As expected, there are a large number of replies by people who didn't even bother to read the summary. (Or, have poor reading comprehension, or even both, I guess.)
The submitter is not the same as the student.
Anyway, the point is, MediaSentry is still "alive", and still sending out automated messages.
Now it seems that the student admitted to downloading the file ("as a result of me downloading Angels and Demons"), which sort of screws over any real complaint they may have had.
Personally, I think it's disgusting that the manager paid any attention to the "generic copyright infringement email" at all. Seriously, if I were in that situation, I would delete the email and forget about it.
I wonder, who is MediaSentry acting for in this situation? Does that company know that MediaSentry is doing this? Do MediaSentry have the right to sue on behalf of that company?
And, is MediaSentry keeping track of these emails and watching for responses?
Needless to say though, for the vast majority of folks in the USA (using one of the more extreme examples here, applies everywhere else as well), it is required that you get a job to survive. Not working simply isn't an option.
Now clearly tech is not required to survive, however, it is required for a modern lifestyle. Saying, "but you can live without it", is similar to saying, "if you don't like this country, why don't you leave?". Millions of people try that every year (refugees, economic migrants etc.), and funny thing, the 'better' places keep trying to turn them back. (Britain doesn't have such strict immigration rules for the fun of it.)
So, where should I go that would accept me and is acceptable to me?
(Oh, and the "invisible hand" of the market is bullshit. Wanna argue that? Go to RevLeft.)
No it doesn't. That's like saying, "getting a job to stay alive is an endorcement of US capitalism, even though the only other options are starving or illegal activity (which can result in very nasty side affects)".
As for the quote, it's from the Unix fortune cookie program. Do a search, you can find it in lots of places.
The point is though, that just because I use tech, doesn't mean I support or endorse capitalism, the state, or any other damn thing associated with the production of the tech. Sure, maybe the "Western" should be dropped. I'll take that into consideration.
If you want to discuss this further, feel free to head over to RevLeft, make an account, and start a thread (in the Opposing Ideologies section at a guess, unless you are a leftist of some sort). Oh, that's a referrer link, I don't get anything from that except knowing how many people signed up because of it. If you really don't like it, just remove it. (I only mention that 'cause some person got uppity once.)
Unless (and even if) this is made clear to the consumer before they bye the product, I'm sure that there would be a good case of "defective product", which would mean, money back.
Of course, you don't get to keep your "Kindle", but you do get to keep your sanity.
---
I expect the following to start happening sooner or later: * Someone write make a "Kindle emulator"; * Someone will pass out "hardware security bypass" designs (modding)
Both are older than the UN (being established in the 18th Century), but, both are part of the UN system now. Oh, and what about the IAEA? FAO? ILO? WMO? All these are part of the UN as well. I think they seemed to have worked out reasonably well, though, of course, not perfect.
Don't make the mistake of thinking that the UN is only the politicised bits.
If they can't agree, then they don't need the fucking law.
Murder is wrong, I'm sure you could find more then 60% of the population to vote on that, with at least 50% of those voting that, yes, murder is wrong.
You maybe happy to be a sheep, and get fleeced... But I would rather keep my wooly coat, and not see my young ones taken off to the market, not see my friends and family slaughtered for meat.
You may think, "it won't happen to me", and it might not. But it happens to too many people as it is.
How about you just stop electing people? Why do you need a fucking "big brother" to look after you anyway? I am an adult. I am responsible for my self. I don't need a government telling me I should wear a seat belt, not take drugs etc.
How about (if you want a government at all), you have a look at demarchy (see also Demarchy; random selection of decision makers)? Or heck, with present technology, everyone could vote on everything! Of course, you would have to introduce a quorum, maybe at least 60% of people have to actually vote for anything to pass. Then if people don't care, well, who needs more laws anyway?
Basically, this man, he won't change anything.
At the end of the day, you still have rich people who screw over poor people. Poor people who screw over poor people. Politicians who screw over everyone (and bend over backwards for donations from rich people and corporations).
Basically, for all you people who think that this new fellow is going to be "different", tell me in four years time whether you still have to go to fucking work nearly every day of the week (for the vast majority who do). Heck, I would guess at least half of the things he promised aren't even possible without the Congress, and they aren't different, even if you think this man is.
Big deal. You got a "black" fellow as president. When you are you going to abolish the outdated presidential system? That would be real change worth having.
(For those not in the know, the Danes once controlled most of Scandinavia. And they must never forget that they were once an imperialist power. They must therefore tread softly when talking to other people. Even though it was years and years ago. It still counts. Bloody imperialists. (I'm not making this up, there is still a guilt complex among some Danes about this.))
Other people have various solutions, label them, have only one per device (which isn't a solution much of the time anyway), don't share them among the family etc.
But you have the solution in your very question: Something to hold them all.
I don't use SD personally (though my next camera will be using SD, as Linux based devices can read them, unlike XD cards). My camera is an Olympus, a few years old now. The camera before that was also an Olympus. One of the best things that came with my camera was a little plastic thingy that holds six XD cards. It's great, I've got four cards, and only one can be in the camera at anyone time (obviously). Being able to carry so many cards, without worrying about them (being so small), especially when I won't be near a computer for a while, is wonderful.
Even if you don't get a plastic or leather thingy that will specifically hold SD cards, it shouldn't be hard to find something.
I fail to see how having copyright extend 75 years past the death of the artist encourages said artist to produce anything either before or after they die.
I am alive today, right now, and can not imagine the world 75 years after I die. Why should such a distant future (at least 75 years into the future, and hopefully many more), affect my decision making process now regarding creating new art work?
Surely I should be creating art work now to benefit myself right now? (Or more likely for most of the good artists, they would be producing stuff anyway.)
Having a long copyright does nothing to benefit artists, but only parasites and other scum.
Except that I very much doubt that the name is copyrighted, or else everyone should be getting into trouble when they write it down. Wikipedia wouldn't be able to have an article about Popeye etc. etc.
Now the name might be a trademark, which is something which doesn't expire (unless not defended, or unless it becomes generic).
Dear folks, please don't use the term "intellectual property" at all. Trademarks are quite different to copyrights, which are very different to patents. They are all covered under different laws, and of those three, I believe that only copyright is international.
(Oh, and a great example of long copyright encouraging dead artists to keep producing yes?)
Oh, and the company that pays them wouldn't drop them like that if it suited the bottom line?
The days of respecting and being loyal to the company have long gone, because the company doesn't respect, and certainly isn't loyal to, you.
The union, on the other hand, will tend to be loyal to their members, will fight for their rights, and so on. (Unions aren't perfect, but under a capitalism system, they are often better than nothing.)
----
More generally, it amazes me that so many "free market" types hate unions. But they don't have any trouble with corporations and so on colluding to keep wages down.
That's the trouble with those who want a perfectly free capitalist market (a contradiction in terms). The want to give all the power to the bosses, and screw the workers, even when joining together in a union is good for the workers interests. They don't like unions because they don't really want a free market, they want a bosses market.
According to the International Earth-Destruction Advisory Board, the current "Earth-Destruction Alert Level" is "RED". Which means that the Earth has been destroyed. A quote from the FAQ:
My baby's in there!
Your baby has most likely been destroyed.
----
Anyway, for you deluded fools who think the Earth is still around, take head of this warning:
The Earth is built to last. It is a 4,550,000,000-year-old, 5,973,600,000,000,000,000,000-tonne ball of iron. It has taken more devastating asteroid hits in its lifetime than you've had hot dinners, and lo, it still orbits merrily. So my first piece of advice to you, dear would-be Earth-destroyer, is: do NOT think this will be easy.
Obviously it's a little out of date now, 'cause those rascals at CERN managed the job, but still...
I note that the fools from the article don't actually want to destroy the Earth (well maybe one or two of the scenarios might break it apart or something), otherwise they would have come up with some scenarios like:
Annihilated by an equivalent quantity of antimatter
Because blacklists don't work. Want to not get phished? Simple instructions that even the most computerphobic person can understand:
When you want to go to the website of your bank, credit union etc., type in what you see on the printed material you have in front of you! (Alternatively, for the more computer literate folks, create a bookmark/favourite after having typed in the address from the printed material from your bank. And only access it via that link.)
Never trust a link via an email, never trust a link from another website, not even if the address looks the same. (Character encoding, bad eyes and other things can make two strings look the same, even when they aren't.)
Basically, "phishing detection" is a flawed approach to the problem, and the best solution (as with most computer security issues), is user education. Considering that banks already have a "captive" audience (the audience has to read the material provided by the bank before being able to connect), they have a great opportunity to provide education to users.
They could even have a short quiz before they allowed their customers to get online access to their accounts. Perhaps questions like:
Will your bank ever email you regarding problems with your account? (No.)
Should you ever give your online password to anyone? (No.)
How should you access the banks website? (Answer given above.)
And subsequently ask one of these questions each login... Of course, if the bank thinks that the answers above should be different, maybe it's time to move to a different bank.
Combined with a security token, this should cut down on most phishing.
(And actually, no bank I have ever used has known my email, I just refuse to give it to them (No I don't have an email address.).)
Anyway, it sounds like a clear case of bad hardware, and thus should be replaced. Obviously still in the warranty period, 'cause the items are barely a few months old.
Though, actually, the article talks about updating firmware. Odd.
Actually, the entire article doesn't say much at all.
If I'm releasing stuff, I'm not about to use a creative commons licence because of that (and others) issue.
But, most of the people who use these CC licences would not actually read the licence text. They would not know what the restrictions they are placing!
Kapor is in his element now, fluent, thoroughly in command in his material. "You go tell a hardware Internet hacker that everyone should have a node on the Net," he says, "and the first thing they're going to say is, 'IP doesn't scale!'" ("IP" is the interface protocol for the Internet. As it currently exists, the IP software is simply not capable of indefinite expansion; it will run out of usable addresses, it will saturate.) "The answer," Kapor says, "is: evolve the protocol! Get the smart people together and figure out what to do. Do we add ID? Do we add new protocol? Don't just say, we can't do it."
Anyway, does anyone have any sources as to know the other "big" OS's (MS Windows, Mac OS, the BSD's etc.) were able to speak IPv6 (if they are able to at all?)?
Also, I've tried to find information about whether FreeDOS can do IPv6, but couldn't. Could anyone help there?
The Russian Empire was doing a lot of really bad stuff way before the USSR was even thought of. Of course, the British Empire, the Japanese Empire, the French Empire etc. all imposed by force their rule of law.
I can't see anything on their webpage that indicates that they have a strange interpretation of the GPL v3.
I get the impression that they believe merely using ext JS on a public website is distribution. I would agree with that. Therefore, if you modify the code, and then distribute it, you have to release under GPL v3 to be "legal". I don't see anything wrong with that.
You don't have to modify the code, and therefore, you don't have any obligations.
In either case, you don't have to worry about the source code requirement, because the source code is being downloaded by the browser anyway.
Regarding server side code, that's different. You aren't distributing the code, you are merely presenting the results of the code. I understand that in the USA and Australia at least, that it is not possible to copy right the output of a program (at least not in general cases).
So, you can take WordPress (which is released under the GPL), and modify it all you want, and so long as your modifications stay on your server, you have no worries.
This "hole" in the GPL coverage is "closed" by the AGPL, which mandates that if you modify the code, and use it, then you have to offer a link to download the changed source code to anyone who accesses the program over a network. (Or something like that anyway, see section 13.)
The question of which is more appropriate, depends on who you consider the "user" to be, the public, or the web master.
1. What copyrights have been infringed? I recall reading about people getting letters for merely the filename of a file being shared, even (in at least on case that I can recall), when the file was just a few bytes and could not have been the movie alleged to have been shared.
2. Who dun it? The person at the other end of the IP address of course!
Anyway, I would suggest, based on the limited amount of material provided, that you find out (if possible), who/what was using the IP address and have a stern talking to the individual concerned.
And then block all ports that aren't HTTP/S, FTP and SSH. That should clear up most of your file sharing "problems".
I've seen it written that IRC is just multiplayer notepad before...
But anyway, Google Writer does this, Abiword is a non-web app freely available on all major platforms, and has a Collaboration plugin (never used it personally).
Oh, and this one still requires you to use their server... That rules it out for most use cases I can think of in a commercial setting.
Interestingly, they say on their FAQ "One thing that Google Docs does not do is real-time collaborative text editing." Actually, yes it does... "Google Docs are cumbersome to share with other people. It requires sending an email, and all collaborators must have a Google Docs account. With EtherPad, you just copy and paste a link, no emails or accounts required." Wrong on the first point (you can just copy and paste the link, or just see it through your list of files).
Score, 4/10, interesting sorta, but actually rather boring. Give us the code, let us host it locally, force user accounts if desired.
Otherwise, not interested.
Everything it can do can already be done using some other tool.
The trouble is, I have to get to a job interview. I have a client coming around right now with the cash. Can you do me a favour? I'll split the proceeds of the sale with you, but because I have to go, I'll grab my share now. That fine with you?
Cool.
---
I was trying to think of something serious to say, but honestly, I couldn't. I even read the first article and loaded up the video and second article. I guess I could make a random attack on capitalism as an economic system, but that would probably be unsubstantiated, so I won't.
Slashdot Mirror
As expected, there are a large number of replies by people who didn't even bother to read the summary. (Or, have poor reading comprehension, or even both, I guess.)
The submitter is not the same as the student.
Anyway, the point is, MediaSentry is still "alive", and still sending out automated messages.
Now it seems that the student admitted to downloading the file ("as a result of me downloading Angels and Demons"), which sort of screws over any real complaint they may have had.
Personally, I think it's disgusting that the manager paid any attention to the "generic copyright infringement email" at all. Seriously, if I were in that situation, I would delete the email and forget about it.
I wonder, who is MediaSentry acting for in this situation? Does that company know that MediaSentry is doing this? Do MediaSentry have the right to sue on behalf of that company?
And, is MediaSentry keeping track of these emails and watching for responses?
Want to argue? Go to the link I provided.
Needless to say though, for the vast majority of folks in the USA (using one of the more extreme examples here, applies everywhere else as well), it is required that you get a job to survive. Not working simply isn't an option.
Now clearly tech is not required to survive, however, it is required for a modern lifestyle. Saying, "but you can live without it", is similar to saying, "if you don't like this country, why don't you leave?". Millions of people try that every year (refugees, economic migrants etc.), and funny thing, the 'better' places keep trying to turn them back. (Britain doesn't have such strict immigration rules for the fun of it.)
So, where should I go that would accept me and is acceptable to me?
(Oh, and the "invisible hand" of the market is bullshit. Wanna argue that? Go to RevLeft.)
No it doesn't. That's like saying, "getting a job to stay alive is an endorcement of US capitalism, even though the only other options are starving or illegal activity (which can result in very nasty side affects)".
As for the quote, it's from the Unix fortune cookie program. Do a search, you can find it in lots of places.
The point is though, that just because I use tech, doesn't mean I support or endorse capitalism, the state, or any other damn thing associated with the production of the tech. Sure, maybe the "Western" should be dropped. I'll take that into consideration.
If you want to discuss this further, feel free to head over to RevLeft, make an account, and start a thread (in the Opposing Ideologies section at a guess, unless you are a leftist of some sort). Oh, that's a referrer link, I don't get anything from that except knowing how many people signed up because of it. If you really don't like it, just remove it. (I only mention that 'cause some person got uppity once.)
Unless (and even if) this is made clear to the consumer before they bye the product, I'm sure that there would be a good case of "defective product", which would mean, money back.
Of course, you don't get to keep your "Kindle", but you do get to keep your sanity.
---
I expect the following to start happening sooner or later:
* Someone write make a "Kindle emulator";
* Someone will pass out "hardware security bypass" designs (modding)
Oh, and I also expect a law suit sooner or later.
Heh, thanks, I just posted before I read this.
I also mentioned the ITU and UPU (formally IPU), both of which might be good entities for running ICANN.
Is the ITU considered to be part of the UN by you?
I personally think they would do a good job...
What about the UPU (formally IPU)?
Both are older than the UN (being established in the 18th Century), but, both are part of the UN system now. Oh, and what about the IAEA? FAO? ILO? WMO? All these are part of the UN as well. I think they seemed to have worked out reasonably well, though, of course, not perfect.
Don't make the mistake of thinking that the UN is only the politicised bits.
If they can't agree, then they don't need the fucking law.
Murder is wrong, I'm sure you could find more then 60% of the population to vote on that, with at least 50% of those voting that, yes, murder is wrong.
You maybe happy to be a sheep, and get fleeced... But I would rather keep my wooly coat, and not see my young ones taken off to the market, not see my friends and family slaughtered for meat.
You may think, "it won't happen to me", and it might not. But it happens to too many people as it is.
Stop the fleecing, fuck government.
----
If voting changed anything, it would be illegal.
There's no government, like no government.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
How about you just stop electing people? Why do you need a fucking "big brother" to look after you anyway? I am an adult. I am responsible for my self. I don't need a government telling me I should wear a seat belt, not take drugs etc.
How about (if you want a government at all), you have a look at demarchy (see also Demarchy; random selection of decision makers)? Or heck, with present technology, everyone could vote on everything! Of course, you would have to introduce a quorum, maybe at least 60% of people have to actually vote for anything to pass. Then if people don't care, well, who needs more laws anyway?
Basically, this man, he won't change anything.
At the end of the day, you still have rich people who screw over poor people. Poor people who screw over poor people. Politicians who screw over everyone (and bend over backwards for donations from rich people and corporations).
Basically, for all you people who think that this new fellow is going to be "different", tell me in four years time whether you still have to go to fucking work nearly every day of the week (for the vast majority who do). Heck, I would guess at least half of the things he promised aren't even possible without the Congress, and they aren't different, even if you think this man is.
Big deal. You got a "black" fellow as president. When you are you going to abolish the outdated presidential system? That would be real change worth having.
Dra åt helvete, jag hatar dig.
(For those not in the know, the Danes once controlled most of Scandinavia. And they must never forget that they were once an imperialist power. They must therefore tread softly when talking to other people. Even though it was years and years ago. It still counts. Bloody imperialists. (I'm not making this up, there is still a guilt complex among some Danes about this.))
Other people have various solutions, label them, have only one per device (which isn't a solution much of the time anyway), don't share them among the family etc.
But you have the solution in your very question: Something to hold them all.
I don't use SD personally (though my next camera will be using SD, as Linux based devices can read them, unlike XD cards). My camera is an Olympus, a few years old now. The camera before that was also an Olympus. One of the best things that came with my camera was a little plastic thingy that holds six XD cards. It's great, I've got four cards, and only one can be in the camera at anyone time (obviously). Being able to carry so many cards, without worrying about them (being so small), especially when I won't be near a computer for a while, is wonderful.
Even if you don't get a plastic or leather thingy that will specifically hold SD cards, it shouldn't be hard to find something.
Anyway, a quick websearch turns up for example,
http://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/images/products/fullpics/00156001-00156250/156046.jpg
http://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/images/products/fullpics/00016251-00016500/16474.jpg
I fail to see how having copyright extend 75 years past the death of the artist encourages said artist to produce anything either before or after they die.
I am alive today, right now, and can not imagine the world 75 years after I die. Why should such a distant future (at least 75 years into the future, and hopefully many more), affect my decision making process now regarding creating new art work?
Surely I should be creating art work now to benefit myself right now? (Or more likely for most of the good artists, they would be producing stuff anyway.)
Having a long copyright does nothing to benefit artists, but only parasites and other scum.
Some websites with arguments against copyright
http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk/index.php?id=52
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-copyright
Except that I very much doubt that the name is copyrighted, or else everyone should be getting into trouble when they write it down. Wikipedia wouldn't be able to have an article about Popeye etc. etc.
Now the name might be a trademark, which is something which doesn't expire (unless not defended, or unless it becomes generic).
Dear folks, please don't use the term "intellectual property" at all. Trademarks are quite different to copyrights, which are very different to patents. They are all covered under different laws, and of those three, I believe that only copyright is international.
(Oh, and a great example of long copyright encouraging dead artists to keep producing yes?)
Oh, and the company that pays them wouldn't drop them like that if it suited the bottom line?
The days of respecting and being loyal to the company have long gone, because the company doesn't respect, and certainly isn't loyal to, you.
The union, on the other hand, will tend to be loyal to their members, will fight for their rights, and so on. (Unions aren't perfect, but under a capitalism system, they are often better than nothing.)
----
More generally, it amazes me that so many "free market" types hate unions. But they don't have any trouble with corporations and so on colluding to keep wages down.
That's the trouble with those who want a perfectly free capitalist market (a contradiction in terms). The want to give all the power to the bosses, and screw the workers, even when joining together in a union is good for the workers interests. They don't like unions because they don't really want a free market, they want a bosses market.
Fuck that.
According to the International Earth-Destruction Advisory Board, the current "Earth-Destruction Alert Level" is "RED". Which means that the Earth has been destroyed.
A quote from the FAQ:
----
Anyway, for you deluded fools who think the Earth is still around, take head of this warning:
Obviously it's a little out of date now, 'cause those rascals at CERN managed the job, but still...
I note that the fools from the article don't actually want to destroy the Earth (well maybe one or two of the scenarios might break it apart or something), otherwise they would have come up with some scenarios like:
(Quote and methods from How to destroy the Earth.)
Fools, I'll show them all!
Is "phishing detection" security? Or does it just provide a false sense of security?
To quote myself (from <http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1030947&cid=25776933>, strong added):
Basically, "phishing detection" is a flawed approach to the problem, and the best solution (as with most computer security issues), is user education. Considering that banks already have a "captive" audience (the audience has to read the material provided by the bank before being able to connect), they have a great opportunity to provide education to users.
They could even have a short quiz before they allowed their customers to get online access to their accounts. Perhaps questions like:
And subsequently ask one of these questions each login ...
Of course, if the bank thinks that the answers above should be different, maybe it's time to move to a different bank.
Combined with a security token, this should cut down on most phishing.
(And actually, no bank I have ever used has known my email, I just refuse to give it to them (No I don't have an email address.).)
tag: appleispants
'Cause apple is pants.
Anyway, it sounds like a clear case of bad hardware, and thus should be replaced. Obviously still in the warranty period, 'cause the items are barely a few months old.
Though, actually, the article talks about updating firmware. Odd.
Actually, the entire article doesn't say much at all.
If I'm releasing stuff, I'm not about to use a creative commons licence because of that (and others) issue.
But, most of the people who use these CC licences would not actually read the licence text. They would not know what the restrictions they are placing!
Err WTF? Somehow I managed to post anonymously without meaning to.
That post up there, the one with "Copyright apathy maybe" is mine.
Source: http://www.mit.edu/hacker/part4.html
So why the fuck hasn't it been adopted yet?
------
Anyway, does anyone have any sources as to know the other "big" OS's (MS Windows, Mac OS, the BSD's etc.) were able to speak IPv6 (if they are able to at all?)?
Also, I've tried to find information about whether FreeDOS can do IPv6, but couldn't. Could anyone help there?
-----
Finally, the beauty of FLOSS.
90 why pick such an odd number?
The Russian Empire was doing a lot of really bad stuff way before the USSR was even thought of. Of course, the British Empire, the Japanese Empire, the French Empire etc. all imposed by force their rule of law.
I can't see anything on their webpage that indicates that they have a strange interpretation of the GPL v3.
I get the impression that they believe merely using ext JS on a public website is distribution. I would agree with that. Therefore, if you modify the code, and then distribute it, you have to release under GPL v3 to be "legal". I don't see anything wrong with that.
You don't have to modify the code, and therefore, you don't have any obligations.
In either case, you don't have to worry about the source code requirement, because the source code is being downloaded by the browser anyway.
Regarding server side code, that's different. You aren't distributing the code, you are merely presenting the results of the code. I understand that in the USA and Australia at least, that it is not possible to copy right the output of a program (at least not in general cases).
So, you can take WordPress (which is released under the GPL), and modify it all you want, and so long as your modifications stay on your server, you have no worries.
This "hole" in the GPL coverage is "closed" by the AGPL, which mandates that if you modify the code, and use it, then you have to offer a link to download the changed source code to anyone who accesses the program over a network. (Or something like that anyway, see section 13.)
The question of which is more appropriate, depends on who you consider the "user" to be, the public, or the web master.
1. What copyrights have been infringed?
I recall reading about people getting letters for merely the filename of a file being shared, even (in at least on case that I can recall), when the file was just a few bytes and could not have been the movie alleged to have been shared.
2. Who dun it?
The person at the other end of the IP address of course!
Anyway, I would suggest, based on the limited amount of material provided, that you find out (if possible), who/what was using the IP address and have a stern talking to the individual concerned.
And then block all ports that aren't HTTP/S, FTP and SSH. That should clear up most of your file sharing "problems".
I've seen it written that IRC is just multiplayer notepad before...
But anyway, Google Writer does this, Abiword is a non-web app freely available on all major platforms, and has a Collaboration plugin (never used it personally).
Oh, and this one still requires you to use their server... That rules it out for most use cases I can think of in a commercial setting.
Interestingly, they say on their FAQ
"One thing that Google Docs does not do is real-time collaborative text editing." Actually, yes it does...
"Google Docs are cumbersome to share with other people. It requires sending an email, and all collaborators must have a Google Docs account. With EtherPad, you just copy and paste a link, no emails or accounts required."
Wrong on the first point (you can just copy and paste the link, or just see it through your list of files).
Score, 4/10, interesting sorta, but actually rather boring. Give us the code, let us host it locally, force user accounts if desired.
Otherwise, not interested.
Everything it can do can already be done using some other tool.
Notice the original anon c didn't say anything about legality or illegality?
They talked only about freedom. Freedom and legality are two different and distinct concepts.
Personally I don't give a shit if copying something that is under copyright is illegal or not. It is about freedom really.
The freedom to copy is quite distinct from the fact being illegal or not.
The trouble is, I have to get to a job interview. I have a client coming around right now with the cash. Can you do me a favour? I'll split the proceeds of the sale with you, but because I have to go, I'll grab my share now. That fine with you?
Cool.
---
I was trying to think of something serious to say, but honestly, I couldn't. I even read the first article and loaded up the video and second article. I guess I could make a random attack on capitalism as an economic system, but that would probably be unsubstantiated, so I won't.