Agreed. You, however, seem to believe that that matters, that that simple fact could keep Microsoft from invoking the DMCA to crush the presentation, and that's dangerously naive. The Bnetd case was about reimplementing a network protocol by reverse engineering, for compatibility purposes. It doesn't fall under the DMCA at all either. That didn't stop vivendi from wielding the DMCA to force their compliance from somebody they didn't like.
The simple fact is, no matter how right you are on the matter that none of this is within the legal scope of the DMCA (and you ARE right), it just doesn't make a lick of difference. Being right doesn't mean you win. Being rich does.
>> HP didn't sue, probably because snosoft wasn't breaking the DMCA.
Sure they didn't sue, but that's not the point. They could have sued if they'd felt like it, and that puts SnoSoft (and everyone else in the security community) in a tenuous position. It doesn't really matter whether Snosoft was breaking the law or not, either, not until this country moves to a loser-pays system of civil litigation anyway.
My point is, if HP had half a mind to, they could employ the DMCA (or any number of similar laws, some of which you pointed out above) to bury SnoSoft or anybody else who can't match them lawyer for lawyer. They don't have to be right to win.
And anyway, companies like HP, Vivendi, RIAA and Microsoft don't even have to prosecute (successfully or un) supposed DMCA offenders to scare the beejesus out of anybody who might try to publish any presentations, code, etc that said corporations don't like. It's called a "chilling effect", yo.
A rose by any other name... the new "anti-counterfeiting" bill provides another avenue for the same sort of legal attacks. The DMCA is one of many holes to be closed, pending a constitutional amendment guaranteeing that this kind of bullshit is to be stopped once and for all.
>> Further, they were distributing code, not making a speech
If you don't accept that code is protected speech, then I can see why your opinion differs. I respectfully disagree... censorship is censorship, speech is speech, regardless of the language.
In the strictest sense, I see the point you're trying to make, and in the strictest sense you're right. However, I don't think that that will come as much comfort to Jon Johansen, SnoSoft, the BnetD developers, or Prof. Felten.
The DMCA doesn't technically grant corporations the right to abridge free speech. However, it does give them means to drag just about anyone into court and keep them there long enough to rack up a couple hundred million dollars in legal fees if needs be to make them comply, so the effect is much the same.
>> Microsoft who says that they'd prefer he doesn't make the speech but can't stop him
That's just it. Microsoft perfectly well can stop him, using the DMCA. They just choose not to in this instance, for whatever reason. The law that gives them the ability to make that choice (Let's see, do I or do I not feel like abridging the freedom of speech today...) is obviously unconstitutional.
that they have a clickthrough license agreement(do they? i dunno) that says "by downloading this source, I agree to only use it with legitimately purchased copies of Blizzard games." or some such.
An interesting concept, but it would be an absolutely ridiculous penalty... there are already plenty of laws to punish those who pirate software (in the very narrow definition of the word that can be considered harmful, not Blizzard's idea of what it means), just like there are laws to punish those who "pirate" cars and wallets... why can't the traditional definition of theft be good enough for these twits ?
> So what is their argument? That the only people who can use bnetd for profit is... uh, the creators, who are, uh, bnetd?
Based on my reading of it, what he's saying is that Blizzard created a product, bnetd stole it and might use it for a profit. When he's saying 'creators', he means Blizzard.
Somebody needs to look up 'reverse engineering' in the dictionary
> Can you explain how it's "better and cheaper" then well tested and free?
Yup.
10. Well tested
9. Free as in speech
8. Private, uncrowded server
7. 100mbit pipe btwn me and my server
6. Works w/o Internet access
5. Works for multiple hosts behind a NAT gateway
4. Works when Blizzard's servers are down
3. Still free after Blizzard decides to make Battle.net a pay service
2. No privacy concerns And the number one reason why bnetd is better than Blizzard's Battle.net service:
1. I'm at the top of the ladder, bitchez !!! Muahahahaaha !
> but is there a SANE reason for not allowing the use of these imported controllers?
Only for suitable definitions of sane. The idea of all region locks is that you can charge what each individual market will bear for a product, without worrying that import from a lower-priced region will force you to drop your prices in a more rich region. Classic example, India is poor so DVDs are sold with a much lower markup there, but DVD/CCA/MPAA can't have people importing cheap Indian DVDs and reselling them in the US where the markup is much, much higher. So, they make them incompatible.
In case this sounds ridiculous, it might help to know that it's also illegal in many parts of the world. Australia and the EU are both invsestigating DVD region codes. Google for 'price discrimination', 'market segmentation', or 'price fixing' for all the info you care to absorb.
I'm envisioning a Microsoft delivery truck being stopped dead in its tracks in Tienamin Square by a single Chinese dissident in a 'Software is like Sex' t-shirt.
Does it strike anyone else as just a little bit foolish to send a message out to hundreds of strangers containing (presumably) your full name, address, phone number and valid email address ?
Identity theft, anyone ? Not to mention that you set yourself up for reverse spam...
This reads alot like the dilbert where dogbert is a consultant and says something to the effect of "I'm going to make a bunch of recommendations that I know you are too cowardly to implement. Later, when you fail, I'll laugh at you for ignoring my advice."
> > Sony still gets their money from the original software sale
> Sony of Japan Inc does. Sony of America Inc doesn't.
If Sony of America Inc can't compete in terms of price and
availability with Sony of Japan Inc, then they SHOULDN'T be
getting any money. The market segmentation that digital content
providers have put into place through region codes is quite
illegal, at least in the U.S. It's just done in a way that
confuses most judges to the point that it can be dismissed with
a waving of hands by a lawyer in an expensive suit.
From Alan Cox's interview posted to slashdot a couple days ago:
"Ignore everyone who tells you kernel hacking is hard, special or different. It's a large program, and bug fixing or driver tweaking can be a best starting point. It is however not magic, nor written in a secret language that only deep initiates with beards can read.
Play with it, try things, break it horribly and enjoy yourself. I started on the networking code because it didn't work very well. Everything I knew about TCP/IP I had downloaded the same day I started hacking the net code. My first attempts were not pretty but it was *fun*."
Hrm... how impossible/practical would it be to have
multiple VMs in the same source tree and select one at
menuconfig time ? It would probably add up to a lot
more testing done on all the non-linus-kernel VMs, but
I have a hunch that the VM is probably something that's
a pretty pervasive patch; could it be localized down to just
an option in menuconfig ?
Hate to follow up to myself, but I went and reread some old stuff; look like Alan has actually move -from- the Rik VM now, and is using the same Andrea VM that's in the linus kernel.
>> (which was recently adopted in Alan Cox's tree).
As I understand it, the Rik VM is what we started the 2.4 series with.
The Andrea VM was adopted in 2.4.10 amidst much controvery, and Alan has kept
the Rik VM as a part in the -ac kernels.
Slashdot Mirror
>> "fake" that "feedback protocol" to keep the DRM thing running?
It'll almost definitely use cryptographic checking, so no, you wouldn't be able to fake it any more than you can fake my PGP signature.
>> It doesn't fall under the DMCA at all
Agreed. You, however, seem to believe that that matters, that that simple fact could keep Microsoft from invoking the DMCA to crush the presentation, and that's dangerously naive. The Bnetd case was about reimplementing a network protocol by reverse engineering, for compatibility purposes. It doesn't fall under the DMCA at all either. That didn't stop vivendi from wielding the DMCA to force their compliance from somebody they didn't like.
The simple fact is, no matter how right you are on the matter that none of this is within the legal scope of the DMCA (and you ARE right), it just doesn't make a lick of difference. Being right doesn't mean you win. Being rich does.
Sure they didn't sue, but that's not the point. They could have sued if they'd felt like it, and that puts SnoSoft (and everyone else in the security community) in a tenuous position. It doesn't really matter whether Snosoft was breaking the law or not, either, not until this country moves to a loser-pays system of civil litigation anyway.
My point is, if HP had half a mind to, they could employ the DMCA (or any number of similar laws, some of which you pointed out above) to bury SnoSoft or anybody else who can't match them lawyer for lawyer. They don't have to be right to win.
And anyway, companies like HP, Vivendi, RIAA and Microsoft don't even have to prosecute (successfully or un) supposed DMCA offenders to scare the beejesus out of anybody who might try to publish any presentations, code, etc that said corporations don't like. It's called a "chilling effect", yo.
>> Norwegian Criminal Code 145(2), copyright infringment
A rose by any other name... the new "anti-counterfeiting" bill provides another avenue for the same sort of legal attacks. The DMCA is one of many holes to be closed, pending a constitutional amendment guaranteeing that this kind of bullshit is to be stopped once and for all.
>> Further, they were distributing code, not making a speech
If you don't accept that code is protected speech, then I can see why your opinion differs. I respectfully disagree... censorship is censorship, speech is speech, regardless of the language.
In the strictest sense, I see the point you're trying to make, and in the strictest sense you're right. However, I don't think that that will come as much comfort to Jon Johansen, SnoSoft, the BnetD developers, or Prof. Felten.
The DMCA doesn't technically grant corporations the right to abridge free speech. However, it does give them means to drag just about anyone into court and keep them there long enough to rack up a couple hundred million dollars in legal fees if needs be to make them comply, so the effect is much the same.
>> Microsoft who says that they'd prefer he doesn't make the speech but can't stop him
That's just it. Microsoft perfectly well can stop him, using the DMCA. They just choose not to in this instance, for whatever reason. The law that gives them the ability to make that choice (Let's see, do I or do I not feel like abridging the freedom of speech today...) is obviously unconstitutional.
Throw in the word "senseless".
that they have a clickthrough license agreement(do they? i dunno) that says "by downloading this source, I agree to only use it with legitimately purchased copies of Blizzard games." or some such.
An interesting concept, but it would be an absolutely ridiculous penalty... there are already plenty of laws to punish those who pirate software (in the very narrow definition of the word that can be considered harmful, not Blizzard's idea of what it means), just like there are laws to punish those who "pirate" cars and wallets... why can't the traditional definition of theft be good enough for these twits ?
> So what is their argument? That the only people who can use bnetd for profit is... uh, the creators, who are, uh, bnetd?
Based on my reading of it, what he's saying is that Blizzard created a product, bnetd stole it and might use it for a profit. When he's saying 'creators', he means Blizzard.
Somebody needs to look up 'reverse engineering' in the dictionary
> Can you explain how it's "better and cheaper" then well tested and free?
Yup.
10. Well tested
9. Free as in speech
8. Private, uncrowded server
7. 100mbit pipe btwn me and my server
6. Works w/o Internet access
5. Works for multiple hosts behind a NAT gateway
4. Works when Blizzard's servers are down
3. Still free after Blizzard decides to make Battle.net a pay service
2. No privacy concerns
And the number one reason why bnetd is better than Blizzard's Battle.net service:
1. I'm at the top of the ladder, bitchez !!! Muahahahaaha !
I put down my copy of Applied Cryptography long enough to check slashdot, and I read this:
Why doesn't Blizzard provide facilities that enable these emulators to authenticate CD keys through Battle.net?
In order for us to keep our proprietary CD-key algorithms secure, we cannot allow outside servers to query for the validity of CD keys.
In the name of Bruce Schneier, I smite thee with the Great Sword, ClueBringer !
> but is there a SANE reason for not allowing the use of these imported controllers?
Only for suitable definitions of sane. The idea of all region locks is that you can charge what each individual market will bear for a product, without worrying that import from a lower-priced region will force you to drop your prices in a more rich region. Classic example, India is poor so DVDs are sold with a much lower markup there, but DVD/CCA/MPAA can't have people importing cheap Indian DVDs and reselling them in the US where the markup is much, much higher. So, they make them incompatible.
In case this sounds ridiculous, it might help to know that it's also illegal in many parts of the world. Australia and the EU are both invsestigating DVD region codes. Google for 'price discrimination', 'market segmentation', or 'price fixing' for all the info you care to absorb.
> Or is it the sexy-stripper-on-a-pole-get-your-$20-out style?
Dude, you pay $20 for a pole dance? I think the strip clubs must have you on a special list.
http://www.dcemulation.com/dcemu-mamedc.htm
On a VGA monitor no less. Dreamcast forever baby !
I'm envisioning a Microsoft delivery truck being stopped dead in its tracks in Tienamin Square by a single Chinese dissident in a 'Software is like Sex' t-shirt.
that they don't leverage this to try to quash their competition, the most excellent Plucker
Does it strike anyone else as just a little bit foolish to send a message out to hundreds of strangers containing (presumably) your full name, address, phone number and valid email address ?
Identity theft, anyone ? Not to mention that you set yourself up for reverse spam...
This reads alot like the dilbert where dogbert is a consultant and says something to the effect of "I'm going to make a bunch of recommendations that I know you are too cowardly to implement. Later, when you fail, I'll laugh at you for ignoring my advice."
> > Sony still gets their money from the original software sale
> Sony of Japan Inc does. Sony of America Inc doesn't.
If Sony of America Inc can't compete in terms of price and
availability with Sony of Japan Inc, then they SHOULDN'T be
getting any money. The market segmentation that digital content
providers have put into place through region codes is quite
illegal, at least in the U.S. It's just done in a way that
confuses most judges to the point that it can be dismissed with
a waving of hands by a lawyer in an expensive suit.
From Alan Cox's interview posted to slashdot a couple days ago:
"Ignore everyone who tells you kernel hacking is hard, special or different. It's a large program, and bug fixing or driver tweaking can be a best starting point. It is however not magic, nor written in a secret language that only deep initiates with beards can read.
Play with it, try things, break it horribly and enjoy yourself. I started on the networking code because it didn't work very well. Everything I knew about TCP/IP I had downloaded the same day I started hacking the net code. My first attempts were not pretty but it was *fun*."
Hrm... how impossible/practical would it be to have
multiple VMs in the same source tree and select one at
menuconfig time ? It would probably add up to a lot
more testing done on all the non-linus-kernel VMs, but
I have a hunch that the VM is probably something that's
a pretty pervasive patch; could it be localized down to just
an option in menuconfig ?
Hate to follow up to myself, but I went and reread some old stuff; look like Alan has actually move -from- the Rik VM now, and is using the same Andrea VM that's in the linus kernel.
>> (which was recently adopted in Alan Cox's tree).
As I understand it, the Rik VM is what we started the 2.4 series with.
The Andrea VM was adopted in 2.4.10 amidst much controvery, and Alan has kept
the Rik VM as a part in the -ac kernels.
Ah, the trolls hate me. My sense of self-worth is thusly reaffirmed; I must be doing something worthwhile after all. =)
Here's a mirror.