From tompoe at renonevada.net Sat Jun 1 01:30:23 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: [DMCA_Discuss] Valenti's "Boston Strangler" Testimony In-Reply-To: <20020601054550.33162.qmail@web10002.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20020601054550.33162.qmail@web10002.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <02053123302300.30112@aether> On Friday 31 May 2002 22:45, Larry Blunk wrote: > Well, I think he may topped his Boston Strangler analogy. Check out this > quote from an article in yesterday's Mercury News referring to piracy of > Star Wars: Episode II and Spiderman -- > > ``It's getting clear -- alarmingly clear, I might add -- that we are in the > midst of the possibility of Armageddon,'' said Jack Valenti, president and > chief executive of the Motion Picture Association of America. Hi: I believe that's a misquote. What he said, was, "It's getting clear -- alarmingly clear, I might add -- that we are in the midst of the possibility of my looking like an armadillo," said Jack Valenti, president and chief executive of the Motion Picture Association of America. Thanks, Tom Poe Reno, NV http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ From alex at synchcorp.com Sat Jun 1 18:49:35 2002 From: alex at synchcorp.com (Alex Heizer) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: [Community_studios] Re: [DMCA_Discuss] Valenti's "Boston Strangler" Testimony References: <20020601054550.33162.qmail@web10002.mail.yahoo.com> <02053123302300.30112@aether> Message-ID: <3CF95D8F.849947C7@synchcorp.com> I think the quote was "It's getting clear -- alarmingly clear, I might add -- that we are in the midst of the possibility of people pirating 'Armageddon', too!" tom poe wrote: > On Friday 31 May 2002 22:45, Larry Blunk wrote: > > Well, I think he may topped his Boston Strangler analogy. Check out this > > quote from an article in yesterday's Mercury News referring to piracy of > > Star Wars: Episode II and Spiderman -- > > > > ``It's getting clear -- alarmingly clear, I might add -- that we are in the > > midst of the possibility of Armageddon,'' said Jack Valenti, president and > > chief executive of the Motion Picture Association of America. > > Hi: I believe that's a misquote. What he said, was, > "It's getting clear -- alarmingly clear, I might add -- that we are in the > midst of the possibility of my looking like an armadillo," said Jack Valenti, > president and chief executive of the Motion Picture Association of America. > > Thanks, > Tom Poe > Reno, NV > http://www.studioforrecording.org/ > http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ > http://renotahoe.pm.org/ > _______________________________________________ > Community_studios mailing list > Community_studios@lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/community_studios From xpol at interfree.it Sun Jun 2 15:45:16 2002 From: xpol at interfree.it (Paolo Pumilia) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: [school-discuss] [Fwd: How could we be part of this] In-Reply-To: <02052811524001.31530@aether> References: <3CF3C6E1.72FC5311@suscom.net> <02052811524001.31530@aether> Message-ID: <20020602204515.GA8584@wigner.cstc.lan> >From tom poe, Tue May 28, at 11:52: .Hi: There's a model to consider at: .http://www.worldccr.org/kiosks.htm .If you want to discuss this model, let me know. I'm sorry to say that i found the project rather poorly documented. In particular, It is not explained to which country those efforts will be directed. Can you provide a bit more of information, please? Kirimi Kaberia request is unclear to me, too; excuse my ignorance, i do not know ATCnet. A project to be developed in a 'rural district in East Africa' appears too hazy. Anybody can shed light on this? thank you -- Paolo -- enc. ------- .Reno, NV .http://www.studioforrecording.org/ .http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ .http://renotahoe.pm.org/ . . .On Tuesday 28 May 2002 11:05, Doug Loss wrote: .> I just received this from Mr. Kaberia: .> .> Kirimi Kaberia wrote: .> > Dear Doug, .> > .> > I am the president of ATCnet in Africa and would like to get help .> > developing a school network in a rural district in East Africa. I .> > am looking at about 100 schools all of which are in a highly .> > mountainous region and quite rural. They have telephone .> > and electricity, some have computers others are in our list to .> > provide computers. We would like to set up a network that is not .> > necessarily linked to the ISPN except for the phone connection. .> > Our biggest handle is the servers to use and the software. Could .> > your group help us. Let me know what we need to do to actually get .> > the teaching materials for the various classes in math, computer, .> > biology, chemistry for mostly high school level students. Also in .> > high need is the curriculum for computer literacy for both kids .> > and adults. I would like to discuss the possibilities here. I .> > think there is a lot that we can do to make it happen together but .> > I do not have the final solution. How can I reach you. I can be .> > reached at 703 658 6333 or by replying to this email directly. .> > Keep up the good work. .> > .> > Kirimi Kaberia .> > .> > President .> > .> > ATCnet .> > .> > 703 658 6333 .> .> What do you all think we can do to help him in this venture? .> .> -- .> Doug Loss All I want is a warm bed .> Data Network Coordinator and a kind word and .> Bloomsburg University unlimited power. .> dloss@bloomu.edu Ashleigh Brilliant . -- From tompoe at renonevada.net Sat Jun 1 01:30:23 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: [DMCA_Discuss] Valenti's "Boston Strangler" Testimony In-Reply-To: <20020601054550.33162.qmail@web10002.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20020601054550.33162.qmail@web10002.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <02053123302300.30112@aether> On Friday 31 May 2002 22:45, Larry Blunk wrote: > Well, I think he may topped his Boston Strangler analogy. Check out this > quote from an article in yesterday's Mercury News referring to piracy of > Star Wars: Episode II and Spiderman -- > > ``It's getting clear -- alarmingly clear, I might add -- that we are in the > midst of the possibility of Armageddon,'' said Jack Valenti, president and > chief executive of the Motion Picture Association of America. Hi: I believe that's a misquote. What he said, was, "It's getting clear -- alarmingly clear, I might add -- that we are in the midst of the possibility of my looking like an armadillo," said Jack Valenti, president and chief executive of the Motion Picture Association of America. Thanks, Tom Poe Reno, NV http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ _______________________________________________ ------------------------ http://www.anti-dmca.org ------------------------ DMCA_Discuss mailing list DMCA_Discuss@lists.microshaft.org http://lists.microshaft.org/mailman/listinfo/dmca_discuss From alex at synchcorp.com Sat Jun 1 18:49:35 2002 From: alex at synchcorp.com (Alex Heizer) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: [Community_studios] Re: [DMCA_Discuss] Valenti's "Boston Strangler" Testimony References: <20020601054550.33162.qmail@web10002.mail.yahoo.com> <02053123302300.30112@aether> Message-ID: <3CF95D8F.849947C7@synchcorp.com> I think the quote was "It's getting clear -- alarmingly clear, I might add -- that we are in the midst of the possibility of people pirating 'Armageddon', too!" tom poe wrote: > On Friday 31 May 2002 22:45, Larry Blunk wrote: > > Well, I think he may topped his Boston Strangler analogy. Check out this > > quote from an article in yesterday's Mercury News referring to piracy of > > Star Wars: Episode II and Spiderman -- > > > > ``It's getting clear -- alarmingly clear, I might add -- that we are in the > > midst of the possibility of Armageddon,'' said Jack Valenti, president and > > chief executive of the Motion Picture Association of America. > > Hi: I believe that's a misquote. What he said, was, > "It's getting clear -- alarmingly clear, I might add -- that we are in the > midst of the possibility of my looking like an armadillo," said Jack Valenti, > president and chief executive of the Motion Picture Association of America. > > Thanks, > Tom Poe > Reno, NV > http://www.studioforrecording.org/ > http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ > http://renotahoe.pm.org/ > _______________________________________________ > Community_studios mailing list > Community_studios@lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/community_studios _______________________________________________ ------------------------ http://www.anti-dmca.org ------------------------ DMCA_Discuss mailing list DMCA_Discuss@lists.microshaft.org http://lists.microshaft.org/mailman/listinfo/dmca_discuss From tompoe at renonevada.net Mon Jun 3 12:13:32 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: Fwd: [webgroup] new improved ibiblio logopage Message-ID: <02060310133201.16727@aether> Hi: Pick one up, today and enjoy! Thanks, Tom ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: [webgroup] new improved ibiblio logopage Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 11:29:38 -0400 From: Serena Fenton To: webgroup@ibiblio.org I've just updated the page to download ibiblio logos. Why would you want one? To show the world that your site is hosted by ibiblio and to let us know that you appreciate the services! http://www.ibiblio.org/hosted/ New on the page: - a print quality logo in .eps format - ibiblio logos in gif format with transparent background (3 sizes) - hosted by ibiblio logos - gif format with transparent background (3 sizes) Add that logo to your site today - and enjoy being hosted by ibiblio! thanks - Serena -- ? ? ? ` ? ? ? ? , ? ? , ? ? ? ? ` ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ` ? ? ? ? , ? ? , ? ? Serena Fenton fents@ibiblio.org http://definedesign.org/ ibiblio: formerly known as metalab...sunsite.unc.edu... digital archivist ----> http://www.ibiblio.org/ Less is not necessarily more. Being a child of modernism I have heard this mantra all my life. Less is more. One morning upon awakening I realised that it was total nonsense. - Milton Glaser ? ? ? ` ? ? ? ? , ? ? , ? ? ? ? ` ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ` ? ? ? ? , ? ? , ? ? _______________________________________________ webgroup mailing list webgroup@lists.ibiblio.org http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/webgroup ------------------------------------------------------- From tompoe at renonevada.net Wed Jun 5 00:45:38 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: Windows only site? Message-ID: <02060422453800.03131@aether> Hello: I was disappointed to have a popup message report that I must use IE to view your site. The National Association of Advisors for Computers in Education is not a site that I would expect such a message to appear. The only access the site seems to offer is one to the product 'illumina', for Microsoft. I am interested in publicizing a project that utilizes Open Source resources. Your group really should be interested in this. With that in mind, I attach the article for you to share with others. Thanks, Tom Poe Reno, NV http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: cdforxmas Type: text/english Size: 4222 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.pm.org/archives/renotahoe-pm/attachments/20020604/339b0450/cdforxmas.bin From tompoe at renonevada.net Wed Jun 5 19:12:41 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: Fwd: Re: [fsl-discuss] Red Hat Patent Policy In-Reply-To: References: <200206041340.g54De5x01307@aoba.mni.ne.jp> Message-ID: <02060517124101.07378@aether> On Wednesday 05 June 2002 15:44, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > Jeremy Simmons writes: > > > Is Red Hat's "Our Promise with Respect to Software Patents We Hold" > > > legally binding? > > > > > > http://www.redhat.com/legal/patent_policy.html > > > > > > Could it be revoked if there was a change in control of the company? > > > > Red Hat is taking out patents in order to build up a defensive position. > > I do not understand the need for this. If the information was just made > > public then future users would not be able to claim patents over that > > because it was pre-existing knowledge and would not be innovative. > > It's defensive because it gives Red Hat some ammunition should they > face a patent lawsuit from some other software company. It gives them > a chance of offering a patent cross-licensing agreement or threatening > a counter-suit. > > In today's software patent world, in which any software company is > guaranteed to be in violation of dozens of patents, it is crazy for > any software company to not obtain software patents. Software patents > are easy to get and, for a corporation, relatively cheap, and even a > weak shield against an infringement lawsuit is better than no shield > at all. > > Ian Hi: I suppose that's good thinking in a proprietary world. Open Source, however, is not concerned with patents, copyrights, or keen business savvy in a proprietary world. Prior art, public domain, and ethics control in our world. thanks, Tom Poe Reno, NV http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ From ian at airs.com Wed Jun 5 19:21:31 2002 From: ian at airs.com (Ian Lance Taylor) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: Fwd: Re: [fsl-discuss] Red Hat Patent Policy In-Reply-To: <02060517124101.07378@aether> References: <200206041340.g54De5x01307@aoba.mni.ne.jp> <02060517124101.07378@aether> Message-ID: tom poe writes: > On Wednesday 05 June 2002 15:44, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > Jeremy Simmons writes: > > > > Is Red Hat's "Our Promise with Respect to Software Patents We Hold" > > > > legally binding? > > > > > > > > http://www.redhat.com/legal/patent_policy.html > > > > > > > > Could it be revoked if there was a change in control of the company? > > > > > > Red Hat is taking out patents in order to build up a defensive position. > > > I do not understand the need for this. If the information was just made > > > public then future users would not be able to claim patents over that > > > because it was pre-existing knowledge and would not be innovative. > > > > It's defensive because it gives Red Hat some ammunition should they > > face a patent lawsuit from some other software company. It gives them > > a chance of offering a patent cross-licensing agreement or threatening > > a counter-suit. > > > > In today's software patent world, in which any software company is > > guaranteed to be in violation of dozens of patents, it is crazy for > > any software company to not obtain software patents. Software patents > > are easy to get and, for a corporation, relatively cheap, and even a > > weak shield against an infringement lawsuit is better than no shield > > at all. > > Hi: I suppose that's good thinking in a proprietary world. Open Source, > however, is not concerned with patents, copyrights, or keen business savvy in > a proprietary world. Prior art, public domain, and ethics control in our > world. I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean that a company which is trying to make money from open source, such as Red Hat, should not be concerned with patents, copyrights or keen business savvy? If so, you are wrong. Do you mean that a hobbyist who writes and uses open source software should not be concerned with patents, copyrights, or keen business savvy? If so, you may be right, although it's worth remembering that software patents, by the nature of patents, affect everybody, commercial or hobbyist, proprietary or free. The RSA patent, for just one example, limited open source software just as it limited proprietary software. Ian From alex at synchcorp.com Wed Jun 5 22:59:23 2002 From: alex at synchcorp.com (Alex) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: [Community_studios] Windows only site? References: <02060422453800.03131@aether> Message-ID: <3CFEDE1A.E23AC782@synchcorp.com> Hello, I concur. Especially since the Mac is better-known to be an educational computer than Windows, and Linux is so prevalent in technical schools. I would think that at least a Mac-compliant site would be available at the same time as the Windows-slanted site. Perhaps once the Netscape and Mac sites are developed we can all visit and enjoy the site. Alex Heizer http://www.synchcorp.com/alex http://www.synchcorp.com/alexheizer tom poe wrote: > Hello: I was disappointed to have a popup message report that I must use IE > to view your site. The National Association of Advisors for Computers in > Education is not a site that I would expect such a message to appear. The > only access the site seems to offer is one to the product 'illumina', for > Microsoft. > > I am interested in publicizing a project that utilizes Open Source resources. > Your group really should be interested in this. With that in mind, I attach > the article for you to share with others. > Thanks, > Tom Poe > Reno, NV > http://www.studioforrecording.org/ > http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ > http://renotahoe.pm.org/ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Name: cdforxmas > cdforxmas Type: text/english > Encoding: quoted-printable From tompoe at renonevada.net Thu Jun 6 08:45:26 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: [Community_studios] Re: Fwd: Re: [fsl-discuss]RedHat Patent Policy In-Reply-To: <200206060740.g567ehm26707@perkunas1.omnitel.net> References: <200206060740.g567ehm26707@perkunas1.omnitel.net> Message-ID: <02060606452600.10503@aether> On Thursday 06 June 2002 01:32, De Bug wrote: > >> > > > http://www.redhat.com/legal/patent_policy.html - - -snip - - - > > All that makes me confident that copyrights and patents must be thrown away > completely if copy-left software is safe to use Red-Hat patented code why > non-copy left software should be discriminated ? > (Copy-left means that modified versions must provide the same freedoms as > the original work, non-copy left does not require modified versions to > comply with this ruling) > > I think Red-Hat maked a big strategic mistake for > I as open-source and free software advertiser and developer cant accept > patents on ideas and i think many others neigther will accept it. > Red-Hat will safe its business in that way but will bury free-software > movement :( > > -- > De Bug Hi: I imagine there are many that agree with you. What is most revealing about their "real" intent, is that they did this patent[s] knowing that Lawrence Lessig and crew put up the Creative Commons [ http://www.creativecommons.org/ ] specifically to address this issue. As far as I'm concerned, they're just one more proprietary company. Thanks, Tom From tompoe at renonevada.net Thu Jun 6 08:54:00 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: [DMCA_Discuss] Microsoft & CBDTPA In-Reply-To: <595149339.20020606160014@elcomsoft.com> References: <595149339.20020606160014@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <02060606540001.10503@aether> On Thursday 06 June 2002 05:00, Vladimir Katalov wrote: > Wow. I cannot beleive that -- Microsoft does not like CBDTPA, and > worries about customers' privacy ;) Look at the following article: Hi: The BPDG didn't accept their proposal to be on the "A" List. Sounds like "sour grapes" to me. This is all about a power grab, and they're just as rotten as the rest that signed their names to this CBDTPA/BPDG/CBPTWG crap. Thanks, Tom http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ From tompoe at renonevada.net Thu Jun 6 12:48:18 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: [DMCA_Discuss] U.S. lawmakers disappointed with digital TV report In-Reply-To: <20020606084923.I83037@networkcommand.com> References: <20020606084923.I83037@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <02060610481801.11347@aether> On Thursday 06 June 2002 08:49, Jon O. wrote: > http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020605/tv_nm/digital_1 > > U.S. lawmakers disappointed with digital TV report > Wed Jun 5, 7:46 PM ET > By Andy Sullivan > > WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. lawmakers could mandate a copy-protection > standard for digital television if media and technology firms cannot reach > an agreement on their own, a House of Representatives committee spokesman > said Wednesday. > > > Lawmakers had hoped that Hollywood and Silicon Valley could settle on a > method to prevent digitally broadcast TV shows and movies from being traded > Napster (news - web sites)-style over the Internet and have indicated that > any agreement would likely form the basis of a federal law. > > Industry heads told Senate and House of Representatives committees this > spring that an agreement was imminent, but a long-awaited report issued by > a working group late Monday acknowledged that many issues had yet to be > resolved. > > "Frankly, we're a little surprised by the report because we were led to > believe that more progress had been made," said Ken Johnson, a spokesman > for the House Energy and Commerce Committee. > > The committee will meet privately with industry representatives next week > to try to iron out the differences, Johnson said, but would eventually > develop legislation whether or not all the players had reached consensus. Hi: Sure. Ramp up for Mickey Mouse Computers, Mickey Mouse Electronic Devices, and watch the economy disappear. Perfect. Well, so much for constituent advocacy, eh? Thanks, Tom http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ From tompoe at renonevada.net Thu Jun 6 13:56:20 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: [cluetrain] do not read this message In-Reply-To: <0.1300006932.2072578836-1463792382-1023387033@topica.com> References: <0.1300006932.758603315-1463792126-1015696476@topica.com> <0.1300006932.2072578836-1463792382-1023387033@topica.com> Message-ID: <02060611562003.11347@aether> On Thursday 06 June 2002 11:12, oliver@baer-coach.de wrote: > Having re-joined your enlighened conversation > I find something amiss, your conversation. > > Hello? > > ? > > Want me to whistle? > > Oliver Hi: Please don't. We're trying to Think. OK. Scenario. The BPDG folks futz around, and we eventually find ourselves dealing with Mickey Mouse Computers, etc. What do we do? The folks at Creative Commons Project outline a scenario that looks something like this: 1] Everyone places their works in the Public Domain, GPL, etc., in support of Open Source. Check the site out for how to get FREE legal assistance at: http://www.creativecommons.org/ 2] The folks at Open Content Network, set up a parallel Internet capable of machine-readable interpretation of the "tokens" from Creative Commons Project. 3] People learn how to build an audience in their respective disciplines using the Internet, and then using marketing strategies for generating revenues. 4] The commercial "arm" of the Internet dies a slow, painful death, as noone visits their sites, because they can "flag" those suckers right out of existence. Does this fit Cluetrain's interests? Thanks, Tom Poe http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ From geist at bears.org Thu Jun 6 14:26:21 2002 From: geist at bears.org (geist) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: [cluetrain] do not read this message In-Reply-To: <0.1300006932.1343448215-1463792638-1023390386@topica.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 6 Jun 2002 tompoe@renonevada.net wrote: > OK. Scenario. The BPDG folks futz around, and we eventually find ourselves > dealing with Mickey Mouse Computers, etc. What do we do? BTW, there was a seminar between tech and hollywood folks discussing BPDG yesterday in DC. I blogged it and it's avilable at... http://geistbear.blogspot.com/2002_06_02_geistbear_archive.html#77350096 J. Thomas Vincent http://geistbear.blogspot.com Traveler, Brewmeister, and sometimes Writer. ********* ***** ** *************************.* "Once and for all, there is a great deal ****** *********** ** *******o I do _not_ want to know.--- ******* ********* **** ****`- Wisdom sets bounds even to knowledge." ******* ********* ***** ****** ********** **** Friedrich Nietzsche ## ***** ***** ## **** ### ***** ### **** #,,, ***,,, ##,,, **,,, From tompoe at renonevada.net Thu Jun 6 14:30:55 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: Book Review is Up . . . . Message-ID: <02060612305501.11836@aether> Hi: Web Development With Apache and Perl, by Theo Petersen is up: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6122&mode=thread&order=0 Thanks, Tom Reno, NV http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ From tompoe at renonevada.net Thu Jun 6 19:03:58 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: Fwd: EFFector 15.17: EFF & ReplayTV Owners Sue Hollywood, Court Rejects Hollywood Effort to Spy on ReplayTV Owners Message-ID: <02060617035801.12928@aether> Hi: Here's a summary of Hollywood's attempt to make video recorders illegal. Thanks, Tom ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: EFFector 15.17: EFF & ReplayTV Owners Sue Hollywood, Court Rejects Hollywood Effort to Spy on ReplayTV Owners Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 16:15:40 -0700 From: effector-admin@eff.org To: EFFector ????? Vol. 15, No. 17 ????? June 6, 2002 ??? ren@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ??? ISSN 1062-9424 In the 217th Issue of EFFector: * EFF & ReplayTV Owners Sue Hollywood * Court Rejects Hollywood Effort to Spy on ReplayTV Owners * Organizations Wary of Plan to Restrict Digital Television * Judge Focuses on "Betamax" Question in P2P File Sharing Case * Thanks to United Layer * EFF Needs Office Chairs * Administrivia For more information on EFF activities & alerts: http://www.eff.org/ To join EFF or make an additional donation: ? http://www.eff.org/support/ EFF is a member-supported nonprofit. Please sign up as a member today! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ReplayTV Users: "We Are Not Thieves" Customers Defend Right to Digital Recording Los Angeles - ReplayTV customers today sued the entertainment industry to protect their rights to skip over commercials and record television programs for later viewing using digital video recorders. Responding to both the lawsuit brought against ReplayTV and the industry's public claims that these actions are "theft," five customers, represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Ira Rothken of the Rothken Law Firm in San Rafael, filed a federal lawsuit in Los Angeles asking the court to rule that their use of the ReplayTV device is legal under copyright law. "The studios are using their copyrights as an excuse to control what individuals do with their own property in the privacy of their own homes," said EFF Intellectual Property Attorney Robin Gross. "These Hollywood guys want to stop me from using my digital video recorder like I use my VCR, like for watching shows when I want or zipping through commercials," explained Craig Newmark, craigslist.com community founder, ReplayTV user, and plaintiff in the case. "I want to give my nephews and nieces a break from the rampant consumerism on TV by using ReplayTV's commercial skipping feature." Last October, dozens of Hollywood movie and television studios sued ReplayTV and SonicBlue for making and distributing personal video recorders, claiming that consumers' use of such devices constitutes copyright violation and seeking a broad injunction that would prevent the further use, support, or sale of the machines. Along with Newmark, ReplayTV customers filing the lawsuit with legal representation by the EFF are: Keith Ogden, owner of a financial broker firm in San Francisco; Shawn Hughes, a small business owner in Georgia; Seattle journalist Glenn Fleishman; and southern Californian video engineer Phil Wright. Links: Press release: http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Newmark_v_Turner/20020606_eff_pr.html EFF complaint against entertainment industry: http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Newmark_v_Turner/20020606_complaint.html EFF case portal on Newmark et al. v Paramount et al.: http://www.eff.org/sc/newmark/ EFF case archive on Paramount v. ReplayTV case: http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Paramount_v_ReplayTV Paramount complaint against ReplayTV: http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Paramount_v_ReplayTV/20011031_complaint.html craigslist.com announcement on ReplayTV case: http://www.craigslist.org/craig.vs.hollywood.html Contacts: Robin Gross ? Intellectual Property Attorney ? Electronic Frontier Foundation ? robin@eff.org ? +1 415 436-9333 x112 (office), +1 415 637-5310 (cell) Fred von Lohmann ? Senior Intellectual Property Attorney ? Electronic Frontier Foundation ? fred@eff.org ? +1 415 436-9333 x123 (office), +1 415 215-6087 (cell) About EFF: The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading civil liberties organization working to protect rights in the digital world. Founded in 1990, EFF actively encourages and challenges industry and government to support free expression, privacy, and openness in the information society. EFF is a member-supported organization and maintains one of the most linked-to Web sites in the world: ? http://www.eff.org - end - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Court Rejects Hollywood Effort to Spy on ReplayTV Owners Los Angeles - On Thursday, May 30, District Court Judge Florence Marie Cooper rejected Hollywood's effort to force ReplayTV to develop and install"spyware" to monitor the viewing habits of ReplayTV owners. In October 2001, ReplayTV was sued in Los Angeles by 28 movie studios, television networks, and cable networks, which allege that owners of ReplayTV PVRs infringe copyrights when they skip commercials and share shows and that ReplayTV should be held responsible for these infringements. As part of preliminary discovery in the case, the Hollywood plaintiffs demanded that ReplayTV develop and install software that would monitor the viewing habits of ReplayTV owners. On April 26, 2002, a magistrate judge granted Hollywood's demand. EFF, along with a number of other civil liberties and privacy organizations, joined in an amicus brief filed by Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) asking the district court to reverse the magistrate's ruling. "As this incident makes clear, when Hollywood goes after technology companies instead of infringers, they often trample on the rights of innocent technology users," said Fred von Lohmann, EFF Senior Intellectual Property Attorney. "We are pleased that the court agreed that Hollywood is not entitled to order Replay to spy on its own customers." Links: The court's May 30, 2002 order ? http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Paramount_v_ReplayTV/20020531_replay_discovery_r eversal.pdf Amicus brief by EPIC, in which EFF joined: ? http://www.epic.org/privacy/replaytv/amici_brief_eick_order.pdf For general background on the ReplayTV lawsuit ? http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Paramount_v_ReplayTV/20020531_replay_ca_lawyer.p df For other case documents ? http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Paramount_v_ReplayTV/ Contacts: Fred von Lohmann ? EFF Senior Intellectual Property Atty. ? fred@eff.org ? +1 415-436-9333 x123 - end - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Organizations Wary of Plan to Restrict Digital Television EFF Rejects Non-Consensus Report Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Release For Immediate Release: Tuesday, June 4, 2002 San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), along with other non-profit organizations and publishers, on Tuesday criticized a Hollywood-backed plan to restrict digital TV equipment. The proposal, which aims at legislative control over television, was unveiled Tuesday in a report by the Broadcast Protection Discussion Group (BPDG). "Hollywood studios are demanding that the consumer electronics industry redesign digital televisions," said EFF Staff Technologist Seth Schoen. "Congress, industry, and consumers must all reject Hollywood's attempt to force an unconscionable government mandate restricting technology innovation and the rights of digital television consumers." If implemented, the BPDG's recommendations would restrict consumers from making and distributing legal copies of programs broadcast on digital television. A sample of the organizations endorsing EFF's comments are: DigitalConsumer.org; the Free Software Foundation; HDNet; Phillips; and The Computer and Communications Industry Association. BPDG was founded in November 2001 as a sub-group of the Copy Protection Technical Working Group (CPTWG). Allegedly representing an industry consensus, BPDG recently attained a high profile as a possible alternative to the controversial Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act (CBDTPA). EFF staff have participated in BPDG's meetings and conference calls since its inception. EFF submitted comments that were included as a dissenting opinion within the BPDG's final report. For the full press release and comments, see the links below. Links: For this release: ? http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/HDTV/20020604_eff_bpdg_pr.html Summary of EFF's comment on the BPDG report: ? http://bpdg.blogs.eff.org/archives/000121.html Full text of EFF's comments on the BPDG report: ? http://bpdg.blogs.eff.org/archives/000116.html EFF's BPDG "Consensus At Lawyerpoint" weblog: ? http://bpdg.blogs.eff.org/ Contacts: Seth Schoen ? Staff Technologist ? Electronic Frontier Foundation ? seth@eff.org ? +1 415-436-9333 x107 Fred von Lohmann ? Senior Intellectual Property Atty. ? Electronic Frontier Foundation ? fred@eff.org ? +1 415-436-9333 x123 About EFF: The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading civil liberties organization working to protect rights in the digital world. Founded in 1990, EFF actively encourages and challenges industry and government to support free expression, privacy, and openness in the information society. EFF is a member-supported organization and maintains one of the most linked-to Web sites in the world: ? http://www.eff.org - end - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Judge Focuses on "Betamax" Question in P2P File Sharing Case At a June 3rd hearing in the case against Morpheus over file-sharing software, the court agreed to narrow the issues in the case to the proper application of the "Betamax" legal doctrine. Last Fall, Hollywood record companies sued Streamcast, KaZaa, and Grokster - all distributors of P2P file-sharing software - and asked the court to ban the software under copyright law. Earlier this year, Streamcast filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, asking the court to declare that the technology is capable of "substantial non-infringing uses" under the Supreme Court's ruling in Betamax (Universal City Studios v. Sony). This is a positive development in the case. It indicates Judge Steven Wilson understands that the Betamax doctrine, the core legal principle protecting consumers rights to use video recordings as they choose absent explicit copyright infringement, is at the heart of this case. The parties next will be before the court on July 8th for a status conference. Links: MusicCity Archive: http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/ U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the Betamax case: http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/464_US_417.htm EFF Campaign for Audiovisual Free Expression: http://www.eff.org/cafe/ Contact: Robin Gross ? Intellectual Property Attorney ? Electronic Frontier Foundation ? robin@eff.org ? +1 415 436-9333 x112 (office), +1 415 637-5310 (cell) - end - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thanks To Server Folks The Electronic Frontier Foundation would like to thank the good folks at United Layer Inc. (http://www.unitedlayer.com) - a San Francisco based server farm and security company - for their generous donation of space for our server and bandwidth. The EFF web server had been hosted in-house on a T1 connection - but due to the support of our members and our success - we had saturated our connection and needed a bigger pipe to the world. Last week when Slashdot published an article about us that linked to a 1.8 Meg MP3 file, United Layer stepped in to provide us the bandwidth to serve that file. Now they are donating EFF all of our web server bandwidth. You can see who else has helped us out with goods, services, and funds by visiting our new thank you page at http://www.eff.org/thanks/index.html - end - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EFF Needs Office Chairs EFF is looking for some good office chairs. Fighting the good fight is hard on the vertebrae, so ergonomically-minded donations are especially welcome. We are in San Francisco, so donors should probably be in the Bay Area. Contact Ren Bucholz if you have questions or donations. Thanks in advance! Contact: Ren Bucholz ? Activist ? Electronic Frontier Foundation ? ren@eff.org ? +1 415 436-9333 x121 (office) - end - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Administrivia EFFector is published by: The Electronic Frontier Foundation 454 Shotwell Street San Francisco CA 94110-1914 USA +1 415 436 9333 (voice) +1 415 436 9993 (fax) ? http://www.eff.org/ Editor: Ren Bucholz, Activist ? ren@eff.org To Join EFF online, or make an additional donation, go to: ? http://www.eff.org/support/ Membership & donation queries: membership@eff.org General EFF, legal, policy or online resources queries: ask@eff.org Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged. Signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of EFF. To reproduce signed articles individually, please contact the authors for their express permission. Press releases and EFF announcements & articles may be reproduced individually at will. To subscribe to or unsubscribe from EFFector via the Web, go to: ? http://www.eff.org/signup/mailserv.html To subscribe to EFFector via e-mail, send to majordomo@eff.org a message BODY (not subject) of: ? subscribe effector The list server will send you a confirmation code and then add you to a subscription list for EFFector (after you return the confirmation code; instructions will be in the confirmation e-mail). To unsubscribe, send a similar message body to the same address, like so: ? unsubscribe effector (Please ask listmaster@eff.org to manually remove you from the list if this does not work for you for some reason.) To change your address, send both commands at once, one per line (i.e., unsubscribe your old address, and subscribe your new address). Back issues are available at: ? http://www.eff.org/effector To get the latest issue, send any message to effector-reflector@eff.org (or er@eff.org), and it will be mailed to you automatically. You can also get, via the Web: ? http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Newsletters/EFFector/current.html Back to table of contents Return to EFFector Newsletters Index ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ? EFF Welcome Page Please send any questions or comments to webmaster@eff.org ------------------------------------------------------- From tompoe at renonevada.net Thu Jun 6 19:32:33 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: EFF t-shirts are NICE! Message-ID: <02060617323300.13042@aether> Hi: Just got my EFF.org t-shirt. Takes a couple weeks, but they're really top quality. Nice. Put it on, went to a job interview, . . . . and they threw me out. Musta been my shoes. Thanks, Tom Reno, NV http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ From tompoe at renonevada.net Thu Jun 6 20:47:42 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: [seul-edu] Mandrake 9.0 will have LTSP In-Reply-To: <200206070927.07276.leon@brooks.fdns.net> References: <200206070927.07276.leon@brooks.fdns.net> Message-ID: <02060618474200.13313@aether> On Thursday 06 June 2002 18:27, Leon Brooks wrote: > ....hopefully out of the box. > > Someone has just posted to the Cooker list offering to employ two > programmers to work on an LTSP management front-end if Mandrake would > respond by packaging it. Another Cooker denizen responded by noting that it > would require LTSP, and Mandrake's response was `we're already working on > packaging that'. > > Cheers; Leon Hi: Once verified, the world is a whole new ball game! Wonderful. Thanks, Tom Poe Reno, NV http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ From tompoe at renonevada.net Fri Jun 7 12:08:39 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: BPDG Exemptions Explained . . . . Message-ID: <02060710083900.16641@aether> Hi: Hollywood wants exemption from the BPDG Requirements: http://www.studioforrecording.org/mt/archive/000032.html#000032 DVR's Illegal For All But Hollywood . . . . Thanks, Tom Poe http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ From apopovici at keysys.ro Tue Jun 11 07:21:47 2002 From: apopovici at keysys.ro (ADRIAN POPOVICIU) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: H E L L O ! Message-ID: Dipl. eng. POPOVICIU ADRIAN R O M A N I A June 11, 2002 Dear Sir, I learn recently about you from Internet network. My name is POPOVICIU ADRIAN. I graduated engineering at the electronic and electrotechnic faculty, speciality radioelectronics, in Europe (Bucharest). I have more 10 years work experience like tehnical support for instrumentation, computers, office devices and general electronic & electrical equipments. I looking to get a new job. You will find my CV (with photo and other abilities)at the address: http://a.popoviciu.tripod.com/index.html If you have a job opportunity please send an email at my address: apopovici@keysys.ro I can submit (if it is necessary) very good recommendations. With best greetings Yours sincerely Adrian Popoviciu From tompoe at renonevada.net Tue Jun 11 14:03:14 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: [fsl-discuss] Why ADTI's Whitepaper dislikes copyleft/GPL, and why it's not even applicable ... In-Reply-To: <20020611170956.GB29507@ix.netcom.com> References: <1023741035.30149.536.camel@bitman.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> <20020611170956.GB29507@ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <02061112031401.20277@aether> On Tuesday 11 June 2002 10:09, Karsten M. Self wrote: - - -snip - - - > This is marginally on topic. If not a final word, some damned good ones > were made by David Skoll, posted to The Register and his own site: > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/25659.html > http://www.roaringpenguin.com/adti2.php3 > > As several of the usual suspects are reporting, MITRE's study makes for > far more informed reading than ADTI's: > > http://www.mitre.org/support/papers/tech_papers_01/kenwood_software/index.s >html > > Peace. Hi: The part I like best, is where ADTI states the plight of our government should it choose to GPL its' software needs. The ADTI says, in effect, the government would be excluding competition and limiting vendors. Well, in response, if the government chooses GPL'd software as the way to go, we instantly increase the vendors about a gazillion-fold, bringing in every one-man shop to bid on the contracts. Even better, all the proprietary vendors would be able to compete on "equal footing" as-it-were. Weird stuff, these idiots profess. Thanks, Tom http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ From tompoe at renonevada.net Wed Jun 12 18:37:26 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: Third Grade Class in Washington Sends MPAA to "Quiet Time" . . . . Message-ID: <02061216354600.27382@aether> Hi: Here's a glowing example of our tax dollars at work: Protection Discussion Group) June 12, 2002 [Meetings] Tauzin's tasks and timetable http://bpdg.blogs.eff.org/ I encourage all to read Tauzin's list. It's kindergarten all over again. Absolutely one of the most embarrassing moments in his embarrassing existence. You would think that between he and his legal counsel[s], they would be able to determine the answers simply by reading the BPDG drafts. For example, this quote from May 24th? draft: "A proposal was later made by Philips and a small number of consumer electronics companies that, for a limited number of years (intended to capture the reasonable life of legacy DVD players), in-the-clear recordings of Unscreened Content and Marked Content could be made using standard definition DVD recorders. Motion picture companies opposed such a "grandfather" provision, inter alia, because tens of millions of legacy DVD-ROM drives would remain capable of unauthorized redistribution of such content when played back, including over the Internet." Does anyone read this out of context quote, and not realize that with the capability to remotely disable devices, Hollywood has any intentions, other than to destroy as much equipment as possible as quickly as possible? Simply by pursuing the "Ooops, didn't mean to flip the switch" strategy? Shall we ask the Apple users what they think? What Tauzin et al, need to do, is to quite the charade, and pass summary judgement on this whole mess. Thanks, tom http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ From tompoe at renonevada.net Sun Jun 16 11:09:47 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:15 2004 Subject: Question about status of SVG In-Reply-To: <20020612024147.GD5226@grorg.org> References: <02061117460200.21952@aether> <20020612024147.GD5226@grorg.org> Message-ID: <02061609094700.15502@aether> Hi, Dean: I'm copying this to a couple of journalists, as I think this might be of interest. Below, I've left the previous correspondence attached, so that we can all be on the same page, so-to-speak. I wasn't quite sure how to take your response, "Is this enough detail for you?", so I have had the message sitting in my Batik mail folder for a few days. I need to ask, just what you intended by stating, "- - - there are patents, but they are available on royalty-free terms (as long as you don't sue the patent holders for infringing your patents)." That is one of the most absurd statements I've been subjected to. No offense, as I believe you were absolutely sincere in writing it. If you have time, I would appreciate your explaining why you wrote that in response to my original request. I need the patent information and the names of the patent holders, and their contact addresses. I will arrange for a Memorandum of Understanding. A Memorandum of Understanding, as you know, cuts both ways, and should provide assurance that they, as patent holders will not sue me for royalty fees. Most people would probably expect the W3.org to hold such a Memorandum of Understanding on behalf of all of the world community. Unless I'm mistaken, this approach is not currently being followed. Your article, which seemed to be written as a spokesperson for the W3.org standards body on SVG makes no mention of patent encumberances: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/javascript/2002/06/06/svg_future.html I look forward to hearing from you. Respectfully, Tom Poe Reno, NV http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ On Tuesday 11 June 2002 19:41, you wrote: > On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, tom poe wrote: > > Hi, Dean: What is the status of SVG at this time? Is it encumbered by > > patents? > > Hi Tom, > > Short answer: No. > > Longer answer: Yes, there are patents, but they are available on > royalty-free terms (as long as you don't sue the patent holders for > infringing your patents). > > Is this enough detail? > > Dean From tompoe at renonevada.net Tue Jun 18 20:52:22 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:16 2004 Subject: How Loud Can You Shout? . . . . Message-ID: <02061818522200.30250@aether> Hi: I think Larry Lessig says it best, http://www.reason.com/0206/fe.jw.cyberspaces.shtml "And now, if digital content has a built-in copy protection system, you aren't allowed to interfere with it, even if the content isn't protected by copyright laws. I have bought a number of eBooks, including Aristotle's Politics. Aristotle's Politics, of course, was never copyrighted, but the Adobe eBook reader forbids me from printing any pages of the book because the permissions have been set to disable any printing. If I try to interfere with those permissions .. if I write a bit of code to disable the limitations that forbid me from printing Aristotle's Politics from my Adobe eBook .. that would be circumventing an access technology, which under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is a crime." Extrapolate that message to the work taking place with the BPDG. Are they one and the same? If so, just how in the he#$ can we let that happen? Someone tell me it ain't so! Using every means possible, I would like to see this quote repeated to every email list, posted on every weblog, and site around the country. It deserves a title that will be instantly recognized, e.g., The REAL DMCA. Let's all get behind this, now, and don't stop shouting until the DMCA goes down. Thanks, Tom Poe Reno, NV http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ From tompoe at renonevada.net Wed Jun 19 13:11:10 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:16 2004 Subject: Linking Policy on NPR In-Reply-To: <1D27AA609CF8D411B6080050DA06ED5903E8C353@NPR-02-MSG> References: <1D27AA609CF8D411B6080050DA06ED5903E8C353@NPR-02-MSG> Message-ID: <02061911111000.01413@aether> Hi: That's the weakest explanation I've heard yet. I suggest NPR, and it's Board of Directors, put their little hats on [their thinking hats], and invite Lawrence Lessig to present a tutorial on common sense. Short of that, they should all view the Creative Commons Project, at: http://www.creativecommons.org/ prepare their site with the assistance of those fine folks, and open the doors back up for the General Public. Thanks, Tom Poe Reno, NV http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ On Wednesday 19 June 2002 10:42, Jeffrey Dvorkin wrote: > Unfortunately, this is a complicated issue. Moreover, I am not a > lawyer. However, a few reasons come quickly to mind. First, the NPR content > is noncommercial, and for journalistic reasons NPR does not want commercial > entities to use it, whether by link or otherwise, without our consent and > then in only limited ways. > Second, we do not want our content associated inappropriately with > issue action organizations. So we do not want the People For Left-Handed > Fascists (or some such entity) to have a link on their site that somehow > might be construed as associating NPR with their mission. People might > misunderstand the NPR relationship. > Third, we do not want others by linking to repackage NPR content as > all or part of a basis for their own Web radio site. That would be illegal > and unfair competition. > Finally, NPR does not completely forbid links, only those which we > do not consent to. Upon request we often allow links that do not run afoul > of the above problems (and a few others). > > Jeffrey A. Dvorkin > NPR Ombudsman > 635 Massachusetts Avenue NW > Washington, DC 20001 > Tel: 202-513-3246 (direct) > Fax: 202-513-3329 > E-Mail ombudsman@npr.org > jdvorkin@npr.org > http://www.npr.org/yourturn/ombudsman From gouranga16 at freestart.hu Fri Jun 28 20:23:55 2002 From: gouranga16 at freestart.hu (gouranga16@freestart.hu) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:16 2004 Subject: Call Out Gouranga Be Happy Message-ID: <200206282204.g5SM40015181@mail.pm.org> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.pm.org/archives/renotahoe-pm/attachments/20020628/8011c0a4/attachment.htm From tompoe at renonevada.net Sun Jun 30 01:25:21 2002 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Wed Aug 4 00:06:16 2004 Subject: Have you begun to wonder why DRM is for the masses and not for business? Message-ID: <3D1EA451.1060207@renonevada.net> Hi: Wasn't that long ago, as I recall, that there was tremendous hype about B2B, e-commerce, and secure networks. Everyone headed to the gold rush for those fat corporate contracts. This last 10 days, seems like the same hype is going on, but this time it's about your computer and my computer being able to be secure, engage in secure banking, credit card transactions, freedom from spam, and those inglorious crackers that are invading the home computers. The solutions are all wrapped up in this thing called DRM. Get one, you'll like it. In fact, M$ has already put out the first patch that downloads some DRM features for those who have Media Player installed. Of course, they haven't said so, directly, as there might be some users gagging. So, since Berman's got this little legal legislative vigilante thing cooking, no need to wait, eh? Now, we can assume that companies don't really go for their employees all having media players running en masse, so the path to DRM for B2B has to be a different one. Does anyone know what that might be? In the meantime, why is there such a big push for getting DRM into the home computer? It can't be because the corporations and banks are all set up. So, I'm wondering and pondering. Why would you hype the homeowner when you haven't set up the receiving end? And, why would you do that first? Is it because DRM doesn't work? Won't work? Or is it something else? I checked over at the ICANN activity board. It sounds like there's rumbling in Congress about having to make a final decision whether to just yank control out of the hands of everyone, and take it into the U.S. government. Imagine that. I suspect they'll indicate it is only a temporary thing, til they get stuff all organized. Then they'll turn the Internet Gatekeeper responsibilities over to someone else, maybe Verizon? So, we have a big push to drive everyone to DRM. We have control of IP addressing in a big power play, and we have business still waiting without saying a word, quietly waiting. We have Hollywood lying low until at least the middle of the month. And, again, this stupid DRM hype by these cheap whores in the mainstream media spewing garbage in order to get one more paycheck. If you find yourself in a trench with someone named McCollom, you might as well put your gun to your head and pull the trigger. If you don't, he certainly will. My dialup ISP gets to send me emails about kicking me off during peak hours, because I'm running at the top of their list for uptime, and I need to get off and let others get on. During these discussions, I'll call and ask some question or another, and they bring up my account info, with activity stats. They track it all, folks. Today, not some time in the future when it will be required. How surprising will it be, when I receive the email that informs me that Linux is illegal, and that DRM is required for access to the Internet? The reason being, of course, that it is a Good Thing, and will let me pay my bills securely online. I won't be able to access certain sites, though, because it would violate my DRM requirements for secure and safe and high-quality content promises. Those sites might be Open Source sites. They might be alternative music sites run by musicians and artists that are not signed by RIAA, or haven't registered their fees with ASCAP, BMI, SESAC. Little stuff, you know? Earlier, Diesel at BSDVAULT reported the latest EULA from M$ [thanks for alerting us, Jon], indicating that the patch may disable - - - and cause other software to not work. I sent him an email, wondering if he had tested to see which Open Source apps might be affected. He's testing to see right now.And will notify everyone when he gets his results. All in all, I'm wondering if there isn't a timeline for the sh$%^ to hit the fan that is coming up real, real fast. If you're still reading, thanks for listening. Just trying to get a handle on why the big push to DRM home users, and not businesses. Maybe it has something to do with taking away copy/paste capability. Some idiot offered that it's no big thing. Fair use isn't taken away, as long as you use a pencil and paper to copy what you want to remember. Thanks, Tom Reno, NV -- http://www.studioforrecording.org/ http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/ http://renotahoe.pm.org/ -- Hollywood's BPDG Group ?!? Never heard of them. What did they do in technology except manage to put on their tie without accidentaly killing themselves ?!? [ modified quote from dm@zensunni.demon.nl ] --