So what are the standard rewritting rules to evade dumb pattern matching ? Writing backward ? L33tsp33k ? doubling characters ? Cockney Rhyming Slang ?
The W3C should set up a list of standardized procedure.
This article is a mix of different issues, which is always the case when talking about "Intellectual Property". I am not sure to understand clearly how the choice of an open format impact in any way the patentability of airbags.
The current trend does look like an attempt at containing IP in its current and historical form: non-software patents and copyrights. Where is the problem ?
This shows that when you have one chance over a billion that something happen, let a billion guys try and it will happen. Some are picking up chicks that way...
To protect against phising doesnt it work the other way around ? What is required is a way for the user to be sure of the website's identity, not the opposite. No ?
There can be a real European political will. Correct me if I am wrong, but controlling the DNS and lot of certificat authorities allows basically the US to do large-scale phishing for intelligence purpose.
In that case, as crazy as it may sound, there may not be any corporate lobby behind...
FSF Europe president, Georg Greve told us that while the FSF is considering some patent and DRM language for the next version of the GPL, "none of this is decided and that only the first draft will show what is really in there".
He was speaking to El Reg after an article on Reuters quoted him as saying that anyone who patented software would be prevented from using free software. Greve says this is not quite what he was getting at:
"The basic idea is that if someone uses software patents against a Free Software program under the GPL, he might lose the right to distribute that particular software, to use it for their products. We have no interest in restricting the way people can use and develop software."
You're selfish, that's fine, don't help people because it's nice, just help people you like. There's no rules against that - but that doesn't mean people will put up with it or deal with you at all if you do.
:)
Being nice to people I think are nice is the best strategy in the prisonner dilemma. This behavior is known as "a tit for a tat". Your "nice" corresponds in that game to the strategy usually named "sucker".
1/ I think this "kind of BS" is far less revolutionary than the "kind of BS" the original GPL was in its time.
2/ Corporations need open-source, not the opposite.
I share this attitude of restricking the rights of people who try to prevent me from coding certain algorithms. They hurt me, I don't want them to use for free the stuff I make. It makes a lot of sense to me.
If you walk into a store and steal anything, you get arrested (some call this bad luck!), and you will get some punishments. What is different here?
1/ Contrary to what happens if you steal a can of soup in a supermarket, when you download an mp3, you do not prevent anybody else from having it.
2/ To defend law in that particular case, where what is at stack is not high (we are talking about (C), not talking about people dying, or even about poor people getting poorer), the judge makes a decision which, when transposed trivially to equivalent situations, hurt some of our most fundamental rights.
3/ It's hard to understand why it's okay to borrow a book from a neighboor and not to borrow an mp3 from a guy 1000km away.
Meanwhile, there was a clear leader in terms of the perceived inhibitors for open source adoption, with the lack of long-term support scoring 33%, ahead of legal issues related to intellectual property and copyright (21%), and a lack of understanding of the benefits, and a lack of clarity on potential return on investment (both 19%).
Since -- as far as I know ? -- there is still not ONE case of an open-source project having lost a case of IP violations, we can conclude that SCO did its FUD job very well.
I agree with this. All those "patents for the open-source movement" look like a way to reduce the strain so that there will never be a major crisis forcing the system to change drastically.
In Europe especially, instead of playing that insane game of the US-patent system, it is time to use our rights and implement algorithms for which the EPO granted illegal patents.
The EPO (European Patent Office) has granted patents on algorithms for years, despite the fact that they are illegal under the current European legislation. And it seems that the fight will go on there (cf. this article).
However, considering today's vote, the patent offices can not anymore claim that their interpretation of the law have a political backup.
--
Go Debian!
Re:Mystery of the computer industry
on
Longhorn Preview
·
· Score: 1
Now you are taking it personally:)
Re:Mystery of the computer industry
on
Longhorn Preview
·
· Score: 1
The iPod is *OBJECTIVELY* three order of magnitude nicer than any other mp3 player. Drop the relative cultural bullshit please.
Mystery of the computer industry
on
Longhorn Preview
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
There is one thing I can't understand: why is Windows so ugly ? Why are non-Apple computers so ugly (yes, Sony's and IBM's PCs are ugly too) ? Why are MP3 players so ugly ?
Is it really that high-tech firms are full of dorks without any taste ? Is the difference with Apple the fact that Steve Jobs decides, and the guy actually has good taste ?
I am not joking, this is really something that puzzles me.
If I understood correctly, in that case the BBC is the copyright owner of the, thus these gentlemen could be "one degre smarter" than the usual owners and put all the stuff under creative commons. They could later on distribute all the deep-trance and rap remix of it:)
I always thought that most countries should those days invest a non-negligeable part of their cultur budget to set up huge on-line databases. I am amazed to see the cost to maintain dusty municipal libraries while I have still no way to get all those music and novels which are in the public domain.
It is still the same tune: when will people in charge realize the power of digital information. One book in a library can be read by one person at one time. It gets wear out, it can be stolen. A book in a library can be read by what ? at most 50 person a year ? How much does it cost to be stored handled, fixed ? That's ridiculous. And municipal libraries should be the place to find computer to access those database if you do not own one.
Also, for that BBC initiative, I read:
Download disclaimer:
The BBC grants you a 7-day, non-exclusive licence to download this Beethoven Experience audio.
You may not copy, reproduce, edit, adapt, alter, republish, post, broadcast, transmit, make available to the public, or otherwise use this audio in any way except for your own personal, non-commercial use.
So I can't give that piece of culture to my grand'ma and my little nephew ? That sucks.
Video games, movies, food, places we have seen in our passed life have been experiences by a different person: ourself younger. Comparison is impossible.
Watch a video game, a cartoon you loved, eat one of those sweets you were so fond of... they suck:)
What is intellectually unpleasant here is the discrepancy between "equivalent things" in the software universe (or mathematic universe) and "equivalent things" in the law universe.
From my point of view (read "the following pompous analysis is mine") expropriation is one of this necessary evil at the fringe of what is obviously good or obviously bad (like every "make one suffer for the interest of a few").
At least, one needs a certain number of clear criterions to know when the border has been crossed and it is not acceptable anymore. And the nuance between "public good" and "private interest" is -- at least for my french leftist perception of the world -- fundamental. I can understand that someone turns berzerk if you kick him out of his nice cottage to build a McDonald and an Office Depot.
What is delightful in this article and in many of the comments here is that "free Internet" equals "free commercial Internet". May I remind you people that even if all commercial sites disappear tomorrow, there will still be valuable content out there ?
Slashdot Mirror
So what are the standard rewritting rules to evade dumb pattern matching ? Writing backward ? L33tsp33k ? doubling characters ? Cockney Rhyming Slang ?
The W3C should set up a list of standardized procedure.
This article is a mix of different issues, which is always the case when talking about "Intellectual Property". I am not sure to understand clearly how the choice of an open format impact in any way the patentability of airbags.
The current trend does look like an attempt at containing IP in its current and historical form: non-software patents and copyrights. Where is the problem ?
Mod the parent up, please!
This shows that when you have one chance over a billion that something happen, let a billion guys try and it will happen. Some are picking up chicks that way ...
At the beginning was IRC, and IRC was not corporate-owned.
To protect against phising doesnt it work the other way around ? What is required is a way for the user to be sure of the website's identity, not the opposite. No ?
There can be a real European political will. Correct me if I am wrong, but controlling the DNS and lot of certificat authorities allows basically the US to do large-scale phishing for intelligence purpose.
In that case, as crazy as it may sound, there may not be any corporate lobby behind ...
--Go Debian!
FSF Europe president, Georg Greve told us that while the FSF is considering some patent and DRM language for the next version of the GPL, "none of this is decided and that only the first draft will show what is really in there".
He was speaking to El Reg after an article on Reuters quoted him as saying that anyone who patented software would be prevented from using free software. Greve says this is not quite what he was getting at:
"The basic idea is that if someone uses software patents against a Free Software program under the GPL, he might lose the right to distribute that particular software, to use it for their products. We have no interest in restricting the way people can use and develop software."
That makes even more sense to me.
:)
Being nice to people I think are nice is the best strategy in the prisonner dilemma. This behavior is known as "a tit for a tat". Your "nice" corresponds in that game to the strategy usually named "sucker".
Cheers,
--Go Debian!
Two things here:
1/ I think this "kind of BS" is far less revolutionary than the "kind of BS" the original GPL was in its time.
2/ Corporations need open-source, not the opposite.
I share this attitude of restricking the rights of people who try to prevent me from coding certain algorithms. They hurt me, I don't want them to use for free the stuff I make. It makes a lot of sense to me.
If you walk into a store and steal anything, you get arrested (some call this bad luck!), and you will get some punishments. What is different here?
1/ Contrary to what happens if you steal a can of soup in a supermarket, when you download an mp3, you do not prevent anybody else from having it.
2/ To defend law in that particular case, where what is at stack is not high (we are talking about (C), not talking about people dying, or even about poor people getting poorer), the judge makes a decision which, when transposed trivially to equivalent situations, hurt some of our most fundamental rights.
3/ It's hard to understand why it's okay to borrow a book from a neighboor and not to borrow an mp3 from a guy 1000km away.
Thus, differences there are.
Cheers,
--Go Debian!
From the article:
Meanwhile, there was a clear leader in terms of the perceived inhibitors for open source adoption, with the lack of long-term support scoring 33%, ahead of legal issues related to intellectual property and copyright (21%), and a lack of understanding of the benefits, and a lack of clarity on potential return on investment (both 19%).Since -- as far as I know ? -- there is still not ONE case of an open-source project having lost a case of IP violations, we can conclude that SCO did its FUD job very well.
Cheers!
--Go Debian!
I agree with this. All those "patents for the open-source movement" look like a way to reduce the strain so that there will never be a major crisis forcing the system to change drastically.
In Europe especially, instead of playing that insane game of the US-patent system, it is time to use our rights and implement algorithms for which the EPO granted illegal patents.
Freedom gets worn-out when you don't use it.
Cheers!
--FF
Is there any legal use for such space ?
I use my very own enotes.el under GNU/Emacs.
The EPO (European Patent Office) has granted patents on algorithms for years, despite the fact that they are illegal under the current European legislation. And it seems that the fight will go on there (cf. this article).
However, considering today's vote, the patent offices can not anymore claim that their interpretation of the law have a political backup.
--Go Debian!
Now you are taking it personally :)
The iPod is *OBJECTIVELY* three order of magnitude nicer than any other mp3 player. Drop the relative cultural bullshit please.
There is one thing I can't understand: why is Windows so ugly ? Why are non-Apple computers so ugly (yes, Sony's and IBM's PCs are ugly too) ? Why are MP3 players so ugly ?
Is it really that high-tech firms are full of dorks without any taste ? Is the difference with Apple the fact that Steve Jobs decides, and the guy actually has good taste ?
I am not joking, this is really something that puzzles me.
--Go Debian!
If I understood correctly, in that case the BBC is the copyright owner of the, thus these gentlemen could be "one degre smarter" than the usual owners and put all the stuff under creative commons. They could later on distribute all the deep-trance and rap remix of it
--
Go Debian!
I always thought that most countries should those days invest a non-negligeable part of their cultur budget to set up huge on-line databases. I am amazed to see the cost to maintain dusty municipal libraries while I have still no way to get all those music and novels which are in the public domain.
It is still the same tune: when will people in charge realize the power of digital information. One book in a library can be read by one person at one time. It gets wear out, it can be stolen. A book in a library can be read by what ? at most 50 person a year ? How much does it cost to be stored handled, fixed ? That's ridiculous. And municipal libraries should be the place to find computer to access those database if you do not own one.
Also, for that BBC initiative, I read:
Download disclaimer:
The BBC grants you a 7-day, non-exclusive licence to download this Beethoven Experience audio.
You may not copy, reproduce, edit, adapt, alter, republish, post, broadcast, transmit, make available to the public, or otherwise use this audio in any way except for your own personal, non-commercial use.
So I can't give that piece of culture to my grand'ma and my little nephew ? That sucks.
--Go Debian!
Video games, movies, food, places we have seen in our passed life have been experiences by a different person: ourself younger. Comparison is impossible.
Watch a video game, a cartoon you loved, eat one of those sweets you were so fond of
--
Go Debian!
What is intellectually unpleasant here is the discrepancy between "equivalent things" in the software universe (or mathematic universe) and "equivalent things" in the law universe.
--
Go Debian!
From my point of view (read "the following pompous analysis is mine") expropriation is one of this necessary evil at the fringe of what is obviously good or obviously bad (like every "make one suffer for the interest of a few").
At least, one needs a certain number of clear criterions to know when the border has been crossed and it is not acceptable anymore. And the nuance between "public good" and "private interest" is -- at least for my french leftist perception of the world -- fundamental. I can understand that someone turns berzerk if you kick him out of his nice cottage to build a McDonald and an Office Depot.
--
Go Debian!
What is delightful in this article and in many of the comments here is that "free Internet" equals "free commercial Internet". May I remind you people that even if all commercial sites disappear tomorrow, there will still be valuable content out there ?
--
Go Debian!