To neutralise this invasion of privacy, we need someone to write an encryption program that will place two or more different files (or messages) in a single encrypted document - with two different passwords. Enter one password, the first file comes out; Enter the other password, the second file is returned. But at no time should the decryption program reveal just how many files are encrypted.
To preserve plausible deniability, if one only stores one file in the encrypted file then the program should encrypt random characters of a similar length to the file with a very long, random password. (or some similar means of obfuscation).
I'm not sure I understand how the RIAA fits into all of this. They are about policing the use of recordings produced and distributed by their member companies.
I was under the impression that if someone else (other than the original artist) performs the piece, then it falls under the broader and more reasonable terms of compulsory licensing of sheet music, which should be handled by an entirely different organisation since neither the original performing artist or their recording company really has any standing here (unless one of them wrote the music - and even then, licensing terms for sheet music are fixed.).
As long as the guy on Youtube wasn't silly enough to include part of the original music in his video clip, none of this should be a problem.
No. The DMCA would not apply. Not for this. Firstly, the fake ID does not rise to the level of creativity necessary to be copyrighted. Secondly, although the photo may be copyright (by the person who took it!) this would not really apply if it were a DMV photo. Third, as a corrupt instrument and evidence of a crime, copyright doesn't even come into it.
may be dismissed by the plaintiff without order of court, unless a provisional remedy has been allowed, (i) by filing a notice of dismissal at any time before service by the adverse party of an answer or of a motion for summary judgment...
I, too, am not a lawyer (still have my soul) but it seems to me that there must have been some kind of answer to the complaint since the defendant got them to drop the suit by proving that it wasn't him and that he didn't have the modem at the time. I do not know, however, if this rises to the level of "service of an answer", but it I were a lawyer I would be attempt to argue that it did.
I'm the last one to defend the MPAA, but the only reason for sharing this number is so that cheapskates can get free movies. Right?
Wrong. I have a store-bought DVD collection that would be the envy of most video stores and I value the ability to take the content from the DVD and use it as I please.
Some movies become mp4 files for portable use. In other cases I like to re-author the content to make it more suitable to my needs - often because the menu structure is stupid or tries to force content upon me.
I like to put a whole season of South Park on a single DVD (at lower quality) so that I can watch it in a marathon session.
There are any number of reasons to decrypt a DVD (or HD-DVD). Only some of them are dishonest.
From the article, it really doesn't sound like the developer really understands what Open Source or the GPL is all about. Let him go and good riddance - I understand there's a pretty good fork out there anyway.:+>
I learned this 15 years ago when I turned my then-four-year-old son loose on an early copy of Wolfenstein 3D.
After a long session of him gleefully shooting everything that moved (In god mode, of course), I decided to test the idea that violent games produced violent children. "Wouldn't it be nice if you could shoot people like that in real life?" I asked.
He looked at me, utterly shocked. "No! Why would I want to do that?"
"You enjoyed shooting people in Wolfenstein, didn't you?" I offered, "Why not for real?"
I swear, my 4 year old son looked at me with pity in his eyes. "It's only a game, Dad!
After that I decided not to worry about kids playing violent video games any more. They are a lot more aware than most folks realize... and a lot smarter than most anti-games crusaders!
I also believe that the National Identity Register will help police bring those guilty of serious crimes to justice. They will be able, for example, to compare the fingerprints found at the scene of some 900,000 unsolved crimes against the information held on the register.
Blair already plans to misuse the data. Suddenly he regards a measure that was meant only to stop terrorists and illegal immigration as a means to solve every open crime of the last 50 years!
Compared to Tony Blair, Big Brother was a piker.
Some guy has already submitted a petition to reopen the "scrap Id card" petition. [ReopenIDpetition]
Utube has a legitimate problem. What they do not have is a case.
Although similar, the trademarks are for different types of business/endeavour. YouTube has made no attempt to profit from any confusion caused by the similarity in names.
In fact, the vast majority of users go to Utube when they really want YouTube. If Utube were a little bit smarter, they could use this opportunity to firmly entrench their brand name and raise public awareness of their business around the world. All it would take would be a low-bandwidth static front page that identified their business and its function (in a pleasent, humourous way) and offered a redirect link to YouTube for those who had come in error.
This is an opportunity for Utube to become obscenely wealthy - if they have enough sense to exploit it.
Map makers have been known to try it. So have telephone companies in their phone books and just about anyone else who compiles public databases that are essentialially just lists of facts.
Usually these attempts fail if they ever get to court because lists of facts are not creative. Most times, however, the little guy will fold when he gets his first corporate lawyer nastygram.
Note: There has been lobbying by these database producers (phone companies, etc.) to change copyright law so that they can retain control of these lists, but to the best of my knowledge there hasn't been any movement on that front.
The sheet music may very well be copyrighted due to small, even minor, variations that the publisher put in it. Not so much the formatting, though I suspect in some more extreme cases (i.e., not just changing the font and page width) that the new work could be copyrighted.
Deliberate errors in the work introduced for the purpose of making the work copyrightable do not meet the necessary creativity test. Nor do any formatting changes, punctuation, or spelling changes, such as changing British to American spelling.
it's not like you can go grab a recently printed score of Bach, scan it and put it on the web. Although Bach's work may not be covered by copyright, the particular printing you're copying probably is.
I have a fairly major credibility issue with that statement. Could you cite some sources for your assertion? - (Not including music publishers, of course)
My understanding of copyright law is that it requires a certain amount of creativity before something is considered copyrightable. Rewriting and reformating just isn't enough. I would normally expect that public domain music would only be freshly copyrightable IF enough new work had been added to justify adding the new publisher's name to the "Composed by" line.
There are a number of content middlemen (Music, video, sheet music) out there who are under the impression that every time they reissue the same work, copyright begins anew. They are wrong.
Everyonce in a while, a publisher will attempt to render public domain material copyrightable by introducing a deliberate error. Then they claim that copiers have infringed their copyrights on the errors. When challenged, this, too, fails the necessary "creativity" test for copyrightability.
"not score program, they probably copyright the output of it"
Not possible. While the program remains copyright, of course, the copyright of the output belongs solely to the author. I have used some of these programs; they allow you to set your own copyright notices.
1) Where would you live, if not in America and 2) What's stopping you from going?
1) Australia!
2) Nothing. I went - and never regretted it!
I must admit, however, that it was a whole lot nicer place before John Howard came to power, took away everyone's rights and then stuck his nose up dubya's backside...
But instead of sending him money, I'd rather send him a letter advising him on how to live a better life throw a steady income job.
RTFA, Jerk. Maybe you can send him a letter advising him "not to die from Post-Polio Syndrome", or not to waste all of his money on needed medical treatment, or maybe you can tell him how it is his own fault for being silly enough to contract Polio (before there was a vaccination for it) in the first place.
Or maybe you could forget the Neocon ideology that holds that everyone in trouble is there because of their own failings. That's just an excuse NOT to care.
And just maybe you could spend a bit of time helping your fellow man rather than preaching at him.
This whole thing has been around before. About a year ago, a similar announcement made the rounds with similar uproar. The fact that much of this proposed technology is so pointless (I mean, DVD's are already region coded, and it probably COSTS studios far more than it helps.) gives one pause.
This whole thing has the smell of an unproven technology (remember "Dark Noise"?) and a developer who is desperate for someone - anyone - to invest in his "snake-oil", hopefully raking in as much cash as possible before the studios discover that the technology is worthless.
Slashdot Mirror
To neutralise this invasion of privacy, we need someone to write an encryption program that will place two or more different files (or messages) in a single encrypted document - with two different passwords. Enter one password, the first file comes out; Enter the other password, the second file is returned. But at no time should the decryption program reveal just how many files are encrypted.
To preserve plausible deniability, if one only stores one file in the encrypted file then the program should encrypt random characters of a similar length to the file with a very long, random password. (or some similar means of obfuscation).
To me, this smells like MediaSenty working on a new concept/service that they were going to try to sell to the MPAA for beaucoup bucks.
I'm not sure I understand how the RIAA fits into all of this. They are about policing the use of recordings produced and distributed by their member companies.
I was under the impression that if someone else (other than the original artist) performs the piece, then it falls under the broader and more reasonable terms of compulsory licensing of sheet music, which should be handled by an entirely different organisation since neither the original performing artist or their recording company really has any standing here (unless one of them wrote the music - and even then, licensing terms for sheet music are fixed.).
As long as the guy on Youtube wasn't silly enough to include part of the original music in his video clip, none of this should be a problem.
How can anyone send 227 text messages per day ?
No. The DMCA would not apply. Not for this. Firstly, the fake ID does not rise to the level of creativity necessary to be copyrighted. Secondly, although the photo may be copyright (by the person who took it!) this would not really apply if it were a DMV photo. Third, as a corrupt instrument and evidence of a crime, copyright doesn't even come into it.
may be dismissed by the plaintiff without order of court, unless a provisional remedy has been allowed, (i) by filing a notice of dismissal at any time before service by the adverse party of an answer or of a motion for summary judgment...
I, too, am not a lawyer (still have my soul) but it seems to me that there must have been some kind of answer to the complaint since the defendant got them to drop the suit by proving that it wasn't him and that he didn't have the modem at the time. I do not know, however, if this rises to the level of "service of an answer", but it I were a lawyer I would be attempt to argue that it did.
I'm the last one to defend the MPAA, but the only reason for sharing this number is so that cheapskates can get free movies. Right?
Wrong. I have a store-bought DVD collection that would be the envy of most video stores and I value the ability to take the content from the DVD and use it as I please.
Some movies become mp4 files for portable use. In other cases I like to re-author the content to make it more suitable to my needs - often because the menu structure is stupid or tries to force content upon me.
I like to put a whole season of South Park on a single DVD (at lower quality) so that I can watch it in a marathon session.
There are any number of reasons to decrypt a DVD (or HD-DVD). Only some of them are dishonest.
From the article, it really doesn't sound like the developer really understands what Open Source or the GPL is all about. Let him go and good riddance - I understand there's a pretty good fork out there anyway. :+>
I learned this 15 years ago when I turned my then-four-year-old son loose on an early copy of Wolfenstein 3D.
After a long session of him gleefully shooting everything that moved (In god mode, of course), I decided to test the idea that violent games produced violent children. "Wouldn't it be nice if you could shoot people like that in real life?" I asked.
He looked at me, utterly shocked. "No! Why would I want to do that?"
"You enjoyed shooting people in Wolfenstein, didn't you?" I offered, "Why not for real?"
I swear, my 4 year old son looked at me with pity in his eyes. "It's only a game , Dad!
After that I decided not to worry about kids playing violent video games any more. They are a lot more aware than most folks realize... and a lot smarter than most anti-games crusaders!
Last Updated: Friday, November 10, 2000 | 11:57 PM ET
Blair already plans to misuse the data. Suddenly he regards a measure that was meant only to stop terrorists and illegal immigration as a means to solve every open crime of the last 50 years!
Compared to Tony Blair, Big Brother was a piker.
Some guy has already submitted a petition to reopen the "scrap Id card" petition. [ReopenIDpetition]
any advice on how to respond to it?
Simple. Tell them to go to hell and and stay at your old job.
Do you really think a company that starts out by cheating you is going to get any better?
It looks like another case is going to get dropped.
Although similar, the trademarks are for different types of business/endeavour. YouTube has made no attempt to profit from any confusion caused by the similarity in names.
In fact, the vast majority of users go to Utube when they really want YouTube. If Utube were a little bit smarter, they could use this opportunity to firmly entrench their brand name and raise public awareness of their business around the world. All it would take would be a low-bandwidth static front page that identified their business and its function (in a pleasent, humourous way) and offered a redirect link to YouTube for those who had come in error.
This is an opportunity for Utube to become obscenely wealthy - if they have enough sense to exploit it.
That schtick is not nearly as funny as it was back when it was just a joke.
Map makers have been known to try it. So have telephone companies in their phone books and just about anyone else who compiles public databases that are essentialially just lists of facts.
Usually these attempts fail if they ever get to court because lists of facts are not creative. Most times, however, the little guy will fold when he gets his first corporate lawyer nastygram.
Note: There has been lobbying by these database producers (phone companies, etc.) to change copyright law so that they can retain control of these lists, but to the best of my knowledge there hasn't been any movement on that front.
That's easy. I would like to see more than one or two good tracks per CD.
Deliberate errors in the work introduced for the purpose of making the work copyrightable do not meet the necessary creativity test. Nor do any formatting changes, punctuation, or spelling changes, such as changing British to American spelling.
I have a fairly major credibility issue with that statement. Could you cite some sources for your assertion? - (Not including music publishers, of course)
My understanding of copyright law is that it requires a certain amount of creativity before something is considered copyrightable. Rewriting and reformating just isn't enough. I would normally expect that public domain music would only be freshly copyrightable IF enough new work had been added to justify adding the new publisher's name to the "Composed by" line.
There are a number of content middlemen (Music, video, sheet music) out there who are under the impression that every time they reissue the same work, copyright begins anew. They are wrong.
Everyonce in a while, a publisher will attempt to render public domain material copyrightable by introducing a deliberate error. Then they claim that copiers have infringed their copyrights on the errors. When challenged, this, too, fails the necessary "creativity" test for copyrightability.
Not possible. While the program remains copyright, of course, the copyright of the output belongs solely to the author. I have used some of these programs; they allow you to set your own copyright notices.
1) Where would you live, if not in America and 2) What's stopping you from going?
1) Australia!
2) Nothing. I went - and never regretted it!
I must admit, however, that it was a whole lot nicer place before John Howard came to power, took away everyone's rights and then stuck his nose up dubya's backside...
Very funny. Buy a copy - then RTFA.
But instead of sending him money, I'd rather send him a letter advising him on how to live a better life throw a steady income job.
RTFA, Jerk. Maybe you can send him a letter advising him "not to die from Post-Polio Syndrome", or not to waste all of his money on needed medical treatment, or maybe you can tell him how it is his own fault for being silly enough to contract Polio (before there was a vaccination for it) in the first place.
Or maybe you could forget the Neocon ideology that holds that everyone in trouble is there because of their own failings. That's just an excuse NOT to care.
And just maybe you could spend a bit of time helping your fellow man rather than preaching at him.
This whole thing has been around before. About a year ago, a similar announcement made the rounds with similar uproar. The fact that much of this proposed technology is so pointless (I mean, DVD's are already region coded, and it probably COSTS studios far more than it helps.) gives one pause.
This whole thing has the smell of an unproven technology (remember "Dark Noise"?) and a developer who is desperate for someone - anyone - to invest in his "snake-oil", hopefully raking in as much cash as possible before the studios discover that the technology is worthless.