More Threats From The MPAA 596
MattLesko writes: "Looks like the MPAA is now even going after those who link to copies of DeCSS, flying high on the recent ruling in their favor. 2600 has a copy of the letter they are sending out here , along with the usual lucid comments that we've come to expect from Mr. Goldstein." Some Slashdot readers have already written to say that access to their e-mail accounts has been yanked by (academic) providers for linking to DeCSS from their home pages. Has it happened to you?
Re:Does it work recursively? (Score:2)
Write a web crawler that looks for everone linking to X site. Then search for everyone linking to everyone who links to those site and so on. When you hit the threshold amount of your mail server (say 4-5 megs), send it to them and keep going.
Fairly soon, they will find out just how big that number is.
"What do you mean the MPAA is suing the *entire* Internet?"
My Mirror... (Score:2)
I am now more convinved than before that what I did was the right thing to do.
To the MPAA, and all who would follow in their footsteps: you may not censor me .
Re:Call it CUSS instead of DeCSS (Score:2)
Now is when I really want to see some of the ol' cyberpunk magic...c'mon, Chinese government, post everything American and copyrighted...now!
Re:MPAA is doing this NOW (Score:2)
The idea of the game is that you start at a web page of a competitor's choice and compete to find smut the fewest number of links away.
Bookmark pages, search engines, etc, are off limits as they make the game too easy.
css_descramble.dmca.txt (Score:2)
--
Link anywhere claiming there is DeCSS - there is. (Score:3)
This is an intentional link to DeCSS. [nytimes.com]
Any site that has advertisements most likely at some point links to some pages that link either to search engines or directly to illegal material. Whereas those themselves can be unintentional, and thus legal, my link above states that it is a link to DeCSS. Thus, my link is illegal.
Too bad we don't have DMCA in Finland.
Blah. Plain insanity.
Ubiquitous DeCSS exploit possible (Score:2)
It seems the terrain in this battle could be altered significantly if server vulnerabilities were used to insert a file (mpaa.html or decss.html) into the root directory of a large number of servers across the net. (Alternately an otherwise invisible text link or transparent gif link in a bottom corner of the page might work as well, to find mirrors, like the PI character in the movie the Net). The html file could contain source and multiple executables of the DeCSS code, and this file could be given a variety of related names or placed in subfolders, stegographed into gifs, inserted into Javascript, encrypted with a public key, etc., so that it is less detectable by administrators and mpaa search engine investigators while promising an unending morph of target and terrain.
Maybe if the MPAA ever gives up the server admins would be notified of the security holes they have.. but I am thinking that admins might even intentionally add this to their own systems since they could say it was placed there by a hacker. Leaving a security hole open intentionally might be a plausible defense in that case.
This thought came to me when I was considering a perl script published in a well known network security secrets book. A friend inexperienced in perl or hacking tried offhand to test his clients' NT servers and suddenly was granted System permissions three times out of three, score 3 for linux. This seems a far more interesting game for script kiddies too, why bother defacing some clueless government's page when they could screw the MPAA instead. There is also less damage on the part of those defaced.
Re:Read the ruling -- (Ans: It depends) (Score:4)
Violence -- Speech may not take the form of violence nor incite violence.
Property Damage -- Same as above.
Criminal Speech -- Some forms of speech are criminal in nature. Treason, conspiracy to commit a crime, etc.
Encroaching on the Rights of Others -- This is why pro-life protesters can be made to stop blocking a clinic.
Trespass -- Freedom of speech does not equal the right to speak wherever and whenever you want. I can't deliver a political (or otherwise) speech in your house without permission.
Forms of expression outside the First Amendment -- Libel and obscenity have been prohibited from the very beginning.
Burden on Government function -- This is the basis of upholding the law against burning draft cards.
Copyright violations -- The Constitutional right of copyright supercedes most Free Speech rights.
Speech containing sufficient nonspeech elements -- Here is where code is most affected. If you had actually read the ruling, you would've realized that over half the ruling deals with code as Free Speech and how it can be limited. The First Amendment does not mean that the government is powerless, and it is realms where a form of expression contains significant nonspeech elements, such as code, where the government typically has the most power to limit speech. While I certainly am not a constitutional scholar, I am at least familiar with:
United States vs. O'Brien (1969)
Chaplinsky vs. New Hampshire (1942)
Rowan vs. Post Office (1970) All three are excellent examples of the government limiting forms of expression and the Supreme Court backing them up. Research them sometime.
Just go international (Score:3)
One: Post the code on non-US servers. AFAIK US law still doesn't apply outside the US. Preferably choose countries where there is lots of anti-US feelings.
Two: Wouldn't it be fun if, say China or Iraq started to demand that the major hollywood sites must be shut down? Surely something there can be considered "illegal" somewhere in the world?
Or better yet. If it enough to have "offending" material on your site, a lot of brits might want to shut down sites that link to a certain movie with Mel Gibson?
Important Correction (Score:2)
That wouldn't have been illegal.
Re:MPAA must be careful... (Score:3)
Disclaimer: I am a lawyer, but I'm tired of putting up meaningful disclaimers. It's been a long, exhausting day, and I need a beer. If you want to act on what's in this message, go see a lawyer, licensed in your jurisdiction, who gives a crap.
I love the idea of reading it into the public record. If my hazy memory serves me, that's what happened with the Pentagon Papers back in the early 70s, and hell hath no fury like the Defense Department scorned. However, after it was read into the record, it was fair game. Then the journalists could report on it willy nilly without worrying about pesky security clearances and stolen documents.
The Speech and Debate Clause of the US Constitution protects Senators and Congresstypes from prosecution for acts taken in the course of official government proceedings (within reason). I'd love to see a Representative go to the well of the House and read DeCSS into the record. Maybe the EFF's lobbyists could try to pull that one off.
The unanimity of support for the DMCA can be broken by one Member of Congress who has the courage to stand up to the MPAA, RIAA and those who seek to congregate control over speech in the hands of faceless monopolistic multinational middlemen conglomerates.
Sheesh, it's definitely beer time. I reserve the right to retract all these statements after I've had two beers and an amount of sleep to be named later.
==
This post sponsored by the American Obstetrics Society:
Re:A Worldwide Game of Whack-a-Mole (Score:2)
the MPAA really doesn't realize, here's proof (Score:2)
Re:what if (Score:2)
According to that all I have to do is put a link to a search engine on my site, or link to a page that links to a page, that links to a page (that links to a page, and on and on...), that links to a search engine of some sort, and BANG! I've just created a series of links that allows the downloading of DeCSS.
I haven't checked the links the MPAA has on their web site, but I'm sure you can eventually get to the DeCSS code from at least one of them, may take a while but I'm sure you can... Personally, I'm waiting for them to go after Yahoo and the likes, after all they ARE linking o sites that provide DeCSS or links to sites that link (and so on...)
On a not quite so related note, I personally think it would be funny if a significantly large number of people provided links to this DeCSS [pigdog.org] (don't worry, nothing illegal about it) and just create a little background noise for the MPAA to have to sort through to get the sites that link to the other/real DeCSS.
-GreenHell
Does it work recursively? (Score:5)
If so, I'm removing my links to search engines...
Welcome to the collapse of 'civilized' society!
-- "Almost everyone is an idiot. If you think I'm exaggerating, then you're one of them."
Why the whole world?????? (Score:2)
Re:civil disobedience - Link Club (Score:2)
Or, as someone else said, change the variables, or make the source code into something different that performs the same. But go a step beyond that. Publish it. I mean really publish it. Send it to a magazine that will print it for you. Truly get it protected under the first amendment. Or talk to those obfuscated perl contest winners and have one write an obfuscated perl script that will output decss when it is run, and have that published. Write into the letters column of your local newspaper, magazines, any chance you have of getting it published, do so!
Another possibility is to loveletter the source code, either in original or modified form (Note: I do not, repeat NOT endorse this nor would i like to see it. I'm a network admin and do not, repeat NOT need that headache again. The though just occurred to me while writing this ). The more places the code is published or spread, the more the MPAA will have to sue. If it achieves loveletter status in mailing itself around the globe (what, just about every other computer in the world in under 24 hours?) the MPAA will have to send cease-and-desist letters to everyone. Including themselves.
Heck, if the source in under 6000 characters, send it into that French space-time capsule that will be up for 50000 years. If not, break it up amongst several people with instructions on how to reassemble the code. Convert it into as many other programming languages as possible, convert the variables into other languages. Write a mathematical equation that is answered with the decss code. The possibilities are endless for this type of civil disobedience. Remember, you (i.e. dedicated hackers) are the smart ones, not them. If they were, you wouldn't have cracked the encryption in the first place.
Rent some time on public access TV and spend the half hour or so teaching people how to compile the source code, and then tell them to tape your show, and halfway thru have the source scroll up the screen so they can type it in later on. Or just dictate it. All those old floppy disks that you've been itching to throw away? Copy the source onto that and some literature about the whole case and the evils of the MPAA and distribute it to people at political rallies.
It can be done. Hell, I'm stupid and look at all these ideas I came up with. Maybe someone smart can think of something that will actually work! -dj
How about this: (Score:2)
2. Drop it onto both the MPAA's and RIAA's web sites. Make sure you put a link to the counterpart version on their home pages.
3. Sit back and watch the fun as they sue each other.
--
Now that is elegant! (Score:2)
Visit DC2600 [dc2600.com]
Re:Directly or through a series???!?! (Score:2)
www.mpaa.org/home.htm ->
www.mpaa.org/relatedsites/ ->
www.privacyalliance.org/ -> (via 'Resources' in banner at top)
www.privacyalliance.org/resources -> (via link all the way at the bottom)
www.eff.org/ ->
www.eff.org/pub/Intellectual_property/Video/ ->
eon.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/DVD/ ->
eon.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/DVD/resources.html ->
eon.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/DVD/DeCSS/ ->
www.zpok.demon.co.uk/decss/ ->
www.zpok.demon.co.uk/decss/DeCSS.zip
Even better... gets you a copy of it!!! 11 degress of separation from www.mpaa.org to an actual copy of the DeCSS archive (only 10 to a list of mirrors of the code).
Eric
Link to search engines without breaking the law... (Score:3)
So the judge says search engines are not trespassing, since they do not link knowingly. So, I assume I can link to a search enigne without breaking this broken law. What if I link to a search engine, giving it a querystring in addition to the hostname? Like...
I could go on, but I won't. I assume this would be legal, right?
Re:Actually, not really. (Score:2)
Thus, linking to DeCSS as a protest against the MPAA, which is exactly what 2600 was doing, is indeed not protected under the First Amendment according to Judge Kaplan's ruling. I disagree very strongly with the DMCA, but if you assume that it is indeed legal, then unfortunately you can only logically follow that linking in that fashion as protest is also illegal according to current case law.
Sucks, huh? I hope they find a good way to challenge DMCA itself. Kaplan really kind of glossed over that by saying that Congress must've considered the ramifications of the law and giving superficial supporting analysis. In math terms, DMCA was considered a postulate, not a theorem to be proven in its own right. Kind of ignores the whole purpose behind judicial review, doesn't it?
Re:MPAA must be careful... (Score:2)
Not going to work if the MPAA takes it seriously. Because of American pressure, the Swedish government passed (without hardly telling the people) a change to the Freedom of Information laws in the constitution in order to make Co$ happy.
I would get a link but the blurbs in the press were so tiny I doubt they even made it online...
So where's the DVD player for Linux? (Score:2)
There's probably a market for a straightforward player with better features. Like skipping the mandatory commercials on Disney disks. Or making a file of thumbnails, one per scene change, as a index to the disk. Or extracting and indexing the closed-captioning information. None of those is a circumvention of copy protection, or a copyright violation. They're useful features a PC-based player ought to have.
Fun for everyone! (Score:2)
* css_descramble.c
*
* Released under the version 2 of the GPL.
*
* Copyright 1999 Derek Fawcus
*
* This file contains functions to descramble CSS encrypted DVD content
*
*/
/*
* Still in progress: Remove the use of the bit_reverse[] table by recoding
* the generation of LFSR1. Finish combining this with
* the css authentication code.
*
*/
#include
#include
#include "css-descramble.h"
typedef unsigned char byte;
/*
*
* some tables used for descrambling sectors and/or decrypting title keys
*
*/
static byte csstab1[256]=
{
0x33,0x73,0x3b,0x26,0x63,0x23,0x6b,0x76,0x3e,0x7e
0xd3,0x93,0xdb,0x06,0x43,0x03,0x4b,0x96,0xde,0x9e
0x57,0x17,0x5f,0x82,0xc7,0x87,0xcf,0x12,0x5a,0x1a
0xd9,0x99,0xd1,0x00,0x49,0x09,0x41,0x90,0xd8,0x98
0x3d,0x7d,0x35,0x24,0x6d,0x2d,0x65,0x74,0x3c,0x7c
0xdd,0x9d,0xd5,0x04,0x4d,0x0d,0x45,0x94,0xdc,0x9c
0x59,0x19,0x51,0x80,0xc9,0x89,0xc1,0x10,0x58,0x18
0xd7,0x97,0xdf,0x02,0x47,0x07,0x4f,0x92,0xda,0x9a
0x53,0x13,0x5b,0x86,0xc3,0x83,0xcb,0x16,0x5e,0x1e
0xb3,0xf3,0xbb,0xa6,0xe3,0xa3,0xeb,0xf6,0xbe,0xfe
0x37,0x77,0x3f,0x22,0x67,0x27,0x6f,0x72,0x3a,0x7a
0xb9,0xf9,0xb1,0xa0,0xe9,0xa9,0xe1,0xf0,0xb8,0xf8
0x5d,0x1d,0x55,0x84,0xcd,0x8d,0xc5,0x14,0x5c,0x1c
0xbd,0xfd,0xb5,0xa4,0xed,0xad,0xe5,0xf4,0xbc,0xfc
0x39,0x79,0x31,0x20,0x69,0x29,0x61,0x70,0x38,0x78
0xb7,0xf7,0xbf,0xa2,0xe7,0xa7,0xef,0xf2,0xba,0xfa
};
static byte lfsr1_bits0[256]=
{
0x00,0x01,0x02,0x03,0x04,0x05,0x06,0x07,0x09,0x08
0x12,0x13,0x10,0x11,0x16,0x17,0x14,0x15,0x1b,0x1a
0x24,0x25,0x26,0x27,0x20,0x21,0x22,0x23,0x2d,0x2c
0x36,0x37,0x34,0x35,0x32,0x33,0x30,0x31,0x3f,0x3e
0x49,0x48,0x4b,0x4a,0x4d,0x4c,0x4f,0x4e,0x40,0x41
0x5b,0x5a,0x59,0x58,0x5f,0x5e,0x5d,0x5c,0x52,0x53
0x6d,0x6c,0x6f,0x6e,0x69,0x68,0x6b,0x6a,0x64,0x65
0x7f,0x7e,0x7d,0x7c,0x7b,0x7a,0x79,0x78,0x76,0x77
0x92,0x93,0x90,0x91,0x96,0x97,0x94,0x95,0x9b,0x9a
0x80,0x81,0x82,0x83,0x84,0x85,0x86,0x87,0x89,0x88
0xb6,0xb7,0xb4,0xb5,0xb2,0xb3,0xb0,0xb1,0xbf,0xbe
0xa4,0xa5,0xa6,0xa7,0xa0,0xa1,0xa2,0xa3,0xad,0xac
0xdb,0xda,0xd9,0xd8,0xdf,0xde,0xdd,0xdc,0xd2,0xd3
0xc9,0xc8,0xcb,0xca,0xcd,0xcc,0xcf,0xce,0xc0,0xc1
0xff,0xfe,0xfd,0xfc,0xfb,0xfa,0xf9,0xf8,0xf6,0xf7
0xed,0xec,0xef,0xee,0xe9,0xe8,0xeb,0xea,0xe4,0xe5
};
static byte lfsr1_bits1[512]=
{
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
0x00,0x24,0x49,0x6d,0x92,0xb6,0xdb,0xff,0x00,0x24
};
/* Reverse the order of the bits within a byte.
*/
static byte bit_reverse[256]=
{
0x00,0x80,0x40,0xc0,0x20,0xa0,0x60,0xe0,0x10,0x90
0x08,0x88,0x48,0xc8,0x28,0xa8,0x68,0xe8,0x18,0x98
0x04,0x84,0x44,0xc4,0x24,0xa4,0x64,0xe4,0x14,0x94
0x0c,0x8c,0x4c,0xcc,0x2c,0xac,0x6c,0xec,0x1c,0x9c
0x02,0x82,0x42,0xc2,0x22,0xa2,0x62,0xe2,0x12,0x92
0x0a,0x8a,0x4a,0xca,0x2a,0xaa,0x6a,0xea,0x1a,0x9a
0x06,0x86,0x46,0xc6,0x26,0xa6,0x66,0xe6,0x16,0x96
0x0e,0x8e,0x4e,0xce,0x2e,0xae,0x6e,0xee,0x1e,0x9e
0x01,0x81,0x41,0xc1,0x21,0xa1,0x61,0xe1,0x11,0x91
0x09,0x89,0x49,0xc9,0x29,0xa9,0x69,0xe9,0x19,0x99
0x05,0x85,0x45,0xc5,0x25,0xa5,0x65,0xe5,0x15,0x95
0x0d,0x8d,0x4d,0xcd,0x2d,0xad,0x6d,0xed,0x1d,0x9d
0x03,0x83,0x43,0xc3,0x23,0xa3,0x63,0xe3,0x13,0x93
0x0b,0x8b,0x4b,0xcb,0x2b,0xab,0x6b,0xeb,0x1b,0x9b
0x07,0x87,0x47,0xc7,0x27,0xa7,0x67,0xe7,0x17,0x97
0x0f,0x8f,0x4f,0xcf,0x2f,0xaf,0x6f,0xef,0x1f,0x9f
};
/*
*
* this function is only used internally when decrypting title key
*
*/
static void css_titlekey(byte *key, byte *im, byte invert)
{
unsigned int lfsr1_lo,lfsr1_hi,lfsr0,combined;
byte o_lfsr0, o_lfsr1;
byte k[5];
int i;
lfsr1_lo = im[0] | 0x100;
lfsr1_hi = im[1];
lfsr0 = ((im[4] >8)&0xff] >16)&0xff]>24)&0xff];
combined = 0;
for (i = 0; i >1;
lfsr1_lo = ((lfsr1_lo&1)>7)^(lfsr0>>10)^(lfsr0>>11)^(lfsr0>>
o_lfsr0 = (((((((lfsr0>>8)^lfsr0)>>1)^lfsr0)>>3)^lfsr0)>>7)
lfsr0 = (lfsr0>>8)|(o_lfsr0>= 8;
}
key[4]=k[4]^csstab1[key[4]]^key[3];
key[3]=k[3]^csstab1[key[3]]^key[2];
key[2]=k[2]^csstab1[key[2]]^key[1];
key[1]=k[1]^csstab1[key[1]]^key[0];
key[0]=k[0]^csstab1[key[0]]^key[4];
key[4]=k[4]^csstab1[key[4]]^key[3];
key[3]=k[3]^csstab1[key[3]]^key[2];
key[2]=k[2]^csstab1[key[2]]^key[1];
key[1]=k[1]^csstab1[key[1]]^key[0];
key[0]=k[0]^csstab1[key[0]];
}
/*
*
* this function decrypts a title key with the specified disk key
*
* tkey: the unobfuscated title key (XORed with BusKey)
* dkey: the unobfuscated disk key (XORed with BusKey)
* 2048 bytes in length (though only 5 bytes are needed, see below)
* pkey: array of pointers to player keys and disk key offsets
*
*
* use the result returned in tkey with css_descramble
*
*/
int css_decrypttitlekey(byte *tkey, byte *dkey, struct playkey **pkey)
{
byte test[5], pretkey[5];
int i = 0;
for (; *pkey; ++pkey, ++i) {
memcpy(pretkey, dkey + (*pkey)->offset, 5);
css_titlekey(pretkey, (*pkey)->key, 0);
memcpy(test, dkey, 5);
css_titlekey(test, pretkey, 0);
if (memcmp(test, pretkey, 5) == 0) {
fprintf(stderr, "Using Key %d\n", i+1);
break;
}
}
if (!*pkey) {
fprintf(stderr, "Shit - Need Key %d\n", i+1);
return 0;
}
css_titlekey(tkey, pretkey, 0xff);
return 1;
}
/*
*
* this function does the actual descrambling
*
* sec: encrypted sector (2048 bytes)
* key: decrypted title key obtained from css_decrypttitlekey
*
*/
void css_descramble(byte *sec,byte *key)
{
unsigned int lfsr1_lo,lfsr1_hi,lfsr0,combined;
unsigned char o_lfsr0, o_lfsr1;
unsigned char *end = sec + 0x800;
#define SALTED(i) (key[i] ^ sec[0x54 + (i)])
lfsr1_lo = SALTED(0) | 0x100;
lfsr1_hi = SALTED(1);
lfsr0 = ((SALTED(4) >8)&0xff] >16)&0xff]>24)&0xff];
sec+=0x80;
combined = 0;
while (sec != end) {
o_lfsr1 = lfsr1_bits0[lfsr1_hi] ^ lfsr1_bits1[lfsr1_lo];
lfsr1_hi = lfsr1_lo>>1;
lfsr1_lo = ((lfsr1_lo&1)>7)^(lfsr0>>10)^(lfsr0>>11)^(lfsr0>>
o_lfsr0 = (((((((lfsr0>>8)^lfsr0)>>1)^lfsr0)>>3)^lfsr0)>>7)
lfsr0 = (lfsr0>>8)|(o_lfsr0>= 8;
}
}
Re:A Worldwide Game of Whack-a-Mole (Score:2)
are you talking about standalone players that you hook up to the TV, or players for the computer?
what would be the point of dvd and a standalone player if the outputquality is crippled?
and what would be the point of crippling the video signal for a computer, if the computer can read the digital data directly, and do it's own decryption and create a good signal without the help of the player?
greetings, eMBee.
--
"Inalienable" rights (Score:2)
Have you ever considered the fact that the only reason you have this right is because another group of people deemed it so? Previous to the creation of the Bill of Rights, no government has such "inalienable" rights for its citizens. This supposedly intrinsic right that everyone supposedly gets by existing did not exist before that except in the rhetoric of natural law philosophers such as Locke.
Don't fool yourself. All rights are priviledges that other people extend to one another. There are no intrinsic human rights -- not even the right to be born anymore. It may not be too long before medical science allows the right to die to be taken away.
While I believe that the DMCA is a seriously bad piece of legislation, Kaplan's words in the ruling rang very true -- that the First Amendment is not a suicide pact for the government. Would you really like to live in a country where people were free to fire-bomb houses and roll over cars without impunity because it is a form of expression? Would you really like to live in a country that couldn't have ruled in favor of the government in Rowan vs. U.S. Post Office; a country where the government cannot stop commercial advertisers from forcing junk mail on you even after telling them you don't want it? Would you really like to live in a country where the expressiveness of an act could be used to justify any criminal action?
"Your honor, I am suing because his throwing me out of his house squelched my freedom to speak about the wonders of my church."
"Your honor, I realize that those secrets about nuclear weapon design could hurt the U.S. if passed into the wrong hands, but it is my right to tell them to whoever I want, wherever I want, and whenever I want."
"Your honor, there is nothing illegal about telling a group of people, even a violently upset group, to kill that black man. That they did it is their problem, not mine."
"Yes your honor, Company X was the original author of that piece of software, but there's nothing wrong with freely copying it, is there? After all, code is a form of speech. So what if it took them 3 years and millions of dollars to research? They should've invested some of that money in better server security. My freedom of speech supercedes their ownership."
"Your honor, my forcing of affections on the young lady over there were merely a positive expression of her good looks."
The fact is that all of the above examples are things that our government system -- the one that originated this "inalienable" right -- does rightfully reject each and every one of those arguments. Oh, and by the way, treasonous speech is illegal. Check the Constitution itself. However, rich case histories have shown that even Communist philosophers speaking of the overthrowing the American capitalist system were well within their rights to do so. (Gitlow vs. New York 1925) How do you think that square with the rich history of protest speech in America?
I swear, some people should get off their "inalienable" rights soapboxes and do some research on how the real world actually works.
Re:Pointing and the law (Score:2)
No, code itself contains significant nonspeech elements. Code is inherently a functional "machine" of sorts as well as being a method of communicating to humans how to make a computer go about a task. It is both a description of a task and the task itself. Thus code itself may be regulated. That is the argument here.
In the case of other forms of illegal speech, such as libel and obscenity, it doesn't matter what the transmission method is, such as "distributing a text file." It's the speech itself that is illegal, and the distribution of it can also be made illegal. This is the unfortunate case with the DMCA.
The judge cited cases because he had nothing else to work with, but there have been other cases involving things like schools attempting to ban messages on t-shirts, and appellate court rulings where the government was unsuccessful in stopping the posting of cryptographic source code that are by far more similar to the present case. I didn't see the judge spending any time distinguishing this case from those. I don't believe he could credibly do so.
Actually, in any case where you are potentially going up against the legal cannon that is the First Amendment, you have to really shore up your defense with precendents like US vs. O'Brien. Kaplan did acknowledge Bernstein vs. US DOJ, where the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that current crypto export legislation was unlawful prior restraint on code as a form of speech. It was with this in mind that he spent 40+ pages dealing with the legal justifications of restricting code in light of its speech elements. That's why he spent significant time covering the validity of censoring code under its non-speech elements.
But before we hang the judge out to dry, it's important to realize how limited his ruling really is.
It's unfortunately worse than you think. The American court system is riddled with precedents. Any significant ruling in a case that tests a law contains exhaustive reference to the judgements of other judges, not necessarily all at the federal level. Kaplan's ruling affirming the DMCA may lead to a whole new level of legislation restricting our actions. The injunctions you refer to were covered previously in the case. The ruling is something else entirely. Punitive damages have been awarded to the MPAA. Round one is already lost. We just have to see if we can survive round two.
Re:Search Engines (Score:2)
Just because an idea is valid or important doesn't mean you need to hear it eight thousand times. My physics teacher used to repeat every single day that the velocity of an orbiting object pointed tangent to the circle. One day, about three months in the class, he said the words "tangent to the circle", and my friend started screaming and banging his head on his desk.
That's about the way I feel about "but search engines link to DeCSS!!" posts.
Re:What happens to: (Score:2)
Twisted experiment (Score:5)
Step 1. Post a web page named DeCSS, with DeCSS in the URL and some general information on the page that explains in great detail that the DeCSS code does not exist on that page. Also, no links to the DeCSS program on the page either.
Step 2. Sit back an wait to see how long the MPAA clueless train takes to fire off a letter.
Modified hack, have a link on the page to an empty file. Explain that it is an empty file. Goto Step 2.
Visit DC2600 [dc2600.com]
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re:Next up (Score:5)
matt
[This message edited by the MPAA.]
Enforcement beyond pencil pushers... (Score:2)
(which all in all is a moot point since there are no funcitonal MPEG players that even begin to run under Linux...)
e-mails (Score:2)
I write an e-mail to a friend talking to him about the DeCSS. In that e-mail I write the URL which outlook automaticaly turn into an hyperlink my friend can click. Am I in trouble? Or is it Microsoft's fault??
Re:Does it work recursively? (Score:2)
This is nothing but bad news for the world.
What, they're going to sue every Russian and Finn that has a link? This is may be bad news for the States, but then again I don't think the Supreme Court is going to let this slide through.
Of course IANAL, so I'm very likely completely wrong...
"Free your mind and your ass will follow"
Re:And? (Score:2)
Or go to every free web provider you can find and post the DeCSS source. They simply cannot afford to sue everyone!
--
Therefore, the MPAA must be guilty (Score:2)
Therefore, by their own accusation, the MPAA are in violation of their MPAA order.
Anyone want to point this out to them?
(Needless to say, the court decision specifically mentioned "intent to link to decss code", so the average random linking that 99.9% of the links out there are harmless here.)
And get TOSsed off. (Score:2)
Store the stuff on a server you run if you actually believe in the spread of DeCSS.
Your upstream provider can always terminate your service.
<O
( \
XGNOME vs. KDE: the game! [8m.com]
Re:MPAA must be careful... (Score:2)
Don't like to DeCSS, link to Altavista's links to DeCSS. Link to Yahoo's links to DeCSS.
*FORCE* the MPAA to drag them into court if they want to drag us into court.
-
Civil Disobedience (Score:2)
The idea is that right now, I suspect the MPAA is simply throwing "DeCSS" into a search engine and sending threatening letters to everyone whose name pops up out of the list. By having a number of files out there which are not the CSS descrambler sources or executables, but are called 'DeCSS', we could theoretically tie up the MPAA in a bunch of potentially losing lawsuits as they in turn sue the wrong people, and are thus forced to spend more resources than they currently are.
Hey, if the MPAA wants to sue every person on the planet, let them--just remember to countersue for legal costs, lost wages and other costs related to protecting yourself against a frivolous suit.
Re:So They Have Started A Witchhunt... (Score:3)
The MPAA is violoating their own policy (Score:2)
Q: What is this Motion all about?
Q: The MPAA is only asking the Court to enter an injunction against Eric Corley, a/k/a "Emmanuel Goldstein" and those persons acting in concert with him, in the use of DeCSS hyperlinks.
If they are only asking that EG get the injunction... then why all the letters?
Re:Call it CUSS instead of DeCSS (Score:2)
Distinction needs to be made between "code" and (Score:4)
However, the MPAA does not say this. They tell website operators to "remove the circumvention device from your website." IANAL, but what kind of language is this??? See the letter that the MPAA sent cryptome.org [cryptome.org] today for an example of this.
They cannot say "please remove the code that you have published on your website" because publishing involves speech, which the DeCSS is. When it is compiled and executed, your computer becomes a decryption device , placing it under patent laws. Is the DeCSS patented? If it is, then the US patent office has already published it. Then it follows that it is your computer that is the circumvention device not the DeCSS code by itself.
Another thing that gets me is the mishmash of copyrights and patents. Two different things, or two different temporary "granted monopolies". People should not be allowed to use one "monopoly" to increase the power of the other (i.g. dealing in software patents), because that power has not been granted by the constitution. The constitution separates the two because they were intended to deal separately with two different things, not act together. For many years, they had about the same amount of power until "copyright creep" started taking place, continually increasing its power until now you have the DMCA controlling "devices" overtaking the power of patents. Software should either have a copyright or a patent, but not both. If it can be copyrighted, then I should be able to have rights like "first sale" and "fair use" that have been argued the century before last when a publisher put a EULA on the first page of a book. If the software is a patent (i.g. a device that configures a computer), then I expect to be able to copy it in twenty years when the patent expires (and I mean the actual software created by the company using the patent). Just because you flash a contract in front of somebody's face or toss it in with the shinkrap doesn't mean you can usurp somebody's constitutional rights, and I consider having patents and copyrights acting as two separate entities as one of those rights. What we see now is the result of abuse of these two constitutionally "granted" temporary monopolies (making it greater than the freedom of speech). Taking a power that was niether "implied" nor "granted", they shaft the public out of their due - the very reason why the constitution grants patents and copyrights in the first place.
What the MPAA is trying to do is extend copyright privilege to devices (even they have to refer to DeCSS as a "device", otherwise their arguement gets flushed down the toilet where it belongs) all the while basking in the newfound powers of the copyright law/DMCA.
New name for code, lets call a Witch a Witch (Score:5)
I suggest the name dvd-fair-use-decrypter.c
It would be best if you don't link to sites directly. That will force the free speech aspect to become more direct. Use the text of the url like this
www.warcloud.net/dvd-fair-use-decrypter.c
If they want to prosecute they will have to mention "Fair Use" every time they open their mouth. How can the press ignore the fair use angle now? People need to know that rights they had a few years ago have been taken away and why!
What's in a name? Where would Linux be if Linus named Linux Freeix.
Perhaps a short commented section in the beginning of the file explaining harmfull efects the DMCA's changes to American law would also help.
When Hollywood pork bellies violate us, Don't just wave the Flag, wrap yourself in it!
No, I LIKE this action... (Score:2)
We should really be greatful to the MPAA for being such wonderfully obnoxious poster-boys for the DMCA, especially before the October review by the Library of Congress.
I hope they do a make a LOT more stupid moves like this, and get a lot more people mad.
Aside...
DeCSS is personal use of encryption. Encryption is a weapon, according to the government. Limiting our use of DeCSS is impairing our right to bear arms, as protected by the constitution, as well as impairing our free speach. Maybe the NRA is our friend on this one.
(Tongue partly in cheek on that last bit, but only partly.)
Re:Answer: Yes. (Score:2)
Has anyone here been to law school? Do they really beat you that stupid before you're let out upon an unsuspecting public?
---
Re:Not yet... (Score:3)
Fear not- it's still there (Score:2)
I haven't gotten a letter yet, but I'll keep y'all updated. I've got a number of lawyers from all over the country (even Harvard professors) aching to defend this song if it goes to court.
In the mean time- keep on downloading! You may be among the first Americans to own the very first illegal protest song. That'll be a sad sad day in American history. (I don't think it'll happen though. Frankly, I think the intelligent ones are on our side.)
Re:Does it work recursively? (Score:5)
If they do, can I sue them under the DMCA for using "view source" to crack my heavy duty source code encryption?
"Hey, My page is encrypted man, only people I inform are supposed to be able to use 'view source' to decrypt it."
Re:What happens to: (Score:2)
- If you're looking for the DeCSS program that's illegal (even if you're only going to use to to view DVD's in Linux), you can find it by starting here [google.com] .
The difference is that one could argue that the above link was created with the intention to aid others in commiting a crime.However, since my intent was simply to communicate an idea, I should be safe from the MPAA, right? right?
Re:MPAA must be careful... (Score:2)
Split the DeCSS code in two, and distribute it (Score:2)
The program can also be used in reverse, to combine the two files together. Whaddya think?
Decryption in a plugin module needed (Score:3)
And then, users wishing to watch their own encrypted DVDs on such a player would have merely to acquire and load a little plugin, which could easily be circulated on Usenet in the traditional way. Easy.
It'd be great if DeCSS (or another clean-room implementation of DVD decryption) were given such a treatment. The dlopen(3) interface is trivial to use. Does anyone know whether the current DeCSS is amenable to such conversion?
Re:DeCSS = De(something) Cascading Style sheets (Score:2)
Farenheit 451 (Score:2)
Re:Time to write up a review on DeCSS (Score:2)
That would be as unstoppable as Usenet, which is pretty darn unstoppable.
send decss out as spam to everyone in the world (Score:2)
MPAA and Disney drowning in their own hypocrisy (Score:2)
<O
( \
XGNOME vs. KDE: the game! [8m.com]
Read the ruling -- (Ans: It depends) (Score:5)
If so, I'm removing my links to search engines...
Well, if you read the ruling, the judge acknowledges that you cannot outright ban linking to pages that contain direct links DeCSS among other content if you are not explicitly linking for the purpose of taking someone to the DeCSS link. This would have what is know as the "chilling effect" where people would be afraid to link to search engines, as you imply above. The "chilling effect" is unfortunately well covered in his ruling.
Basically, if I say, "Here's DeCSS!" and provide a direct link, then I am in violation of the clause of the DMCA prohibiting trafficking in copy-protection thwarting decryption software -- as I obviously should be under the letter of the law. I mean, just because it's not on my site doesn't mean I'm not guilty of helping people to get it. It's all transparent to the end user whether they are grabbing it from a server I own or a server owned by someone else.
However, you can't make a link illegal to a site that you didn't know contained DeCSS or a link that was made for other purposes. An example would've been a link to 2600.com back when they actually hosted the code for purposes of linking to a hacker magazine. That would've have been illegal. The grey area, I think, is if you linked to their DeCSS links page and told people what it is. I'm not sure about that one.
Anyway, don't worry about search engines. The acknowledged "chilling effect" prevents them from being a problem. Read the ruling. A grounding in constitutional law helps. (IANAL, but this is a big area of interest of mine.)
Re:Does it work recursively? (Score:3)
If so, I'm removing my links to search engines
Did no one read the judge's ruling??? It was very clear that to be in violation, you had to link to deCSS, know you were linking to deCSS (or whatever "illegal" material it was), and link to it for the express purpose of spreading it. Search engines don't fall under this ruling because they don't know they are linking to "illegal" material. Please stopping FUDing the issue with "all linking is now illegal". Linking in general is in no way threatened by this ruling. The web will not cease to exist. Please move along, there's nothing to see here that will destroy the world (wide web).
Re:Twisted experiment (Score:2)
<a href="home.html">DeCSS</a>
Of course, the name of the page it's on is home.html . .
Re:Next up (Score:3)
> Th_ Unit__ _tat__ wa_ on__ a fr__ _ountry, but not anymor_.
Because I was able to parse and reconstruct jvmatthe's comment, can jvmatthe throw me in jail for circumventing his access control mechanism?
What about a link to a link? (Score:2)
Maybe the whole web is illegal since it's all interlinked.
I hope some judge has the common sense to rule that pointing to a crime isn't illegal.
Re:Not yet... but now MPAA has this list (Score:2)
Don't turn your neighbors in to the Gestapo. Make it hard for them to make a bust!
1. Take your copies of DeCSS and css-auth, and dork up about 51% of the code so its no longer workable code.
2. Call it DeCSS and css-auth, tar & zip it and put it up for download.
3. Give it to your friends. Link to each other. Post it on every site and link exchange you can.
MAKE THEM PROVE IT.
Remember WW2? The allied planes dumped aluminum foil out of planes to confuse Nazi radar. Get some DeCSS foil in the air instead of shining spotlights on the good stuff.
Re:Clinton to appoint a DeCSS Czar... (Score:2)
--
Now, Can You Get A Recording Contract For It? (Score:2)
Singing the DeCSS is one thing (and an interesting excercise in protesting as well) but to meet the real challenge, and show the incredible stupidity of the MPAA and cabal, can you get a major artist to record the song and include it on one of their CDs? Or better yet get it included as music on the soundtrack of a movie that will come out on DVD?
Re:What happens to: (Score:3)
Will that be forbidden next? Or will all big search engines be forced to use "filter lists" to ban the bad words (i can imagine some people might then push on to get words like 'sex', 'nude' etc. on that lists). Why stop there, why not ban every mentioning of the 'evil word' altogether since otherwise people might get the idea to search for it.
I think i'll go and read Kerningham/Ritchie before they start burning books.
Now you see the point (Score:4)
Ah, yes. Now you see the whole danger of the DMCA. DIVX was the first shot in the war on consumer property rights, but the pay-per-use annoyance-ware model has not yet died. Witness the recent Slashdot story about the evil subscription textbooks [slashdot.org] that one company is pushing. In particular, read their PR page. They don't care about their customers -- students and campus bookstores. They don't have to. As long as they can lock you into paying for the rest of you life for something you could pay once for nowdays, and as long as they can prevent you for reselling your copy to someone else, they can keep pumping every student for money as much as possible. As a student who recently had to pay $300 for textbooks, at least 2 of which I will be using for years to come if not the rest of my life, I am very angry about this trend.
We are beginning a new age of corporate control over our lives and our very fundamental freedoms. As much as I disagree with him on other issues, Richard Stallman's "The Right to Read [gnu.org]" is dead on the money. Keep these times fresh in your mind -- you'll be telling your grandkids one day what the "good old days" were like.
Just beat them at their own game! (Score:5)
As far as I know I did not breach my contract with the ISP, but they claimed that they can terminate my account simply because someone feels offended by its contents. I've told them that I'm going to sue them but received no reply. I'm going to see a lawyer next week.
Rather than suing your ISP, try beating them at their own game: post their name, and a list of a few other customers, and we'll send them a couple more of legalese letters claiming that such and such customer has breached some copyright somewhere. Eventually they will have to kick so many customers that it hurts their business. Hopefully, this makes them more critical vs lawyer's letters.
We could actually push this a bit further: if each Slashdot users picks one random web page per week, finds out the ISP via whois or some other means, and sends a "legal" letter, then these hoax letters will be so ubiquitous that nobody will take lawyer's letters serious any more.
Just be careful to chose your marks purely randomly, do not sign with your real name, and do not post the letters in your hometown, and this shenanigan will be almost untraceable. Result: a beautiful proof ad absurdum of this whole legal crazyness.
Pointing and the law (Score:3)
Unfortunately, the First Amendment isn't the blanket on censorship everyone thinks it is. Take the Supreme Court case U.S. vs O'Brien. This is the infamous draft card burning case, where O'Brien claimed that the 1st Amendment superceded the 1965 amendment to the Selective Service Act that prohibited the defacement of draft cards. To quote Justice Warren's opinion of the court:
This case is frequently brought up in cases like the DeCSS case, where nonspeech elements are important considerations and in the early commercial speech cases. This is the reason why flipping over someone's car because you were "expressing" your happiness that the Bulls won the championship game is still illegal. Unfortunately, the judge in the DeCSS case argued very intelligently about the constitutionality of limiting speech with the DMCA (with the exception of his "Congress must've considered this" arguments). Over half of his 90+ page ruling covers this issue. It's a good read.
While I severely disagree with the DMCA's ramifications, it is currently legal and looks to stay that way.
--
Get DeCSS [copyleft.net] -- The legal way... for now.
Re:Does it work recursively? (Score:3)
I wouldn't say that this is a safe statement considering the actions lately against Altavista's mp3 search engine [altavista.com] as well as the AOL search engine.
Search engines that link to copyrighted files (mp3's) are being witch-hunted.
And? (Score:3)
Store the stuff on a server you run if you actually believe in the spread of DeCSS.
Next up (Score:4)
People who read about DeCSS
People who talk about DeCSS
People who listen to people who talk about DeCSS
People who think about DeCSS
People who have ever used the letters c,d,e & s in any way, shape or form
But, hey it's a free contry... right...
Vote [dragonswest.com] Naked 2000
But... (Score:5)
If so, Slashdot is about to get nailed!
civil disobedience - Link Club (Score:5)
the article states:
Actually, we can do BOTH of these solutions at once. The solution is to distribute deCSS widely, but not link to it - but make it understood how to acquire it easily.
Everyone with a domain should put deCSS in webroot. Don't link to it, but make it standard - you should be able to go to any website you want and type in http://www.domainname.com/deCSS.zip and bingo! you download the file. But nary an <a href=""> anywhere!
Every webmaster on every site, commercial, private, personal, educational - should put deCSS in webroot. I dream of the day when we can get:
webmasters, unite! rise up! insidiously spread the Code! Civil Disobedience on a grand scale!
let's show the MPAA it isn't linking per se they should fear, but the power of people to resist in an organized way when their rights are taken away for corporate gain. or, more colloquially...
The First Rule of Link Club is: you don't talk about Link Club
The Second Rule of Link Club is: YOU DON'T TALK ABOUT LINK CLUB.
The Third Rule of Link Club is: if this is your first night, you WILL put deCSS in webroot!
JOIN LINK CLUB! spread the word...
JOIN !LINK CLUB! [slashdot.org]
So They Have Started A Witchhunt... (Score:5)
Looks like they plan on actually trying to remove something from the web. Looks like a good test of the often-sigged adage that the Internet views censorship as damage and routes around it. Why not post the DeCSS code (can I even say it without being sued?) under a different name? It's going to be awfully hard to track down if it starts appearing under many different names.
Oh, and wouldn't that cause another problem, in that all the court documents are probably identifying the code by that specific name, if its a different name then they need to go back into court and spend MORE money on this. If we keep it up we could bleed em dry over time - or they will eventually realize the stupidity of their stance and give up.
In any case, this sets a dangerous precedent for the internet.
Re:Therefore, the MPAA must be guilty (Score:5)
MPAA.org links to the (interestingly named) Online Privacy Alliance (www.privacyalliance.org).
The OPA links to the EFF.
The EFF links to Cryptome.
and Bob's your uncle.
--
Academic providers (Score:4)
What else could I do except withdraw the deCSS stuff and relocate.
Here's something the MPAA's CEO said: (Score:4)
I got the quote from here [virtualave.net]. I don't know where he got it..
[Re:But...] Please mirror! (Score:3)
I cannot say how glad I am that this song has taken off the way it has, but as the Admin of joeysmith.com, I am BEGGING you guys to mirror this and make either Joe Wecker or I aware of it.
joeysmith.com is a 386/16 mb RAM running linux, apache, and php. It is hosted for me by a local ISP because I am friends with both the CEO and all of the SA's. But when they called me on Monday, they had to ask me to tune it down a bit, as I was using an entire T1 that is supposed to be shared among other co-locates.
If you have a mirror, you can email me, or webmaster@joeysmith.com (heh. that's me, too.
Note: The more mirrors, the less burden there is on each one, so mirror and encourage your friends to do so!
Re:Twisted experiment (Score:3)
I've got my fake DeCSS page up. I'd put up a real one, but cphack [waldo.net] is about all that I can handle at the moment. If I get a nibble on this site, I'll give a holler.
-Waldo
-------------------
Silly but effective (Score:3)
Why did you get a life sentence? "I tried to watch a DVD on a Linux box."
Dont it make you proud that the United states judicial system is 100% worthless.
What happens to: (Score:3)
Altavista search for DeCSS [altavista.com]
Google search for DeCSS [google.com]
HotBot search for DeCSS [lycos.com]
Are these search engines breaking the law?
Has anyone seen this ????? (Score:3)
Among their demands is that the ISP's
3) advise us of the name and physical address of the person operating this site;
Surely that would be illegal ??!!
My Copy of DeCSS is Freedom of Speech (Score:3)
Why? Because it is formatted, in HTML, to be a giant ASCII-art version of the OpenDVD logo, expressing my belief that DVDs should be open and viewable by anyone, anywhere, free from restrictions, on any OS.
--
-Esme
Introducing PooPoo - The DeCSS Alternative (Score:4)
The MPAA will likely have a hard time scraping all the PooPoo from the Internet but, hey, shit happens right? One might imagine MPAA lawyers in their polished Oxfords having a hard time with PooPoo in court too, as lines like "we've got to stop the flood of PooPoo!" and "right now PooPoo is floating around everywhere" will likely fail to amuse federal judges after awhile.
Get PooPoo [216.200.235.72]! It's the SHIT!
Re:MPAA must be careful... (Score:4)
> afraid. Imagine how quickly the tide could turn against MPAA if they tried to push around Yahoo! or AOL.
That's precisely the problem, though.
MPAA will sue whom it pleases, when it pleases. The Yahoos and Googles and AOLs don't have to worry; MPAA won't bother suing them. MPAA's goal is to put the fear of God into the little guys. Us. The ones nobody cares enough about to defend. When they've chilled reverse-engineering for the sake of interoperability (even though explicitly permitted by DMCA) out of the public eye, they'll have won. The search engines can only index what gets developed and released.
Of course, they'll never do it - the next DeCSS-type application will be released anonymously, through real anonymous channels, as opposed to pseudonymous channels. A post on USENET via an anonymizing remailer through a poorly-configged NNTP server that doesn't include NNTP-Posting-Host: for instance.
Sigh. Didn't we go through this in way the hell back 1995 with alt.religion.scientology and the internal cult docs that wound up mirrored around the world?
It seems the only difference between then and now is that we're up against the part of the movie industry that isn't run by the Cult. (Although MPAA is just as clueless about how the 'net works as the Cult was, they seem to be somewhat more adaptable, albeit far less entertaining. ;-)
I wonder what happens if someone reads DeCSS into the Swedish Parliamentary records. Let's see the MPAA try to take that down! They can arrest a Norwegian, but can they shut down an entire foreign government?
Avoid fascists: Distribute DeCSS with PAD!! (Score:4)
MPAA must be careful... (Score:5)
It reminds me of Arthur Miller's "The Crucible". When Abigail implicated her powerless enemys and the downtrodden of the village, the Powers That Be (in this case the tribunal) did her bidding. As soon as she got too big for her britches and had the audacity to threaten the head of the tribunal, he quickly shut her down, she was forced to flee, and the Salem Witch Trials were over.
My advice to the MPAA: Be careful who you step on, because if you step on a gorilla, he'll smash your face in.
Re:Fear not- it's still there (Score:3)
KEO (Score:4)
http://www.keo.org/uk/your_message.html
That way DeCSS can survive 50000 years...
Easy way to irk the MPAA-- and regain our rights (Score:4)
Set up a P.O. Box to which people are instructed to send $1 (to cover expenses), plus the address they wish to have the source code mailed to. The provider then ships a printed copy of the source code embedded in an essay (of social and political merit) about the dangers of viewing source code as anything less than speech.
No violation of previous precedent (even non-binding) exists, and the first amendment argument is suddenly on very well-established ground.
Furthermore, the MPAA legal team gets to jump through the extra hoops of subpoenaing the P.O. Box provider, attempting to identify the parties actually responsible for the distribution of the source (be smart-- create a "collective" box or something-- don't rent it in the name of whomever is responsible for the distribution), etc. The internet makes for easy access to information and communication-- a dream for anyone attempting to shut down (scare into submission) a lot of information sources at once. Let's give them a bit of leg work to do.
---sig---
Are they going to verify every copy? (Score:3)
Any number of changes from subtle syntax errors to replacing whole modules with the first ammendment could be done to make it legal under the DMCA.
Just make sure you don't include any instructions on how to fix it.
What if they sue you for linking to something that diddn't work?
I bet we could get about 100 Million dollars from the MPAA this way if they persued a bunch of us.
Mirror and Link DeCSS (Score:3)
No problem. Let's all mirror and link DeCSS.
After a little searching, I found a site [pigdog.org] that has developed a nice smokescreen. It's a program, called DeCSS, which removes Cascading Style Sheets from HTML pages. Comes complete with a mirror and linking kit. Nothing illegal about that.
Check out my site [technical.net] for a DeCSS mirror and instructions.
-Todd
---
Re:Call it CUSS instead of DeCSS (Score:5)
Poof new program. The MPAA then has to pay their lawyers to fight everyone again to forbid linking to CUSS. If they win against CUSS, then we produce REmoveCSS. RECSS is a whole new battle. I'd like to see a judge try to forbid everyone on the planet from ever using open sourced code in any program ever.
LK
Re:Does it work recursively? (Score:4)
Also of interest to note, that the site hosting the page is required to:
This is nothing but bad news for the world.
------
Re:MPAA must be careful... (Score:3)
No need to wonder anymore.
I just mailed it to the registrar of the ministry of justice in sweden [ministry.se].
It should be available by mailing them and asking for the mail sent on the 30th or 31th of august,
with titel: "maktmissbruk av MPAA i sverige"
Then you should be able to get your copy.
I CC'ed a copy to malda and 2600.
I'll post the diarynumber as soon as I get it.
Re:A Worldwide Game of Whack-a-Mole (Score:5)
Motion picture DVDs store a decryption key in a special area on the disc. All writable DVDs will have that special area preburned to zeroes, so even a bitwise copy of a DVD won't work.
Unless you pre-decrypt the data with DeCSS.
Why CSS was bothered with in the first instance, I don't know. It's a bit like I always wondered why copy protection schemes were always tried on the Amiga (they were always cracked).
An excellent question.
In order to manufacture DVD players, you need to obtain a copy of the CSS decryption algorithm and a key from the DVD-CCA. Before they give you the algorithm and key, you have to sign an agreement that says that you will, among other things, never manufacture a DVD player that can output unencrypted digital video, or macrovision-free analog video.
Since a DVD player built on DeCSS would not require a license from the DVD-CCA, someone constructing a DVD player around DeCSS would not be bound by the requirement that the player only put out a degraded signal.
This would wreck the market for MPAA-crippled DVD players.
Hence, in order to prevent the appearance of DVD players on the market that are capable of putting out top quality digital video, the MPAA must fight to suppress DeCSS. Obviously they cannot eliminate it, but they can and are eliminating the possibility of circumventing their market control over what features are allowed in DVD players. In other words, their hidden agenda is succeeding, and all the talk here about making billions of copies of DeCSS completely misses the point. Copying is the red herring. It isn't what this fight is about.