpose of being accessible in client-mode by an end user.
b. You may make exact, unmodified copies of the Software and distribute such copies solely (i) by electronic means; (ii) for Non-Commercial Purposes; and (iii) with all proprietary notices (including without limitation all copyright notices and this End User License Agreement) intact and unmodified or obscured.
... blah, blah, blah...
3. Term. This Agreement is effective unless and until earlier terminated as set forth herein. This Agreement will terminate automatically if you fail to comply with any of the limitations or other requirements described herein. Upon any termination or expiration of this Agreement, you must destroy all copies of the Software and the Documentation.
11. Miscellaneous. This Agreement is governed by the laws of the United States and the State of California, without reference to conflict of laws principles. The application of the United Nations Convention of Contracts for the International Sale of Goods is expressly excluded. This Agreement sets forth all rights for the user of the Software and is the entire agreement between the parties. This Agreement supersedes any other communications with respect to the Software and Documentation. This Agreement may not be modified except by a written addendum issued by a duly authorized representative of Network Associates. No provision hereof shall be deemed waived unless such waiver shall be in writing and signed by Network Associates or a duly authorized representative of Network Associates. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, the remainder of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. The parties confirm that it is their wish that this Agreement has been written in the
English language only.
Quick overview of the sections not included:
2. Restictions: no renting/leasing/loading/reselling.
4. Updates: No tech support.
5. Ownership Rights: They still own all the copyrights.
6. Warrant Disclaimer: "As is" software.
7. Limitation of Liability: I can't hold them liable.
8. US Government:
9. Export Controls: Don't let it cross a border! oh no!
10. High Risk Activities: Don't use this inconjunction with life-support, etc.
So, section 1 grants me the right to use, copy and distribute PGP. Section 3, there is no expressed limit on the amount of time I can use it. The only limiting factor is section 11, which gives them the right to modify by a written addendum.
In these modern days of mega-corporations and bloated laws, one of the greatest tenets of the American dream is quietly forgotten. Trust in your fellow American. Trusting your neighbor to abide by the law and not kill you while you sleep. Trusting your bank to hold your earnings and not run off in the night. Trusting the American people to do the right thing and not infringe on copyrights.
If things go in favor of MPAA, I will be trusted by the American government and my fellow Americans to possess a FIREARM that I could use to kill another person, but I would not be trusted to own COMPUTER HARDWARE that I could use to copy a DVD.
Perhaps the greater irony is that the men who created this idea of a Nation of trust--our forefathers--have been replaced by men whose very name now implies mistrust--politicians.
Why not? Saddam Hussein already kills millions of his own children by saying "NO!" to US grain imports that are due under the oil-for-food programme. Saddam has $10billion of grain ready and waiting for shipping under this scheme but he's saying, "NO! Don't give me the grain, let my children starve so the US will lift Iraqi sanctions, making America look weak so that binLaden will gain supporters and attack the US again."
Therefore in order that binLaden doesn't attack the US again, America must look strong, and maintain Iraqi sanctions at all costs, killing Iraqi children.
This is not even a credible argument. What does any of that have to do with the right to kill thousands? Are you implying that the US is killing Iraqi children, and is therefore hypocritical (i.e. killing our own citizens is bad, killing Iraq's citizens is fine)?
The blame for Iraqi's starving children lies solely on Saddam Hussein's pride. If he cared for his people, he would stop constructing his billion dollar palaces and spend the country's money on health care and food. There are few restrictions on importing basic humanitarian items like food or medicine, and a lot ($21 billion) has been delivered. For a better report on the import/export restrictions, check here.
People die, dude it's just the way the world works, that's why elections are such a big deal.
People also commit adultery, rape children, and murder innocents. Just because it HAPPENS does not mean we have the right to do it.
I will concede the point that there are freedom hating people amoung the US population... but that is their right. Just like it is your right be a whiny little bitch. What you do not have the right to do is kill thousands of other citizens. Period.
Now, I dare you to walk down the streets of Pakistan carrying a sign that reads 'Musharraf is satan' or 'Allah should be shot'. I am sure you would not be brainwashed by the Pakistan government.
Here in the US, the people have a VOICE. And they are allowed to use it to influence government policy. Which is exactly how all the privacy envasion/copyright protection bills will be defeated.
What it comes down to is anything created with the BioWare NWN toolset and then distributed is considered property of BioWare. So all I really have to do is create my *own* toolset for editing and then I can distribute modules as my property or public domain.
Do you have a way to distinguish modules created by your toolset from modules created by a third party toolset?
With the vast majority of tech geeks that play BioWare games, it is only a matter of time before an editor gets released that has no restrictions on the content created.
Or are you going to restrict the creation of third party toolsets as well?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm suing the RIAA for selling me their audible crack, also known as 'music'. They hooked me with a low quality 'top 40' freebie when I was only eight. I couldn't help myself, all the other kids were doing it. My school teacher even encouraged me to try it. I've been an adict for so many years now that I have no hope of ever quitting. And my supplier keeps raising his prices, complaining about 'piracy' and the cost of advertising. Once I tried using an alternate supplier, a guy named Napster, but the RIAA hired an expensive gang of hit-men call 'the justice department' and had him killed.
The sad part is that some people actual think this is a good idea.
What part of strikeback is going to prevent the offending system from being re-infected and attacking you again?
My two cents:
If you THINK a system is attacking you, then you report it to your ISP. Your ISP does it's job and contacts the "attacker's" ISP, who then checks to see if the offending box is violating the terms of service. If so, the system should be removed from the network and the owner properly notified.
If the issue doesn't get resolved to your satisfaction, then you SUE your ISP for not holding up their end of the contract to provide you with the bandwidth and service that you paid for.
You will probably lose because your own terms of service provide no guarantee on bandwidth or service. So now you complain to the BBB and switch to a new ISP.
Tim Mullen obviously has no clue. Let us draw an analogy with the public phone system.
Your telephone constantly gets calls from one particular number. All hours of the day and night. What do you do (other than turn off the ringer)? You call the phone company and report the problem. The phone company resolves the issue.
-SignalFreq
EPIC has a good site with information on DRM here.
Personally, I feel that "Hollywood" should be allowed to create and release whatever they want with DRM, but they should be required to call all such media something other than the common name for the medium. For example, they can release a DRM protected CD, but would not be permitted to call it a CD. Nor should they be allowed to use 'CD' in the name, as that would imply some sort of compatibility with existing CD players. This would probably dissuade the average person from adopting the technology without at least understanding the implications.
Further, they ("Hollywood") should be required to support legacy devices such as DVDs and CDs. When I purchased a DVD player last year, it was with the understanding that current and future media would be released in this format. When the industry adopts a standard and implements it, they should be required to support it for 'x' number of years. Otherwise the consumer pays the cost of their R&D for newer technologies.
-SignalFreq
Without the record companies, you wouldn't have ever heard of any of the artists you listen to today.
... but without the financial backing of a major record company, they have precisely a snowball's chance in Hell of distributing nationwide.
That was before the invention of this little thing called the *internet*. It lets anyone distribute content for a fraction of what the cost would have been ten years ago.
This is exactly what the media giants want us to think. They have created a mystique about the amount of money and power it takes to make you successful, when the reality is you make them successful. They have exploited the relationship between artist and art lover to the point that artists feel they have no alternative to get their art to the art lover and still earn a living.
A quick look at the documentation that came with my version of PGP Freeware:
Network Associates Freeware End User License Agreement
(Non-Commercial Use and Distribution Only)
1. License Grant. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Network Associates hereby grants to you a non-exclusive, non-transferable right to use, copy and distribute solely for Non-Commercial Purposes (as defined below) the specified version of the Software and the accompanying documentation (the "Documentation").
a. For purposes of the foregoing, "non-commercial purposes" means non-commercial, non-governmental use, including, without limitation, home use for personal correspondence, student or academic use, or use by non-profit human rights organizations. The Software is "in use" when it is loaded into the temporary memory (i.e., RAM) or installed into the permanent memory (e.g., hard disk, CD ROM, or other storage device) of a computer for the purpose of being accessible in client-mode by an end user.
b. You may make exact, unmodified copies of the Software and distribute such copies solely (i) by electronic means; (ii) for Non-Commercial Purposes; and (iii) with all proprietary notices (including without limitation all copyright notices and this End User License Agreement) intact and unmodified or obscured.
3. Term. This Agreement is effective unless and until earlier terminated as set forth herein. This Agreement will terminate automatically if you fail to comply with any of the limitations or other requirements described herein. Upon any termination or expiration of this Agreement, you must destroy all copies of the Software and the Documentation.
11. Miscellaneous. This Agreement is governed by the laws of the United States and the State of California, without reference to conflict of laws principles. The application of the United Nations Convention of Contracts for the International Sale of Goods is expressly excluded. This Agreement sets forth all rights for the user of the Software and is the entire agreement between the parties. This Agreement supersedes any other communications with respect to the Software and Documentation. This Agreement may not be modified except by a written addendum issued by a duly authorized representative of Network Associates. No provision hereof shall be deemed waived unless such waiver shall be in writing and signed by Network Associates or a duly authorized representative of Network Associates. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, the remainder of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. The parties confirm that it is their wish that this Agreement has been written in the English language only.
Quick overview of the sections not included:
2. Restictions: no renting/leasing/loading/reselling.
4. Updates: No tech support.
5. Ownership Rights: They still own all the copyrights.
6. Warrant Disclaimer: "As is" software.
7. Limitation of Liability: I can't hold them liable.
8. US Government:
9. Export Controls: Don't let it cross a border! oh no!
10. High Risk Activities: Don't use this inconjunction with life-support, etc.
So, section 1 grants me the right to use, copy and distribute PGP. Section 3, there is no expressed limit on the amount of time I can use it. The only limiting factor is section 11, which gives them the right to modify by a written addendum.
Damn. Guess I'll just have to switch to GPG.
- SignalFreq
In these modern days of mega-corporations and bloated laws, one of the greatest tenets of the American dream is quietly forgotten. Trust in your fellow American. Trusting your neighbor to abide by the law and not kill you while you sleep. Trusting your bank to hold your earnings and not run off in the night. Trusting the American people to do the right thing and not infringe on copyrights.
If things go in favor of MPAA, I will be trusted by the American government and my fellow Americans to possess a FIREARM that I could use to kill another person, but I would not be trusted to own COMPUTER HARDWARE that I could use to copy a DVD.
Perhaps the greater irony is that the men who created this idea of a Nation of trust--our forefathers--have been replaced by men whose very name now implies mistrust--politicians.
- SignalFreq
Why not? Saddam Hussein already kills millions of his own children by saying "NO!" to US grain imports that are due under the oil-for-food programme. Saddam has $10billion of grain ready and waiting for shipping under this scheme but he's saying, "NO! Don't give me the grain, let my children starve so the US will lift Iraqi sanctions, making America look weak so that binLaden will gain supporters and attack the US again."
Therefore in order that binLaden doesn't attack the US again, America must look strong, and maintain Iraqi sanctions at all costs, killing Iraqi children.
This is not even a credible argument. What does any of that have to do with the right to kill thousands? Are you implying that the US is killing Iraqi children, and is therefore hypocritical (i.e. killing our own citizens is bad, killing Iraq's citizens is fine)?
The blame for Iraqi's starving children lies solely on Saddam Hussein's pride. If he cared for his people, he would stop constructing his billion dollar palaces and spend the country's money on health care and food. There are few restrictions on importing basic humanitarian items like food or medicine, and a lot ($21 billion) has been delivered. For a better report on the import/export restrictions, check here.
People die, dude it's just the way the world works, that's why elections are such a big deal.
People also commit adultery, rape children, and murder innocents. Just because it HAPPENS does not mean we have the right to do it.
I will concede the point that there are freedom hating people amoung the US population... but that is their right. Just like it is your right be a whiny little bitch. What you do not have the right to do is kill thousands of other citizens. Period.
Now, I dare you to walk down the streets of Pakistan carrying a sign that reads 'Musharraf is satan' or 'Allah should be shot'. I am sure you would not be brainwashed by the Pakistan government.
Here in the US, the people have a VOICE. And they are allowed to use it to influence government policy. Which is exactly how all the privacy envasion/copyright protection bills will be defeated.
What it comes down to is anything created with the BioWare NWN toolset and then distributed is considered property of BioWare. So all I really have to do is create my *own* toolset for editing and then I can distribute modules as my property or public domain.
Do you have a way to distinguish modules created by your toolset from modules created by a third party toolset?
With the vast majority of tech geeks that play BioWare games, it is only a matter of time before an editor gets released that has no restrictions on the content created.
Or are you going to restrict the creation of third party toolsets as well?