You're right, and that's Moglen's reading, but I was encouraged to find this in the Eldred decision:
"...when, as in this case, Congress has not altered the traditional contours of copyright protection, further First Amendment scrutiny is unnecessary."
By implication, this means laws that do alter the "contours" can be challenged constitutionally. I'm thinking DMCA, esp. anticircumvention... which goes beyond the prohibition of copying and denies mere access to works, as pointed out in a good chapter of a very mediocre book: Protecting Ideas by David L. Hudson.
I think you and GP are kinda right, but I lean away from the name they've chosen. Predominantly it's because I don't think "pirating" the **AA's crap is the right way to bring about change. I'd like to see a "Free Culture Party" or some such with a platform saying, e.g.:
1. Okay, you guys enjoy yr Life + 425 years' copyright protection; we'll be over here creating art and sharing it with each other and making you obsolete.
It says "securing for limited Times". What needs to made clear(er) in the Constitution is that Copyright laws that demonstrably do *not "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" are not valid.
To a suit, 'Levanta' probably just sounds cooler than 'LinuxCare.'
To me, too. Levanta definitely sounds like something from a drug ad where there's soft fuzzy lighting and Really Pleasant Music playing. But LinuxCare has this homeopathic quality to it that I don't like... is Linux sick?
Broadband should be free -- provided by spread-spectrum radio-on-chip systems that people just generally get used to requested when they buy laptops, cellphones, automobiles, etc.
These scale backward: the more users, the better your connection.
Answer: Because anything that has the potential to become a "platform" is a threat. Netscape didn't get blasted because Microsoft wanted to rake in a bunch of cash by selling browsers; it was because the browser as a concept made it conceivable that dependency on windows could be weakened
Likewise "Search". There's quite a bit of revenue there, of course, but it wasn't until GMail, GTalk, GExcel (just kidding) popped up that MS really felt the heat from google's platform.
No, the iPod is not a platform. But OSX is, and if there isn't a microsofty competitor to the iPod then that little device's users are eventually going to discover that Macintoshes are -- as a whole -- quite a bit better than XP boxes. (Vista I set aside for the time being)
"...they have little choice. Much of this fact can be laid squarely at the feet of the Linux zealots who insist that there is no need for Linux to be "consumer friendly"
We zealots actually just feel that they should have more choice. If you can't find a consumer friendly Linux distro, you aren't looking very hard. If you can find a retailer who sells computers that aren't pre-loaded with Windows, then you are looking very hard
The governmental powers who are hot and bothered about "intellectual property" violations in China maybe could apply pressure on the free speech area first. The way I'm seeing it the things that piss America off most are (in order)
1. Be Iraq
2. Develop weapons of mass destruction
3. Support terrorists
4. Infringe copyrights
..
... (Profit?)
...
...
413. Abridge freedom of speech, or of the press.
This post has got to be in my all time top ten. I've used FC3 for a couple years now, I guess, and yum etc. has been finicky as hell. I'm trying your tips.
Question: "roll your own"? That sounds hard... is it hard? Where to start?
"what on earth has to do the OSS dispute with political, or worse, religious issues?"
New here?
Politically, the question is about people's right to control their own property. Completely control. Seeing a human-readable version of the code running on their machines is necessary to assert control over them.
Religiousistically -- or better, morally -- the question is about the definition of property, esp. "intellectual property", and whether it has any moral weight.
If MS wants to work with "GPL folks" then the point might be valid. There are a number of "GPL folks" who frankly want nothing to do with 'em, ever, regardless of what/if they change. But if they want (as they claim) to work with GPL software that's different. If they want to interoperate with GPL software the ball is in their court. Get off the stump, read the standards, read the code, write what you need. Everything you need is there, freely available. I know because compared to MS I have exactly Zero resources and have build some interoperable stuff by doing exactly that.
What I see is a classic erosion of an unnecessary middleman. RIAA proved themselves really good, until 1990, at packaging and distributing music. Now there's an easy-to-implement strategy for just hooking artists directly up with listeners.
But this doesn't kill the "music industry". There will always be a need for a legitimation structure -- an industry that sifts the amateurish crap from the high-quality art. But it won't be done through "push" marketing: "Britney is the next Madonna (as if Madonna was a major artist anyway)! Coldplay is the next U2!" No, listeners will want good information about who's doing what, and they'll decide who's the next what. RIAA has got so distracted shrieking about "piracy" that they've forgotten their core competency: put simply: telling good from bad. That's a service people will always want and pay for.
I don't neglect the obvious fact that the RIAA not been a bastion of good taste recently; they've focused for over a decade on making the bad look good, in order to simplify their lives by stamping formula music out of a mold and just marketing it all to hell so that people buy it. Or payolizing it so that people don't realize there's anything else out there. But those days are numbered.
But getting audio files (in whatever format) into the hands of listeners? Sorry, the mechanism there is well-understood and staggeringly efficient.
Slashdot Mirror
"...when, as in this case, Congress has not altered the traditional contours of copyright protection, further First Amendment scrutiny is unnecessary."
By implication, this means laws that do alter the "contours" can be challenged constitutionally. I'm thinking DMCA, esp. anticircumvention... which goes beyond the prohibition of copying and denies mere access to works, as pointed out in a good chapter of a very mediocre book: Protecting Ideas by David L. Hudson.
1. Okay, you guys enjoy yr Life + 425 years' copyright protection; we'll be over here creating art and sharing it with each other and making you obsolete.
It says "securing for limited Times". What needs to made clear(er) in the Constitution is that Copyright laws that demonstrably do *not "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" are not valid.
To me, too. Levanta definitely sounds like something from a drug ad where there's soft fuzzy lighting and Really Pleasant Music playing. But LinuxCare has this homeopathic quality to it that I don't like... is Linux sick?
No, I was actually hoping someone would point out some ramifications I didn't pick up on.
I'm not sure why on earth I should be concerned...?
Are any of the teams networked? It seems like coordination of action would be a *huge step forward
that is all.
When I do flamebait you'll know it 2)
The Economics of the Wireless Last Mile
These scale backward: the more users, the better your connection.
Likewise "Search". There's quite a bit of revenue there, of course, but it wasn't until GMail, GTalk, GExcel (just kidding) popped up that MS really felt the heat from google's platform.
No, the iPod is not a platform. But OSX is, and if there isn't a microsofty competitor to the iPod then that little device's users are eventually going to discover that Macintoshes are -- as a whole -- quite a bit better than XP boxes. (Vista I set aside for the time being)
Just thinking aloud here.
We zealots actually just feel that they should have more choice. If you can't find a consumer friendly Linux distro, you aren't looking very hard. If you can find a retailer who sells computers that aren't pre-loaded with Windows, then you are looking very hard
..........jhg d;kljah j
1. Be Iraq
2. Develop weapons of mass destruction
3. Support terrorists
4. Infringe copyrights
..
... (Profit?)
...
...
413. Abridge freedom of speech, or of the press.
Between this stuff, WGA, and just general principle I'm not sure I'll ever boot XP again. Just gotta figure out how to run Party Poker on Lx...
check this one outm &q=l&c=msft
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=2y&s=GOOG&l=on&z=
Question: "roll your own"? That sounds hard... is it hard? Where to start?
6 used and new available from $7.00
I don't remember; was DL pretty much the first game that cost 50c per play?
Did he say "go ye therefore and license this knowledge to all nations; here's a DRM-protected version." Anyone read the Gospel's EULA?
New here?
Politically, the question is about people's right to control their own property. Completely control. Seeing a human-readable version of the code running on their machines is necessary to assert control over them.
Religiousistically -- or better, morally -- the question is about the definition of property, esp. "intellectual property", and whether it has any moral weight.
If MS wants to work with "GPL folks" then the point might be valid. There are a number of "GPL folks" who frankly want nothing to do with 'em, ever, regardless of what/if they change. But if they want (as they claim) to work with GPL software that's different. If they want to interoperate with GPL software the ball is in their court. Get off the stump, read the standards, read the code, write what you need. Everything you need is there, freely available. I know because compared to MS I have exactly Zero resources and have build some interoperable stuff by doing exactly that.
But this doesn't kill the "music industry". There will always be a need for a legitimation structure -- an industry that sifts the amateurish crap from the high-quality art. But it won't be done through "push" marketing: "Britney is the next Madonna (as if Madonna was a major artist anyway)! Coldplay is the next U2!" No, listeners will want good information about who's doing what, and they'll decide who's the next what. RIAA has got so distracted shrieking about "piracy" that they've forgotten their core competency: put simply: telling good from bad. That's a service people will always want and pay for.
I don't neglect the obvious fact that the RIAA not been a bastion of good taste recently; they've focused for over a decade on making the bad look good, in order to simplify their lives by stamping formula music out of a mold and just marketing it all to hell so that people buy it. Or payolizing it so that people don't realize there's anything else out there. But those days are numbered.
But getting audio files (in whatever format) into the hands of listeners? Sorry, the mechanism there is well-understood and staggeringly efficient.
Comments on movies in another post. Maybe.
You're going to have to wait probably at least 12 hours before WGA is cracked, so you can keep doing whatever-it-was wrong.