A New album of my fav band is out. I'm $15 short of buying it. I have some old CDs I don't need anymore. 1. I go find a store, register, leave fingerprints, sell the old CDs and purchase the album legally, using my own $15 and the credit. 2. I discard the CDs and launch emule, grab the album off the net.
If you maintain a private information, you keep it private. If you sell it to the public, it's public. Anything contradicting the two is lawyer babble of eat a cake and have a cake.
It isn't like Brazil is the only country buying the drug. It isn't like they wouldn't profit from the sales if their pricing was reasonable. They just thought "Brazil is such a ripe fruit, so many diseased, we can squeeze more from them" and they squeezed too much. Ask for a fair share and you get it, act as a scumbag ripping off the dying and you get treated like a scumbag.
Won't happen, because the companies will spend a lot of money on lobbying against it. If it was created, it would mean the end of them, so they'd do whatever in their power to prevent it.
Yeah... we can't allow people go violate intellectual property in order to do such trivial and insignificant things as saving lives. Pirates beware, your illegal live-saving activity won't go unpunished!
First, I'd request a written order signed by the boss, specifying what they exactly request and awareness of legal problems. Then I'd freely proceed. It's not my ass that would be on a plate in case of a control.
Sometimes magazines have good software included on the CDs for a puny price. Partition Magic, Nero, some 3D stuff, firewalls, some good essentials at $49/piece normally can be bought for $5. Then I don't discard the paper, just grok it for interesting stuff and read whatever catches my interest.
I buy the software, I get the magazines free with it.
Me: Hey, guys, but paragraph $free.parNum point $free.ptNum of $free.lawname claims I am allowed to make copies of this for purpose of $free.fairUsePurpose and you're not allowed to stop me from doing that! Them: Hard luck, kid. Crack it, we'll sue you and you try defending your ass out of court if you really believe you have a case. For now, GTFO, we got your $5 and you can stick your law up your ass.
The problem is that you can't patent a random number.
You might try patenting a number that has a special meaning, say, optimal performance, size that fits exactly some standarized volume or such, by explaining in your patent application why chosen number is special for given purpose. Here the number is strictly random and any other random number could be used in its place for exactly as good result, therefore it's unpatentable. A method of creating the number, a method of using it - could be. The one specific value - not.
The other problem is that they wouldn't protect it from pirates, who don't give a shit about the law, they just grab the number and use it for whatever they desire.
Sure they HOPED the number would remain secret, assuring their profits and protecting the content. They BELIEVED AACS is uncrackable. Therefore they kept the key secret, and the only protection it had was said secrecy. They put all eggs in one basket, and now once the secret is out, they refuse to acknowledge their defeat.
The key WASN'T DESIGNED to circumvent AACS. It was created to create code keys for AACS - for protection, not for circumvention. The fact that it can be used to reverse the process is an undesired side effect, and therefore the key was kept secret.
The hackers didn't create a totally new key which circumvents AACS. They just discovered the key used by MPAA and co. for encrypting the movies. They took it and used it for its "secondary" purpose.
Things are different than with DeCSS which was a special piece of code designed to crack protection. This piece of data was designed to create protection, by some guys who implemented AACS. It's used directly or indirectly in every single HD-DVD player for legal playback of the movies. The fact that after the leak it can be used to decrypt these movies to devices other than just your screen is a side effect.
A name can be copyrighted, given enough creativity. Try to release a movie with a guy called Luke Skywalker as the main character and have your ass sued off by Lucas. Common names can't be copyrighted due to massive prior art, not because some law forbids it.
OTOH a RANDOM number can't be copyrighted. Randomness contradicts creativity.
A random (RANDOM!) number cannot be patented. Use of it can be. If a specific (special for some reason) number is a part of a patent, it must be included in said patent and made public with the patent application. If this is not a specific, but an arbitrary number, it can be at best a trade secret, which prevents employees from reposting it, but not arbitrary people from the outside. They may seek damage from whoever released it first, if they find them, and besides that - nothing. DMCA specifies a circumvention device as a device with primary function of circumventing protection. The primary function of this key is creating protection keys for the disks. Ability to decrypt them is secondary and it wasn't originally created (by the manufacturers of HD-DVD) as a circumvention device. It was later only copied (discovered) by people who used it for a different purpose.
So, sorry. All bases covered, nothing illegal here.
Nope. We hate both. HD-DVD is an old hate of Microsoft. Blu-ray is a new hate of newly-scummy SONY.
Except we currently got the HD-DVD key. Blu-ray comes in next.
Once we have both broken and down to their knees, with faces in dirt, just like DeCSS got DVD to be, we stop hating them: they are our bitches and we screw them as we like.
If they held the number as a PATENT, they would have to make it public. Nobody could LEGALLY use it without their consent. Pirates would use it freely illegally. Plus this is arbitrary data, can't be patented. If they made it COPYRIGHTED, they couldn't generate it randomly. It would require certain amount of creativity. Meaning it would be easier to brute-force. If they made it a TRADE SECRET, they could sue their own employees for releasing it. They couldn't demand outsiders not to spread it. They could make it a TRADE MARK. Situation pretty similar as with patent - they'd need to make it public, then sue anyone who uses it without their consent. Last but not least they could claim it's a CICRCUMVENTION DEVICE, as per DMCA, except circumvention must be the primary function of a circumvention device. The key's primary function is replaying legal movies in legal players released by legal manufacturers. It wasn't made to circumvent, it was made to access legally, then "leaked" - just like service access codes.
Since the story got/.'d and nearly wiped out Digg, the number will be all over the web in matter of hours. Google will need a few weeks to catch up with all the occurences.
Sure you can "go back in time", but two users working on the same file at the same time would be a pain. Networking would require additional layers - even plain SAMBA/NFS, but still. Plus a bunch of userspace utilities as UI to access it easily.
It's not bad as a backend for such a system, just like MySQL is good as a backend for a website, but by itself it's pretty much worthless.
Slashdot Mirror
yep, that's interplatform service.
Visit Apple's portal to find gApple.
A New album of my fav band is out. I'm $15 short of buying it. I have some old CDs I don't need anymore.
1. I go find a store, register, leave fingerprints, sell the old CDs and purchase the album legally, using my own $15 and the credit.
2. I discard the CDs and launch emule, grab the album off the net.
Which one is more likely?
Seen "I, Robot"? Viki was a servant, ordered to protect the humanity. The lawyers protecting AACS acted about the same.
If you maintain a private information, you keep it private. If you sell it to the public, it's public. Anything contradicting the two is lawyer babble of eat a cake and have a cake.
Prior (oldest known) professions of:
- congressmen: lawyers
- women: whores
seems right.
It isn't like Brazil is the only country buying the drug. It isn't like they wouldn't profit from the sales if their pricing was reasonable. They just thought "Brazil is such a ripe fruit, so many diseased, we can squeeze more from them" and they squeezed too much. Ask for a fair share and you get it, act as a scumbag ripping off the dying and you get treated like a scumbag.
Won't happen, because the companies will spend a lot of money on lobbying against it. If it was created, it would mean the end of them, so they'd do whatever in their power to prevent it.
Yeah... we can't allow people go violate intellectual property in order to do such trivial and insignificant things as saving lives. Pirates beware, your illegal live-saving activity won't go unpunished!
First, I'd request a written order signed by the boss, specifying what they exactly request and awareness of legal problems. Then I'd freely proceed. It's not my ass that would be on a plate in case of a control.
Any no-frills cellular phone.
BTW, any decent hearing aid can nicely cooperate with a good cell phone.
Sometimes magazines have good software included on the CDs for a puny price. Partition Magic, Nero, some 3D stuff, firewalls, some good essentials at $49/piece normally can be bought for $5. Then I don't discard the paper, just grok it for interesting stuff and read whatever catches my interest.
I buy the software, I get the magazines free with it.
Internet 1 was designed to withstand a nuclear war.
Internet 2 gets knocked off by a stray cigarette.
I don't like where the technology is going.
Me: Hey, guys, but paragraph $free.parNum point $free.ptNum of $free.lawname claims I am allowed to make copies of this for purpose of $free.fairUsePurpose and you're not allowed to stop me from doing that!
Them: Hard luck, kid. Crack it, we'll sue you and you try defending your ass out of court if you really believe you have a case. For now, GTFO, we got your $5 and you can stick your law up your ass.
The problem is that you can't patent a random number.
You might try patenting a number that has a special meaning, say, optimal performance, size that fits exactly some standarized volume or such, by explaining in your patent application why chosen number is special for given purpose. Here the number is strictly random and any other random number could be used in its place for exactly as good result, therefore it's unpatentable. A method of creating the number, a method of using it - could be. The one specific value - not.
The other problem is that they wouldn't protect it from pirates, who don't give a shit about the law, they just grab the number and use it for whatever they desire.
Sure they HOPED the number would remain secret, assuring their profits and protecting the content. They BELIEVED AACS is uncrackable. Therefore they kept the key secret, and the only protection it had was said secrecy. They put all eggs in one basket, and now once the secret is out, they refuse to acknowledge their defeat.
The key WASN'T DESIGNED to circumvent AACS. It was created to create code keys for AACS - for protection, not for circumvention. The fact that it can be used to reverse the process is an undesired side effect, and therefore the key was kept secret.
The hackers didn't create a totally new key which circumvents AACS. They just discovered the key used by MPAA and co. for encrypting the movies. They took it and used it for its "secondary" purpose.
Things are different than with DeCSS which was a special piece of code designed to crack protection. This piece of data was designed to create protection, by some guys who implemented AACS. It's used directly or indirectly in every single HD-DVD player for legal playback of the movies. The fact that after the leak it can be used to decrypt these movies to devices other than just your screen is a side effect.
A name can be copyrighted, given enough creativity. Try to release a movie with a guy called Luke Skywalker as the main character and have your ass sued off by Lucas. Common names can't be copyrighted due to massive prior art, not because some law forbids it.
OTOH a RANDOM number can't be copyrighted. Randomness contradicts creativity.
A random (RANDOM!) number cannot be patented. Use of it can be.
If a specific (special for some reason) number is a part of a patent, it must be included in said patent and made public with the patent application.
If this is not a specific, but an arbitrary number, it can be at best a trade secret, which prevents employees from reposting it, but not arbitrary people from the outside. They may seek damage from whoever released it first, if they find them, and besides that - nothing.
DMCA specifies a circumvention device as a device with primary function of circumventing protection. The primary function of this key is creating protection keys for the disks. Ability to decrypt them is secondary and it wasn't originally created (by the manufacturers of HD-DVD) as a circumvention device. It was later only copied (discovered) by people who used it for a different purpose.
So, sorry. All bases covered, nothing illegal here.
Digg getting slashdotted?
Teh Intarnets is Over.
Nope. We hate both. HD-DVD is an old hate of Microsoft. Blu-ray is a new hate of newly-scummy SONY.
Except we currently got the HD-DVD key. Blu-ray comes in next.
Once we have both broken and down to their knees, with faces in dirt, just like DeCSS got DVD to be, we stop hating them: they are our bitches and we screw them as we like.
gtfo, 4-row layout is much better suited for rectangular spaces.
09 F9 11 02
9D 74 E3 5B
D8 41 56 C5
63 56 88 C0
If they held the number as a PATENT, they would have to make it public. Nobody could LEGALLY use it without their consent. Pirates would use it freely illegally. Plus this is arbitrary data, can't be patented.
If they made it COPYRIGHTED, they couldn't generate it randomly. It would require certain amount of creativity. Meaning it would be easier to brute-force.
If they made it a TRADE SECRET, they could sue their own employees for releasing it. They couldn't demand outsiders not to spread it.
They could make it a TRADE MARK. Situation pretty similar as with patent - they'd need to make it public, then sue anyone who uses it without their consent.
Last but not least they could claim it's a CICRCUMVENTION DEVICE, as per DMCA, except circumvention must be the primary function of a circumvention device. The key's primary function is replaying legal movies in legal players released by legal manufacturers. It wasn't made to circumvent, it was made to access legally, then "leaked" - just like service access codes.
So, pretty much they are screwed now.
Actually, this is as of now.
/.'d and nearly wiped out Digg, the number will be all over the web in matter of hours. Google will need a few weeks to catch up with all the occurences.
Since the story got
Fighting child pornography is way less profitable.
Concurrent...
Sure you can "go back in time", but two users working on the same file at the same time would be a pain. Networking would require additional layers - even plain SAMBA/NFS, but still. Plus a bunch of userspace utilities as UI to access it easily.
It's not bad as a backend for such a system, just like MySQL is good as a backend for a website, but by itself it's pretty much worthless.
I use Dual ROT13.