This follows some of the recommendations from Bruce Schneier's editorial dated yesterday. I give it even odds that this is release is real vs. someone hacking Microsoft's network and putting out a fake release or wire story.
If real, it's good news, since MS products are a security nightmare.
If fake, it's brilliant, since Gates will be faced with either admitting the breach and the unimportance of security or keeping quiet and being held to his new "highest priority".
In any case it looks like this will get very interesting!
No question - this is as ballsy of a move as it gets. The RIAA suit should be a surprise to noone, least of all the management of mp3.com.
So, what's their defense?
Many web sites contain copyright notices that state you may not make copies of the data, yet for a short while we all do. It's called a cache.
I wonder if MP3.com will attempt to claim that the 1's and 0's they stream WOULD have been those of the user, except that the server didn't need to upload them because it already had a cached copy from someone else. Or can they somehow prove that a good hash function of lots of 1's and 0's is as good as the data itself?
I also wonder if MP3.com actually owns a copy of the 45,000 CD's that they make available. If they DON'T own them, could they claim that the enclosed restrictions don't apply to them? (The theory being that MP3.com is just providing hard drive space, not a music distribution service, so why should they own them?) If they own them, they are likely bound by the reproduction restrictions.
This is going to be an interesting ride. While I absolutely love their service, I hope they have some sort of ace up their sleeve - from my understanding of the facts, it looks like they are in blatant violation of the law.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been very satisfied with the Powr Pointer. http://www.powrpointer.com/. If it had a built-in timer it would be perfect.
(Only real complaint is that they came out with a longer range model a few weeks after I bought the first model!)
--L
If real, it's good news, since MS products are a security nightmare.
If fake, it's brilliant, since Gates will be faced with either admitting the breach and the unimportance of security or keeping quiet and being held to his new "highest priority".
In any case it looks like this will get very interesting!
No question - this is as ballsy of a move as it gets. The RIAA suit should be a surprise to noone, least of all the management of mp3.com.
So, what's their defense?
Many web sites contain copyright notices that state you may not make copies of the data, yet for a short while we all do. It's called a cache.
I wonder if MP3.com will attempt to claim that the 1's and 0's they stream WOULD have been those of the user, except that the server didn't need to upload them because it already had a cached copy from someone else. Or can they somehow prove that a good hash function of lots of 1's and 0's is as good as the data itself?
I also wonder if MP3.com actually owns a copy of the 45,000 CD's that they make available. If they DON'T own them, could they claim that the enclosed restrictions don't apply to them? (The theory being that MP3.com is just providing hard drive space, not a music distribution service, so why should they own them?) If they own them, they are likely bound by the reproduction restrictions.
This is going to be an interesting ride. While I absolutely love their service, I hope they have some sort of ace up their sleeve - from my understanding of the facts, it looks like they are in blatant violation of the law.