And for all countries except the US, the code is legal for use.
I would be very careful with such broad assertions. Actually, some countries (like Germany and many others) worsened their Copyright laws significantly in the last couple of years, mimicking the US-DMCA w.r.t. anti-circumvention measures. DeCSS could very well be illegal there... but fortunately, they don't seem to care enforcing those anti-circumvention measures all that much (though they still could, if the US government puts enough pressure on them).
It could be... but fortunately, ACTA still needs to be ratified by all parliaments before it goes into effect. There may be some arm-twisting going on, but ultimately, every country could -- at least in theory -- just say no by not ratifying it.
Plus, what kind of pressure could Morocco exert on the US? Would they cancel the free trade agreement that gives them much more advantages than it gives the US? And why would they want to, since they have so little intellectual property to protect, compared to the US? It's not like the (beautiful) handmade stuff they're exporting is being counterfeited that they have to worry. They're just in the same ACTA boat, because the US asked them nicely to be, referring to the old Treaty of Friendship of 1789, and they politely smiled and just said: okay, we're on.
Essentially the US is letting other countries write the laws for us.
Actually, the US is misusing ACTA to change its own laws. All those draconian steps in ACTA were promoted and forced through by nothing less than the US Government, to protect what is essentially an economy that relies increasingly on immaterial goods after having outsourced manufacturing to China and elsewhere. Other ACTA participants are bearing the pressure of the US here, rather than vice-versa.
Really not? Keep printing US dollars en masse, and the almost certain hyperinflation will soon take care of the rest. $150,000 will seem like small change when a coffee costs over $1,000,000,000.
It's precisely what happens when you don't defend yourself in a lawsuit: The plaintiff automatically wins. A defaulting defendant is deemed to have admitted the truth of all of the plaintiff's allegations and the court is bound to follow that. Spamhaus' attorney committed malpractice by advising them not to defend themselves. After all, if the lawsuit is as "frivolous" as they claim it is, then getting it dismissed shouldn't be a problem, no?
Spamhaus are not located in the US. Why should they bother? Suppose someone filed a lawsuit against you in, say, Lithuania, because they didn't like your blog or something similar. Would you care to hire a lawyer there, just to get the case dismissed? Really?
I wouldn't care about the ads, as long as those new HP printers can also print USD or EUR bills to pay for the ink cartidges (and for other things that each BOFH needs).
I may be a little bit old fashioned, but wasn't censorship by the military in times of war the norm not so long ago... everywhere in the world? I'm all for freedom of speech, and I support Wikileaks with a passion, but if some of those documents can potentially jeopardize operations who are currently in-progress (including military personnel), shouldn't the DoD at least have a chance to talk with journalists beforehand? You know, this kind of cooperation isn't new; it's always been that way. Remember: loose lips sink ships.
FreeBSD is currently moving (slowly) towards Clang/LLVM with their ClangBSD subproject. They've just imported clang into the base system of FreeBSD (-CURRENT), and clangbsd is on its way.
So as a result the Europe moved into a modernity, but the countries, where printing was banned, stayed behind.
Quite true. But since the invention of Copyright, Europe and most of the West have started banning the free copying and sharing of information as well.. And with the successive extensions of Copyright terms (how long until we have Perpetual Copyright?), we're caught in the same downward spiral than those countries.
It got old years ago and if I hear "zero day" one more time I'm going to go nuts and take a sniper rifle up to the top of a bell tower and start picking off wannabe technology journalists.
Wouldn't that qualify as a "zero day" sniping attack?
I'm very fond of our many social securities for the disabled, elderly, unemployed, our socialized health care and pay a pretty penny in taxes without grumbling too much - but the flip side of that is that I know that people are also quite well taken care of.
And this is IMHO the core of the problem: you may turn a blind eye towards those unfortunate enough to fall through the meshes of your social security net. People like, say, illegal immigrants, refugees etc., who can't benefit neither from the system, nor from empathy of people who think that the State will already have taken care of them even though it is far not true.
Nothing prevents you from operating your own website, on your own network, where you're free to write what you want. Sure, if your opponents are as resourceful as governments or megacorps (think: IP cartells), you may still have a little problem...
Where do YOU think the source of information will come from if people don't get paid anymore to do investigative journalism.
How much investigative journalism is still done nowadays? If you look at the articles, that's 95% slightly edited or even verbatim reprints from syndicated content; content they get from a couple of big news agencies like Reuters, AP, etc...
I'm assuming that the particular math used to encode the fingerprint in such a way that it doesn't die a horrible death the second it hits a lossy codec
There are already some papers like this one that aim to create robust fingerprints that can survive various filtering techniques.
Flash may run faster where available, but since it's not supported on my FreeBSD/amd64 platform, a slow HTML5 Canvas beats an empty Flash field hands down here.
Currently there is no other company out there trying to deliver such a comprehensive write once, run anywhere solution.
Well, it's not run anywhere. FreeBSD/amd64 here, without a native flash plugin, and no Adobe support in sight. I'm pretty sure there are a lot of other platforms that too are not supported, and never will. (Sorry mods, I know it's redundant, but the point has to be driven home to Flash devs).
Huh? US Patents don't last 28 years. New patents have a term of 20 years from the earliest filing date.
You're right, but if past experience with Copyright extentions (last to date: Mickey Mouse Protection Act) taught anything, it's that we can expect those terms to be extended too soon(ish).
GPLed build systems can also be a problem. Suppose you want to release software under the BSD license. If you used an old version of bison(1) (instead of newer ones, or Berkeley yacc(1)), there was a nasty surprise in store for you. From "info bison", Conditions for Using Bison (emphasis mine):
The distribution terms for Bison-generated parsers permit using the
parsers in nonfree programs. Before Bison version 2.2, these extra
permissions applied only when Bison was generating LALR(1) parsers in
C. And before Bison version 1.24, Bison-generated parsers could be
used only in programs that were free software.
Another example? Okay, how about IDL4? Suppose you want to write a BSD-only OS on top of L4Ka::Pistachio (which is BSD licensed too), and you wanted to make use of IDL4 (which is GPLed) to simplify IPC. You're in again for a bad surprise, because the IDL4 generated stubs are (probably) GPLed too, nullifying your intention to create a BSD-only OS. A simple special rule w.r.t. the generated stubs could have been added by IDL4 developers just as the bison(1) developers thankfully did, but IDL4 devs didn't. So it's not only the "bad greedy companies" that play tricks on build environments, it happens in the OSS community as well (sometimes intentionally, sometimes by accident).
Over priced compared to what? The pirated copies? Letting people who infringe copyright dictate price point is not a good idea.
It's not the infringers who dictate free market prices, but the purchasing power of your customers and how much they think something is worth to them. Or, to say it differently: free market and regulated market prices differ only then, when price fixing is in effect on the regulated market... which is actually the case with most IP-related stuff nowadays. Perhaps the street prices in China on the free market are a lot closer to customers' expectations than the retail prices of the regulated market. All this infrigement that's going on may be nothing more than simple market artithmetic, or rather the market sorting things out.
Slashdot Mirror
I would be very careful with such broad assertions. Actually, some countries (like Germany and many others) worsened their Copyright laws significantly in the last couple of years, mimicking the US-DMCA w.r.t. anti-circumvention measures. DeCSS could very well be illegal there... but fortunately, they don't seem to care enforcing those anti-circumvention measures all that much (though they still could, if the US government puts enough pressure on them).
It could be... but fortunately, ACTA still needs to be ratified by all parliaments before it goes into effect. There may be some arm-twisting going on, but ultimately, every country could -- at least in theory -- just say no by not ratifying it.
Plus, what kind of pressure could Morocco exert on the US? Would they cancel the free trade agreement that gives them much more advantages than it gives the US? And why would they want to, since they have so little intellectual property to protect, compared to the US? It's not like the (beautiful) handmade stuff they're exporting is being counterfeited that they have to worry. They're just in the same ACTA boat, because the US asked them nicely to be, referring to the old Treaty of Friendship of 1789, and they politely smiled and just said: okay, we're on.
Actually, the US is misusing ACTA to change its own laws. All those draconian steps in ACTA were promoted and forced through by nothing less than the US Government, to protect what is essentially an economy that relies increasingly on immaterial goods after having outsourced manufacturing to China and elsewhere. Other ACTA participants are bearing the pressure of the US here, rather than vice-versa.
Really not? Keep printing US dollars en masse, and the almost certain hyperinflation will soon take care of the rest. $150,000 will seem like small change when a coffee costs over $1,000,000,000.
Thank you for explaining. I didn't consider that. That's indeed a good reason to follow up with a US court, even though it's not really intuitive.
Spamhaus are not located in the US. Why should they bother? Suppose someone filed a lawsuit against you in, say, Lithuania, because they didn't like your blog or something similar. Would you care to hire a lawyer there, just to get the case dismissed? Really?
I wouldn't care about the ads, as long as those new HP printers can also print USD or EUR bills to pay for the ink cartidges (and for other things that each BOFH needs).
I may be a little bit old fashioned, but wasn't censorship by the military in times of war the norm not so long ago... everywhere in the world? I'm all for freedom of speech, and I support Wikileaks with a passion, but if some of those documents can potentially jeopardize operations who are currently in-progress (including military personnel), shouldn't the DoD at least have a chance to talk with journalists beforehand? You know, this kind of cooperation isn't new; it's always been that way. Remember: loose lips sink ships.
FreeBSD is currently moving (slowly) towards Clang/LLVM with their ClangBSD subproject. They've just imported clang into the base system of FreeBSD (-CURRENT), and clangbsd is on its way.
Quite true. But since the invention of Copyright, Europe and most of the West have started banning the free copying and sharing of information as well.. And with the successive extensions of Copyright terms (how long until we have Perpetual Copyright?), we're caught in the same downward spiral than those countries.
Wouldn't that qualify as a "zero day" sniping attack?
At least, we FreeBSD-ers aren't getting Flash... I guess we were lucky this time.
Another good example of a very performant microkernel written in C++ is L4Ka.
And this is IMHO the core of the problem: you may turn a blind eye towards those unfortunate enough to fall through the meshes of your social security net. People like, say, illegal immigrants, refugees etc., who can't benefit neither from the system, nor from empathy of people who think that the State will already have taken care of them even though it is far not true.
Nothing prevents you from operating your own website, on your own network, where you're free to write what you want. Sure, if your opponents are as resourceful as governments or megacorps (think: IP cartells), you may still have a little problem...
Never underestimate the stupidity of people: there are still some people who buy spamvertized products too.
How much investigative journalism is still done nowadays? If you look at the articles, that's 95% slightly edited or even verbatim reprints from syndicated content; content they get from a couple of big news agencies like Reuters, AP, etc...
There are already some papers like this one that aim to create robust fingerprints that can survive various filtering techniques.
It is protected by the BSD license...
Flash may run faster where available, but since it's not supported on my FreeBSD/amd64 platform, a slow HTML5 Canvas beats an empty Flash field hands down here.
Well, it's not run anywhere. FreeBSD/amd64 here, without a native flash plugin, and no Adobe support in sight. I'm pretty sure there are a lot of other platforms that too are not supported, and never will. (Sorry mods, I know it's redundant, but the point has to be driven home to Flash devs).
You're right, but if past experience with Copyright extentions (last to date: Mickey Mouse Protection Act) taught anything, it's that we can expect those terms to be extended too soon(ish).
Another example? Okay, how about IDL4? Suppose you want to write a BSD-only OS on top of L4Ka::Pistachio (which is BSD licensed too), and you wanted to make use of IDL4 (which is GPLed) to simplify IPC. You're in again for a bad surprise, because the IDL4 generated stubs are (probably) GPLed too, nullifying your intention to create a BSD-only OS. A simple special rule w.r.t. the generated stubs could have been added by IDL4 developers just as the bison(1) developers thankfully did, but IDL4 devs didn't. So it's not only the "bad greedy companies" that play tricks on build environments, it happens in the OSS community as well (sometimes intentionally, sometimes by accident).
It's not the infringers who dictate free market prices, but the purchasing power of your customers and how much they think something is worth to them. Or, to say it differently: free market and regulated market prices differ only then, when price fixing is in effect on the regulated market... which is actually the case with most IP-related stuff nowadays. Perhaps the street prices in China on the free market are a lot closer to customers' expectations than the retail prices of the regulated market. All this infrigement that's going on may be nothing more than simple market artithmetic, or rather the market sorting things out.
As an ISP, you have upstream providers (if you're small), and peers (if you're big). Both can disconnect you for whatever reason if they feel like it.