FSF Starts Anti-ACTA Campaign 173
judgecorp writes "Free Software Foundation president Richard Stallman has said in a blog post that the ACTA file-sharing proposals punish users unfairly. He wrote, 'Any time there is a proposal to change things for the worse, the obvious way to oppose it is to campaign for the status quo. To campaign for the status quo suggests the approach of singing its praises; thus, praising WIPO is a natural way to highlight how ACTA is a step for the worse. However, where there have been previous changes for the worse, lauding the status quo tends to legitimize them. The past 20 years have seen global waves of harmful changes in copyright law — some promoted by WIPO. To confront a further assault by presenting the status quo as ideal means we stop fighting to reverse them. It means that our adversaries need only propose a further affront to our rights to gain our acceptance of their last affront. Instead of making the status quo our ideal, we should demand positive changes to recover freedoms already lost.' The FSF has launched a petition against the ACTA proposals."
Also known as the Overton Window (Score:5, Informative)
"praising WIPO is a natural way to highlight how ACTA is a step for the worse. However, where there have been previous changes for the worse, lauding the status quo tends to legitimize them"
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window [wikipedia.org]
Or better yet use the existing problem to advantag (Score:4, Interesting)
The best way to get a problem like copyright legislation is to use it against those who created it. Follow the trail of greed, find individuals responsible and track what copyrights they violate.
Make them turn on themselves like a bunch of rabid animals and sit back and laugh as they tear themselves apart.
Not that it would work because they don't want to fight each other they just want to pick on the little defenseless suckers that get singled out.
I thought I would just throw out my stupid idea while we are dreaming.
Re: (Score:3)
Kinda like this video from Youtube which accuses Viacom of the same infringment that they claim Youtube has done?
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly but you have to go against the people not the business. If you sue Viacom no one in the company cares because it is the legal department that handles it. But if you sue the CEO of Viacom in small claims locally that would be funny. Of course you have to have a legit claim against them.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think using their own dirty tricks against them is a way to make much progress. They can afford to play by their own rules.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
They can afford to play by the rules, but they probably don't.
So the tactic may work in the short term. Do you think that music producers or Simon Cowell (or the executives lower down in the pecking order) ever pay for music that they listen to? No, they assume that they can just copy it and that the person copied from should be honoured at the possibility of getting noticed by the aristocracy. Heck, they assume they can put it into a track and sell it and worry about the "clearance" afterwards.
At the very
Worried about ACTA impact on patent law (Score:5, Interesting)
My concern about ACTA is not related to copyright law but to its effect on patents. Copyright law is practically always infringed by intent, while patent infringement in the field of software is in most cases inadvertent (that's the most fundamental problem I have with software patents). It would be desirable to introduce into patent law, at least in connection with software, an independent invention defense. However, ACTA in the version I saw might do quite the opposite, treating a patent infringer as a "pirate" once he is made aware of an infringement (for an example, by a cease-and-desist letter). That's unreasonable and unjust in my view. I blogged about that [blogspot.com].
Recently I read on Twitter that the US Trade Representative told knowledge rights activist Jamie Love [twitter.com] that the US wouldn't mind throwing patents out of ACTA and instead the US government blames the EU for wanting patents included. Since those negotiations take place behind closed doors, it's not easy to verify that claim. However, it's more likely than not to be accurate. It would be good if EU-based activists could inquire about this (especially with help from Members of the European Parliament). With pressure from inside the EU there may be a chance to get patents thrown out of ACTA altogether. I know a lot of people here are at least equally interested in copyright issues but to many of us patents are the number one concern.
For those interested in EU processes relevant to free and open source software, here's a link to a blog post [blogspot.com] on a talk I gave on the subject (not discussing ACTA per se in detail, but with a couple of slides on EU patent policy in general) at LinuxTag in Berlin last week. LinuxTag is Germany's and probably Europe's largest open source event. The blog post I just linked to contains links to the presentation.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
i suspect we will see each party blame the other, and if one looked closer, find the same lobbying entities behind them both.
its the age old problem of the sick leader allowing the soothsayer to run the show from behind the throne.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
an independent invention defense.
Good idea, I hope it gets around.
Re: (Score:2)
Copyright law is practically always infringed by intent
The one big exception here is music. What steps would you recommend that a songwriter take to avoid falling victim to something like Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music and Three Boys Music v. Michael Bolton, where someone copied another song's hook by accident?
It would be desirable to introduce into patent law, at least in connection with software, an independent invention defense.
If patent law changes to recognize independent invention as evidence in favor of obviousness to a person skilled in the art, that might not be too hard to square against the existing law.
Effectiveness of petitions (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Effectiveness of petitions (Score:4, Funny)
That's just the first step! Once they get enough signatures, they'll print signs and hold protests on campuses all over Boston. From then, if ACTA isn't dropped, a e-mail campaign will be started to get people to forward e-mails to all of their friends!
Soon the international coptywrite cartels will be begging for mercy!
Re: (Score:2)
That's just the first step! Once they get enough signatures, they'll print signs and hold protests on campuses all over Boston!
They'll need a new mascot. Everyone loves a mascot. Windows 7 Sins [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
So, what's the alternative to a petition? Fire-bomb a senator's house?? Unless you're a multi-billion dollar corporation, you have no legal way to really influence your own government, let alone influence the internationals deciding treaties in secret behind closed doors.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is exactly what they want you to think. The reality is that you can make a difference [eff.org]. Let your legislators know your own personal opinion of the ACTA. They are your government representation and are supposed to be voting in your interest. If you can't take the time to firmly and politely inform them of y
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
(Including sitting back and complaining about things on the Internet.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Right. This from the EFF, turning back the tide since 1990. Since then we've gotten the No Electronic Theft Act, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a new "inducement" infringement tort, losses in the 2600 case and Blizzard v. bnetd, etc. The reality is that the EFF can't make a difference _either_.
Re: (Score:2)
They are your government representation and are supposed to be voting in your interest.
If my representative and senators don't vote in my interest, and I don't live in a swing district (in fact, I've seen a representative run unopposed), then what should I do?
Re: (Score:2)
You want something that works? Write letters. Real, honest to goodness, handwritten on dead tree letters. And get others to do it. Not e-mails, faxes, automated letter writers, real letters created by a real person.
And get all your friends and other copyright advocates to do it. Send them to your representatives and copies to the local papers. Do it every week until you get a non-form letter reply. And then start doing it twice a week.
On-line petitions are too easy and have no weight with anyone. A
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I've written letters to my elected representatives. They are replied to with a form letter, and probably not even read by anyone other than an intern. If you want them to actually pay attention, then go and speak to them in person.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The EFF is doing a little more in the way of advocacy, but for some reason the Obama administration has decided to defend the Bush administration classification of information related to ACTA.
The EFF and Public Knowledge announced today [eff.org] that they dropped a lawsuit against the US Trade Representative to release background documents related to ACTA.
Re: (Score:2)
announced today
I believe your clock is running about a year behind.
The Usefulness of Petitions (Score:2)
..or at least the usefulness of this one, is to state clearly what is and isn't acceptable in this treaty, make people aware and get a consensus about it. I mean, there are a lot of people here who would agree with the statement, "ACTA is bad, make it go away", but it's not a very constructive way to engage with policy makers or the unaware.
The statement "ACTA must respect sharing and cooperation: it must do nothing that would hinder the unremunerated noncommercial making, copying, giving, lending, owning,
More of an anti-copyright campaign (Score:2)
Here's the first item on their list:
ACTA must respect sharing and cooperation: it must do nothing that would hinder the unremunerated noncommercial making, copying, giving, lending, owning, using, transporting, importing or exporting of any objects or works
They essentially only want copyright to prohibit making money by copying, etc., the works of others.
Sounds reasonable to me (Score:3, Insightful)
They essentially only want copyright to prohibit making money by copying, etc., the works of others.
That sure sounds reasonable to me.
Re: (Score:2)
It's also a very good way to get the campaign dismissed out of hand due to unrealistic demands.
Re: (Score:2)
How does it sound reasonable to you? Someone makes a movie. It costs them, say, $30 million. They try to sell DVDs of the movie to try to get back that $30 million, and maybe even make a profit.
So the DVDs go on sale, and the first person who buys a copy rips it and puts it up on the P2P networks. If the FSF had its way, this would be completely legal as long as the P2P networks are not commercial.
So where do the people that made the movie get their $30 million from? Ask for donations? Movies aren't like c
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, RMS wants all software to be free.
I don't always agree with his politics but I do share his concerns.
For example from the TFA:
I agree that being accused of sharing is not enough to justify disconnection.
However if they are con
Re: (Score:2)
Software that break DRM is tool and can be used for legal reasons too. What if I wanted to run a program that I purchased but can't because my netbook doesn't have a CD-ROM drive?
Buying a game that uses disc-based copy authentication and trying to run it on a netbook is like buying a PSP UMD game and trying to run it on a PSP Go, or like buying a PS3 game and trying to run it on a PS2. It's not designed for that. Vote with your dollars against PC games that require the disc during play.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But what if it's an old game that isn't sold anymore and I already owned it years before I bought the netbook?
You can't run NES cartridges on your PS3 either.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry. You lost me on that one. How does the inability to run NES cartridges (nintendo) on my PS3 (sony) have anything to do with my inability to run a PC Game?
Especially when I already own the title, there is no emulation since the OS is the same, and the only difference between my old system and the netbook is the lack of CD-ROM drive.
Re: (Score:2)
there is no emulation since the OS is the same
You can't run Windows 3.1 apps on Windows 7 if, like most PCs that come with Windows 7, your PC has a 64-bit CPU and a 64-bit operating system. The OS is the same (Windows), yet the 64-bit edition can't run 16-bit apps, not even by running wowexec inside wow64.
and the only difference between my old system and the netbook is the lack of CD-ROM drive.
Why haven't you already bought an external one? Do you not plan on reinstalling the operating system after a couple years?
Re: (Score:2)
Well the games I have ran in Windows XP and both the old computer and the netbook is 32 bit or for all intents and purposes run in 32 bit mode. Anyway, the game was designed to run on Windows XP and higher with DirectX.
Well I do own an external C
"Recover" freedoms? (Score:3, Insightful)
Richard, I love ya and everything you've done for the open source community, just want that clear. Now what the sam hell are you doing telling us to "recover" our freedoms? You don't recover freedom -- you fight for it. You disobey, you protest, you drum up support, tear down walls, and throw wrenches in the establishment. Freedom isn't free, and you won't get it by firing off strongly worded letters.
Look at it from the other side -- the ACTA is about trying to make a global police framework to try and stop file sharinng. Let them pass it. Let the government sink billions upon billions tryinng to solve the problem, while we come up with ever more clever ways to evade detection, and eat away at their bottom lines. The ACTA is about moving the costs from an industry to a global support group of governments. Now is the time to maximize damage -- gut their bank accounts, make free copies pervasive.
Slip how-to manuals into people's mailboxes, leave CDs on the bus with instructions on how to get stuff for free, build and distribute new tools that are harder to track, use stronger encryption, and frustrate traffic analysis efforts. Bury these fuckers to the point where for every dollar they can recover through this kind of legislation they have to pay five more. Keep the hurt machine running at full power.
That's how you defeat the ACTA and protect your freedoms -- by going on the offensive. If they have no rules, neither should we. They want to hand this mess over to the government and we should be only too happy to obliege them -- let's make it cost more than the combined budget of all of law enforcement to recover what little cash they're getting back now. Eventually the costs for this will make it a public spectacle and people will question why we're diverting so much money and throwing all these people in jail and ruining their lives and the general public will finally ask the question it should have been asking years ago:
Is it worth it?
Re: (Score:2)
Yo, I'ma let you finish, but Braveheart had one of the best speeches on freedom of all time! One of the best speeches of all time!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I suggest thinking, just a little bit, about the end points that are possible. How about picking from the list below:
Re: (Score:2)
After all, we are looking at 20-30% of the economy disappearing in the US overnight.
Yeah, because we moved to a service-based economy and then signed treaties and laws which put those services in a global marketplace, competing with a vastly larger labor pool. The net result is we lost all those jobs to other countries, who now sell their cheaper services back to us. End result is less of our dollars are circulating in the country where they can contribute to the multiplier effect.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I think number 2 is the way it is going.
Let's say 2 happens. Why would I care if the next Angelina Jolie has to get a real job instead? Or if some media exec has to blow guys in a park to get his drug fix? I can go to pub and see a live bad if I want music, or buy it from their website (download or hardcopy - this already works for software). Limited audience / commercial-use publications will still exist because the demand is there, just not from the file-sharing masses.
They knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash.
Re: (Score:2)
There is an undeniably brilliant way of eating away at their bottom line that is, always has been, and always will be undetectable, no matter how much money is spent on enforcement or improving
Re: (Score:2)
Eventually the costs for this will make it a public spectacle and people will question why we're diverting so much money and throwing all these people in jail and ruining their lives and the general public will finally ask the question it should have been asking years ago:
Is it worth it?
just like the war on drugs?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I appreciate your passion, but you're missing one point. These treaties will push the burden of enforcement from the copyright holder more onto the governments. So part of what you're suggesting is to waste government money, taxpayer money. Civil disobedience is necessary in many cases, but we have to be preventative as well, if nothing else so that we can say "we told you so".
The message to future elections has to be "You wasted our money and we tried to stop you, and we hate you for it." Hurt the mach
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Eventually the costs for this will make it a public spectacle and people will question why we're diverting so much money and throwing all these people in jail and ruining their lives and the general public will finally ask the question it should have been asking years ago: Is it worth it?
Yess...because that has worked so very well in the so-called "War on Drugs", no?
Or, even more on point, the "War on Smoking" which is *actually* legal (really, it is!), but since a minority of people get right stuffed when they see (or hear or smell or visualize) others doing it, smokers have been dehumanized to the point that, in some places, they can't even stand in the middle of an open park to indulge their habit. Exactly how many people have been 'saved' from the 'effects' of second hand smoke as
Re:"Recover" freedoms? (Score:4, Insightful)
I agree with your first paragraph about resistance.
But extra resistance for an unnecessary conflict is where I draw the line. Once the govt does start sinking billions into the new policies, there will be an investment in them that makes them entrenched. What's more, the govt isn't some distant enemy... they are right here using OUR resources for this shit.
So the attitude of "who cares what they do, we'll eventually win" I do not agree with. Its encouraging the waste of money, resources, trust and civility.
The best course is to prevent something like ACTA from being adopted in the first place.
let ACTA pass (Score:5, Insightful)
its a farce
all of copyright law is based on a dead technological era. well, copyright law as applied to agreements between creators, say: the company that films the adaptation of harry potter and jk rowlings, for example, is still valid, because the parties in the agreement are finite
but copyright law as applied to end consumers is completely and utterly unenforceable. its not like you need to have a vinyl printing plant or a tape duplicator to spread media anymore. you simply need to be able to point and click. additionally, its completely international, and completely without economics: the cost to send 100,000 copies of lady gaga to johannesburg, novosibirsk, cartagena, etc is exactly the same as sending one copy of lady gaga across town. your agerage 15 year old today has more publishing power worldwide than bertelsmann, time warner, etc., had in 1990. this really means something, and what it means is: copyright law (as applied to end consumers), is dead, and unenforceable
so let them make ACTA as draconian as the morons want. who fucking cares? 10,000 lawyers in western countries versus 10 million media hungry, technologically savvy and, most importantly, POOR teenagers, worldwide, is no contest. of course i understand the EFF, they are protesting on the matter of principle. and to this extent, they should protest, and you should join them. but remember who we are dealing with here: the media industry. a bunch of sociopathic assholes. principles don't matter to them, so the EFF won't sway them. so i say: go ahead register your principled objections, to clear your conscience, but do not grow disheartened by a lack of response from the lizards. rejoice in the fact the lizards are at an end game, and are dying out, and that there ridiculous ACTA is a useless folly
its called disruptive technology for a reason: it disrupts the status quo. the printing press did away with monarchies, the gun did way with the feudal caste system, the automobile created suburbia, the nuclear bomb did away with world wars, etc.: technology changes society and the law. the law and society do not change technology. well, that's never stopped one shortsighted asshole after another from trying, but their efforts are always futile and pointless, just causing a lot of temporary pain for innocent bystanders. in the end, none of their posturing matters: the internet will assimilate the media industry, resistance is futile
the internet has rendered copyright law as applied to end consumers null and void, despiter all the believers to the contrary, despite all the power they hold. its a fait accompli
the media industry's job now is to embrace its obsolescence. of course, it goes down kicking and screaming instead. but again, who fucking cares? let them pass the most draconian ACTA anyone can imagine in their worst nightmares. UNENFORCEABLE. END OF STORY
RIP, vinyl record era copyright law. i'm certain you will exist on the books for a long time to come. but in terms of being an enforceable concept on end consumers in an internet-using society, you're toast
Re: (Score:2)
Hi.
Please post links to your materials from Bangamovie!
We need nice fresh meat for da InterBeast to play with!
http://bangamovie.com/ [bangamovie.com]
(Pun intended!)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
your agerage 15 year old today has more publishing power worldwide than bertelsmann, time warner, etc., had in 1990. this really means something, and what it means is: copyright law (as applied to end consumers), is dead, and unenforceable
The fifteen year old is an unlicensed distributor, not a publisher.
He doesn't put anything new on the market - and he has no interest in reprinting anything old. No interest in serving an audience older or younger than himself.
The product he offers is second-rate.
The amat
Re: (Score:2)
The fifteen year old is an unlicensed distributor, not a publisher.
He doesn't put anything new on the market - and he has no interest in reprinting anything old. No interest in serving an audience older or younger than himself.
The product he offers is second-rate.
Clearly you were unaware of this. [youtube.com]
Song of the South (Score:2)
Netflix can keep 100,000 videos in its catalog, 20,000 on-line, and contract to have its service built in to every Internet enabled video device priced over $100.
But not even the mighty Netflix can offer Disney's Song of the South.
Copyright worst cases (Score:2)
so let them make ACTA as draconian as the morons want. who fucking cares?
If we allow copyright owners' power to expand unbridled, imagine not being able to create your own works for fear that they will be too similar [spiderrobinson.com] to a work controlled by an incumbent publisher. Or imagine not being able to buy a home PC because all the PC makers have switched to making cryptographically locked-down appliances (like the iPad) for fear of contributory infringement liability. Only professional software developers working for established companies are eligible to buy PCs [gnu.org].
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Please see my response to girlintraining here: http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1689618&cid=32608916 [slashdot.org]
You could make the same 'unenforceable' case about drugs (they can be grown or synthesized easily at home using todays technology), but the reality is that the War On Drugs was a pretext for putting inner cities under a sort of martial law. The result is that in the USA the police have been militarized and the prison system has grown to proportions that are unprecedented in human history.
So I sugge
Um, no (Score:3, Insightful)
There's is no "drugs are harmless routine" coming from me, that's for sure.
YOU are the moron if you cannot distinguish between a society that copes with illegal substances as a matter of routine police work, and one that increasingly imposes martial-law style tactics on its own population (you know, the WAR in the "War On Drugs").
What ACTA represents is a possible "War On Piracy" which could reinforce police state patterns in this and many other countries. That's a road we should just not go down.
if you didn't want a flame response (Score:3, Informative)
you wouldn't call yourself the velvet flamebait
and here's my flame free rebuttal:
world before internet: 99% of artists were poor. 0.9% one hit wonders signed contracts with distributors in which they got pennies and a ride in a limo for a few months. 0.1% muscled in on the distributor's game and made fair money
world after internet: 99% artists are still poor (this is the way it always was and always will be). 0.5% make enough contact over the internet with their fans to make some money from gigs ( http://en [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
distributors are parasites that only existed because someone had to manufacture the media.
Distributors have historically functioned as promoters. Under your preferred business model, who would perform that function?
the internet has made that process defunct
Not everybody has a home PC and high-speed Internet access, especially the older generation that listens to pop standards and vocal jazz.
Re: (Score:2)
Distributors have historically functioned as promoters. Under your preferred business model, who would perform that function?
hmmm... that's a hard one. maybe something that begins with "i" and ends in "nternet"
actuallly, that's actually what distributors will morph into: promoters. pop music isn't going away. in fact this business model: giving away music for free for exposure has an obvious predecessor: radio. so they give away the mp3s for free, and thereby sell warm butts in stadium seats. presto bingo:
Re: (Score:2)
Parent should be modded insightful.
MPAA approves of camcording at home (Score:2)
Change video cameras to blur copyrighted material
If video equipment makers are not required to do so by law, at least one manufacturer will take away others' business by not recognizing watermarks. This brand would look attractive to the MPAA representative who recommended camcording [arstechnica.com] for classroom fair use. If they are, someone would sue to have the law overturned. The opinion of the Supreme Court in Eldred v. Ashcroft hinted that fair use is the necessary part of copyright that keeps it from violating the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of express
DRM Removal Tools Illegal (Score:5, Insightful)
requires countries to prohibit software that can break Digital Restrictions Management (DRM), also known as digital handcuffs
So if someone has a library of DRM protected Flash videos and seeks to convert them to some new HTML5 format, they are not allowed to use a simple conversion tool to convert their entire video library. They are instead required to find the original DRM-free source of each video - if it exists?
Re:DRM Removal Tools Illegal (Score:4, Insightful)
Law enforcement (Score:2)
people that get DRMed government documents that are proof of a crime can't (by that proposal, the constitution of most places will disagree) publish that document in a format that the public or a judge will be able to read
The language of ACTA is modeled closely on that of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which has an explicit exemption for circumvention related to law enforcement.
Re: (Score:2)
I found the article clear and well explained. Perhaps it is a reading comprehension issue on your part?
Or perhaps you did not read the article, but are referring to the quote in the ./ story. It is not as bad as you make it out to be, but is clearer in the context of the article.
Have you ever... (Score:2)
slogged through the GPL? I did, admittedly sometime in the early nineties, and I found it to be one of the most self-agrandizing masturabtory exercises in literature that I have ever encountered (even worse than that last sentence). Instead of making clear statements, RMS prefers to build a series of statements that are dependent of each other for reference or support.
I do not know if there is any real value to it, or if RMS just wants to believe that it requires a 'greater intelligence' to read his work
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I certainly don't agree with everything RMS has to say, but I do respect his intelligence and his conviction. Signed the petition, too.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Honestly, I agree with RMS more than disagree.
However, vi is the superior editor
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The real question is, how is the first goddamn post redundant? Idiot mods.
Anyway, I'll help you out.
He says normally you resist bad policy by promoting how good things are without it.
This, however, obviously implies that things are good without it.
If things are bad and getting worse, promoting the bad in favor of something worse legitimizes the bad. All policy makers need to do to legitimize bad policy then is to simply introduce worse policy, which gets people to accept the bad in favor of something wors
Re:Status.... Um.... What? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Have to also say that an immature person is preferable to the MPAA and RIAA trying to take over the world.
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, it's pretty easy to be right when you're a cynic and don't trust people who plan on making money off of you.
Re:Status.... Um.... What? (Score:4, Funny)
Stallman might make accurate predictions (though I wouldn't say that all his predictions are all that accurate - it's just that you don't hear much about those which are not), but his suggestions as to how things should be done instead are utopian, to put it politely.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That may be true but really, almost every one of his predictions has come true in one way or another. As much as I really would like to dismiss him as having unworkable policies, he has been spot on for almost everything
Examples? Most of things that come to mind where I think of things turning out the way the FSF wanted have done so in spite of the FSF. For example, most music is now sold DRM-free. The FSF had almost nothing to do with this. Free software is widely used--because of the Open Source movement, with RMS unable to run any of the top Linux distributions because they contain software he considers to be non-free.
RMS is very much like Richard Altmayer from the Isaac Asimov story "In A Good Cause--".
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Then look at the article on Trusted Computing ( http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.html [gnu.org] ) and then look at the Kindle remotely deleting c
Re:Same question... (Score:4, Insightful)
that I asked myself when I read the GPL. why the FUCK doesn't Stallman communicate directly and get away from the obsufcated communication style that he uses.
If the GPL causes you so much distress, I suggest you go try to read a typical proprietary EULA. Then maybe that will cause your head to explode and we'll all be better off.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL; this coming from someone who couldn't figure out how to log in. That's rich. I think YOU are the status quo. DIAF.
Re:I will do my civic duty and sign these petition (Score:4, Interesting)
While there is a time and place for some "binding" contracts such as bi-laterally reducing nuclear weapons stockpiles (lets face it, we don't need thousands upon thousands of warheads that could get lost/stolen/etc.), things like the ACTA and also to some degree the UN effectively force the US to give up its own sovereignty, placing lawmaking not in the hands of elected officials, but unelected delegates from not just the US but almost every other country.
Free trade is easy to accomplish, simply let people purchase goods from foreign countries just like domestic products, only using internationally recognized standards such as gold, silver, platinum, palladium, oil, etc. However, in this day and age, its hard to avoid entangling alliances that infringe on the sovereignty of the USA.
Re:I will do my civic duty and sign these petition (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, the US is misusing ACTA to change its own laws. All those draconian steps in ACTA were promoted and forced through by nothing less than the US Government, to protect what is essentially an economy that relies increasingly on immaterial goods after having outsourced manufacturing to China and elsewhere. Other ACTA participants are bearing the pressure of the US here, rather than vice-versa.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It could be... but fortunately, ACTA still needs to be ratified by all parliaments before it goes into effect. There may be some arm-twisting going on, but ultimately, every country could -- at least in theory -- just say no by not ratifying it.
Plus, what kind of pressure could Morocco exert on the US? Would they cancel the free trade agreement that gives them much more advantages than it gives the US? And why would they want to, since they have so little intellectual property to protect, compared to the US
Re:I will do my civic duty and sign these petition (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't a "law" this is an agreement, meaning it basically passes without the consent of the people.
Ratified treaties are just as much "laws" as anything passed by Congress. Perhaps you need to re-read the Constitution?
This is exactly what the founding fathers warned us about with "Free Trade With All, Entangling Alliances With None".
Except that you're wrongly attributing a quote that paraphrases something Jefferson said as if all the Founding Fathers were of a similar opinion. This is not true. Amongst those that can be named, James Monroe is probably the most obvious example of disagreeing with such a notion.
Re:I will do my civic duty and sign these petition (Score:5, Interesting)
Essentially the US is letting other countries write the laws for us.
As someone who lives in another country, let me assure you it's exactly the other way around. Many of the proposals in the leaked document come directly from US law, and are being pushed down everyone else's throat with the threat of being blacklisted if we don't agree to it. For instance, Canada's new law that forbids breaking DRM, lobbied for by US groups, pressured for by the US ambassador, and written up by RIAA.
Maury
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
To be fair, it works both ways. The current draft text of ACTA still includes language that permits "graduated response" or "three strikes" laws in a section that was contributed by EU countries. While the original footnote that referred specifically to three strikes was removed, neither is it explicitly forbidden.
Having gone over the draft text and the leaked version that indicated the various country positions, I'd say the US and EU are equally responsible for some of the nasty things in ACTA - just diffe
Re:I will do my civic duty and sign these petition (Score:4, Interesting)
The current draft text of ACTA still includes language that permits "graduated response" or "three strikes" laws in a section that was contributed by EU countries.
The European parliament has several times explicitly removed the concept of the "three strikes" rule. Which countries are you referring to?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's not a law yet, it is only a bill (C-31) but unless you (Canadians) get off your collective fat asses and start making noise about it, it will be.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
My guess is that it is actually neither. What's really happening is that highly interested parties with a shitload of money are hiring people in all involved countries (especially the US and the EU, but almost certainly in others as well) to manipulate politicians into doing their bidding.
Article 6 (Score:2)
This isn't a "law" this is an agreement, meaning it basically passes without the consent of the people. Essentially the US is letting other countries write the laws for us. This is exactly what the founding fathers warned us about with "Free Trade With All, Entangling Alliances With None".
From Article 6 of the US Constitution:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States,
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This isn't a "law" this is an agreement, meaning it basically passes without the consent of the people. Essentially the US is letting other countries write the laws for us. This is exactly what the founding fathers warned us about with "Free Trade With All, Entangling Alliances With None".
That's not actually true. The US is the one writing and pushing ACTA, and is having it written as a treaty so that it can do an end run around it's own laws that would prevent something like it passing. It's ingenious really. Can't pass a law? Get it written as a treaty and have someone else pass it for you!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
To someone who follows mainstream politics, and in my own words, the Libertarian Party seems horribly fragmented. There is no way to vote for the party, because each candidate has their own take on what is part of the philosophy.
I've read the definitions and distinctions between someone who has libertarian views (lower case) and is part of the Libertarian party. That there's even a distinction between the two suggests that the name was poorly chosen, or the philosohpy adapted/bastardized.
That there remain
Re:Read petition and laugh (Score:4, Insightful)
The entertainment industry does not have either a) a right to exist or b) a right to make money. Agreements such as ACTA and laws like the DMCA provide those rights. The MAFIAA wants to have it both ways: it's a free market when it comes to pricing, competition and business practices, but it's draconian laws when it comes to finding ways to support it's aging business model, and force people to pay when there are better alternatives available.
The guilt card about lack of employment for software and media producers is priceless. Not to mention that the business value of "production" versus "creation" is questionable. Never mind how many of those in Mr. Stallman's world have lost their jobs to precisely the unethical business practices he rails against. Like me, they will have to find ways of adapting to a world with changing ideas. Or, like you say, maybe they can just go on welfare. I, for one, won't pity them, for none was shown to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong.
They have every right to exist. Just like you have a right to be a slashdot commenter.
Not exactly
It would be more correct to say they have a right to have a chance to make money. No one has a right to profit, but everyone has a right to try to make money as long as it through lawful means.
Re: (Score:2)
You make the "follow the rules" argument very well, and I can respect that. But, having waited a decade for reasonable laws governing the use of the Internet, and a viable commercial alternative that lets me continue to use the Internet as my main source for media, I've given up following the rules. And, frankly, your argument about traction doesn't hold up in practice.
Audio pirates changed the way the music industry does business, I'd say for the better. Admittedly, there are times when what I do appears t
Re: (Score:2)
First of all... I'm not that conservative. I live in Alabama and the locals consider me a communistic liberal... Why? Beats me? Maybe I shouldn't of asked for the non-Republican primary ballot.
Anyway, I develop software for a living. However every single line of code I write is free (sc
Re: (Score:2)
exactly