Push Underway For Languishing UCITA 79
mojotoad writes: "Efforts have currently be redoubled to push UCITA through up to 10 states by the end of the year, according to an article on law.com. Apparently, the bill has been "languishing" in state legistlatures. My favorite quote: 'There is a natural euphoria whenever you draft a bill like UCITA,' says Daniel Duncan, executive director of the Digital Commerce Coalition. 'We thought, "We'll take it to the states and they'll see the wisdom of our work."' Time to redouble your effort to thwart this beast. Contact your congressman."
21st post! (Score:2)
Cool, multi-state processing.
That should change software testing policies (Score:4)
People will think twice before putting out software now *cough* MS *cough*.
You want your software to WORK?!? (Score:1)
If I buy a piece of software, I might accept the odd bug, especially if bug lists are available, but there's too much shoddy software that appears to have had about 3 minutes testing by a blind guy with no keyboard.
And you claim to live in a free society (Score:3)
How is it that Americans constantly proclaim their amazingly free society when totalitarian legislation like this can become law? It blatently tramples over all kinds of Constitutional rights, precedents established in courts and the general moral principles claimed by Americans in political arguments.
Until you stop letting your Government using the Constitution as novelty toilet paper, your hysterical rantings about the "land of the free" are nothing more naive, foolish posturings.
Topics ... (Score:1)
I want to be able to customize the
--
This is ridiculous (Score:2)
Liability (Score:4)
This should have been the bill that would put an end to a lot of this, but no:
while software companies should provide reliable goods, they shouldn't have to bear potentially enormous risks associated with the use of their products.
"How many companies are there who would undertake that risk?" Kupferschmid asks. "No one would. It's just too great."
So: The industry knows that its software can cause enormous problems, and yet does not want to take responsibility for them. If a building contractor were to say that, they would be slapped down!
Now instead of a law which would finally force companies to take responsibility for their software and actions, we have one which will instead give them more opportunity to prevent us from doing anything about it. How long before license agreements prevent the dicussion of bugs found in the program? It could be done!
Contact Your Local Representatives! (Score:5)
Some day I hope to have a
This plays into the MS anti trust cases... (Score:1)
Actually this may be harmful for them in the end.. (Score:2)
When they go TOO far, people may start realizing that they have no choice but to use Free Software.
This may end up backfiring big time, because of a shortsighted hunt for profit.
Wouldn't It Be... (Score:1)
...Your state legislature and/or governor, not congressman? I'm not an American, but since this is at the state level, I wouldn't think congress would have much to do with it... Or are there state-level congresses too?
-RickHunter
UCITA in other Countries (Score:2)
Sorry if this is a bit off topic, but I have never seen it discussed on /. ...
How will the UCITA affect shrink-wrap agreements in other countries? I live in Canada, and I really do not see how a law passed in congress (or wherever ;) ) can apply to me. Are there international agreements which would allow the US to enforce this law abroad?
---There is no spoon....---
Write to companies! (Score:1)
Re:And you claim to live in a free society (Score:5)
At the risk of sounding like Katz...
It happens because America is a land of consumers, not citizens. Anything that doesn't specifically enable us to dole out more money for goods and services (to the benefit of corporate interests everywhere) is effectively deemed unnecessary, and anything (such as personal rights) that hinders market reach, share values, and profitability is a threat to be removed or otherwise addressed.
And it's not just that we're being forced into such a position - we're accepting it, settling into it nearly wholeheartedly. (A minority of eligible voters even bothered showing up [fec.gov] to vote in the last presidential election, and it gets even worse [fec.gov] during years when we're not voting on that office.)
Point and jeer all you want - we earned it.
I'm from Virginia ... (Score:1)
Re:UCITA in other Countries (Score:1)
Re:And you claim to live in a free society (Score:1)
there is a balance between protecting people's rights as citizens and the bottom line of american corporations and their stock price.
Re:Wouldn't It Be... (Score:1)
It could be worse (Score:1)
Meanwhile, people argue about the color of the wallpaper in their cells.
Re:It could be worse (Score:2)
I hear Central Services has lots of fancy new colors of ducts!
___
Re:It could be worse (Score:1)
Didn't say we had it better or worse, just that I think it sucks. We're all getting screwed, just in different ways - no sense getting into a pissing contest on who's getting the raw-er deal.
Re:And you claim to live in a free society (Score:1)
Oh, B-freakin'-S. There is no balance - not in existence, and not governmentally guaranteed. Where in the Constitution or Bill of Rights is a "right to profitability," "right to shareholder confidence," "right to protection of business model," etc.?
I don't buy the "economy" excuse, either. During good times, people often justify lackluster voter turnout on a general contentedness/apathy of the public, since said public is happy with what's going on. During less-than-good-times, voter turnout still doesn't typically improve [fec.gov], despite the logic of economy justification that would indicate the public wants improvement. (And if the first held, and the economy had all that much to do with it, then neglecting oil prices, why is Dubya getting all that much consideration? By the logic of the first, we'd leave a Democrat in the office.)
UCITA (Score:1)
Make UCITA Meaningless (Score:2)
The way do deal with this is to start behaving like other industries:
Auto makers don't slap a disclaimer on their products - they slap a warranty on them.
Home builders don't slap a disclaimer on their products - they slap a warranty on them.
Computer makers don't slap a disclaimer on their products - they slap a warranty on them.
As soon as a few software makers start replacing disclaimers with warranties then consumers will start demanding them.
Re:This is ridiculous (Score:1)
It'll be even sooner, now that someone hacked MS and copied their source code.
So how far can they go? (Score:2)
Does this mean that I can put out a blank disk, claiming to have a really cool game, but it just be a few lines of java,... but when smacking a shrinkwrap on it, claim no warranty, and be covered by the UCITA?
In order for laws to be passed, they need to be taken to their extremes, and then tested. Enough with this intent and legal interpretation shit.
relentless (Score:3)
If saner minds prevail, and UCITA is defeated in a few states it will not stop them . We have to understand this and be just as resolute and relentless as our opponents. We also can't give in in the states where UCITA has passed. We have to keep working to get those laws repealed.
"The price of liberty is eternal vigilance." That is what that phrase means. Fighting these people is a lot like mankind's fight with the cockroach - it will never be won - but you have to keep fighting. Set yourself mentally for the fact that you are in a fight that will last your lifetime. We might win battles, but the war will never end.
Re:And you claim to live in a free society (Score:5)
We were a lot more free in some ways in the past. Of course, there have always been stupid things going on, while white males were more free 150 years ago, women were considered 2nd class people, and native americans and black people were considered to be animals. We are also more free than some other countries right now. We are not being run over by tanks for protesting, our police don't kill us as often as the police in some other countries do, although it is getting worse here. And, for the most part we still have some of our rights given to us by the constitution, but that list is getting shorter.
The problem is that most Americans that think we are free do so because their heads are stuck in the past. They don't see what our government has become and how they are getting worse. They don't see that rather than having concerned citizens who are willing to protect the things important to them, we are mostly "consumers" who only care to get what we want to feel good or have fun for a little while. It's not that there are not good people out there, but that the majority only cares about themselves as an individual. That's why most parents are ok with having both the mother and father work 10 hours a day, then come home in time to ship their kids off to soccer practice so they don't have to deal with them. People don't care in the U.S. about anything other than getting more money and more things. We have been converted to a consumer country. Everything is about money, and nothing is about what is good or bad.
I am very fond of how this country was started, and that my life is not in danger as it would be if someone with my attitude were living in China, but that doesn't make the U.S. any less wrong than it is now. I don't know where it all went wrong, but as it currently is, I hate the U.S. but don't know any free place to move to.
Re:Contact Your Local Representatives! (Score:2)
Find your state representitives. Many of them are up for election this year, so you don't have much excuse for (well, after the first Tuesday in November) not knowing who they are!
Jeff
Open Source Cos. Atty supports UCITA?!? (Score:2)
>>>>What is the story here -
Consumer groups' opposition to current software licensing practices -- and to the Uniform Computer Information Transaction Act (UCITA), which is strongly supported by software manufacturers -- could have the unintended effect of threatening the existence of open source software, an attorney for companies and organizations that develop free software said Thursday.
Speaking at a Federal Trade Commission workshop at which consumer groups and technology companies aired their views of UCITA and its impact of software licenses and warranties, attorney Carol Kunze said the open source and free software movements were extremely concerned about restrictions on their ability to license their programs.
"Licensing is critical, and the ability to embed the license in the product is critical," said Kunze -- who represents Red Hat, TurboLinux, and other companies and groups who create open source software, or free software, that is available for download and redistribution.
Although most of the consumer groups' complaints are directed at software companies that license software for a fee and require individuals to accept the terms of the license before they make a purchase, the dispute over licenses opens a new conflict between consumer groups and the open source movement. Kunze said that open software companies would be wiped out if they had to provide warranties about the software they distribute.
In particular, Kunze criticized a proposal that the Consumer Federation of America made to the FTC prior to the conference that software companies sell rather than license their wares. She expressed concern that this would subject software-makers to the 1975 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act -- which requires that companies certify the reliability of their product before they sell it.
"Magnuson-Moss applies to the sale of consumer goods," said Kunze. "What we do is license. We are worried that people are arguing that it should apply."
She added: "Because the software is free, there are no license fees to support a warranty. If free software makers lose the right to disclaim all warranties and find themselves getting sued over the performance of the programs they've written, they will stop contributing free software to the world."
But Jonathan Band, an attorney at Morrison and Forester who represents technology companies that seek to develop interoperable systems, said that Kunze's defense of licensing was overwrought. "It is a given that people are going to license software," Band said. "Given that, the question is whether there certain terms that should be prohibited in licenses."
Re:I'm from Virginia ... (Score:4)
I also am from Virginia. Yes, the UCITA legislation has passed. HoweverThere was also a resolution [state.va.us] passed that the Joint Commission on Technology and Science would study the impact of the legislation and report back to the General Assembly by December 1, 2000. Furthermore, the UCITA legislation is not set to take effect until July 1, 2001.
It is not too late.
Write to your state senators and representatives (not your federal congressional representatives, but the ones that represent you in the state legislature - which you can find here [206.246.254.9] - although it probably couldn't hurt to write to everyone in the state legislature if you are motivated to do so). Refer to the Uniform Computer Informations Transactions Act, or SB372 (from 2000 legistlative session) or CHAP996 (the actual additions to the Code of Virginia). Explain to them nicely, coherently, and concisely why UCITA is bad for Virginia, its citizens, and even its businesses. Point out how the other states have been unwilling to adopt UCITA and why.
UCITA can still be repealed in Virginia. Now is also the time to redouble our efforts towards that goal.
Won't take responsibility (Score:1)
Translation: Sofware shouldn't have holes, but but it does, and people still buy it, so they wait until someone else finds the hole before they fix it.
I guess this also means that no one has already tried to sue a company because their crappy product killed their system, and thus cost them loads of time and money. I'd love to see somebody sue MS for allowing something like Mellisa, or I Love You to cripple their company.
IMHO people take no pride in their work. If they actually cared, and didn't have the marketing dept pushing the product out the door, then this wouldn't even be an issue. OSS all the way.
Re:Open Source Cos. Atty supports UCITA?!? (Score:1)
How would the corporations be affected differently by UCITA?
Re:And you claim to live in a free society (Score:1)
Certain license terms infringe on your rights but those are unenforceable with or without UCITA. Those issues are dealt with in a completely different jurisdiction of law
Without question, UCITA has its problems but rants like this don't help. Read the law. Find the problems. Suggest how to fix it.
Re:Won't take responsibility (Score:2)
It's all nice and good to say that companeis should stand behind their products and provide a warranty, but also look at how that will affect the companies you *do* care about.
False assumptions (Score:2)
This whole post is based on false assumptions. The excerpt above is the closest you come to actually stating them.
Owning a gun does not make someone "right wing." Traditional liberalism is about personal liberties, and the right to keep and bear arms is the lynchpin of all other personal liberties. The right to keep and bear arms was historically the product of the radical left, and many of it's strongest champions hark from that point of view. Elitism tends toward the view that only a few should be allowed the privelige of arms, it is egalitarianism (historically a "left" or "liberal" position) that leads to the view that everyone has the right to arm and if necessary defend themselves.
Free Software, and, to a lesser degree, Open Source, are also coherent expressions of an egalitarian perspective, that believes not just some select elite, but everyone, should have the ability to learn from, and modify, the programming of their computers. These are actually very similar positions.
Now to get back to the topic of the article, one must ask oneself whether UCITA is an expression of the sort of egalitarian worldview that produced the RKBA and Free Software, or of the right-wing elitism that holds that the people cannot be trusted with weapons or with source code? I must submit that it is an expression of the latter, and furthermore it is blatant rent-seeking, an attempt by big business to gain power over their customers by act of legislature. Those of use that believe in the RKBA and Free Software should therefore also oppose UCITA strongly and vocally. Call your state representatives people. Call or write, dead-tree mail, not email, and let them know you are a registered voter in their district, why you don't want UCITA to pass, and that you WILL be looking at how they vote when it comes up.
Re:In which states is UCITA up for a vote soon? (Score:5)
year, but only Maryland has enacted the law.
Virginia is still holding hearings on UCITA,
which is scheduled to become law in July 2001.
The bill will be up for review this year in Delaware, Hawaii,
Illinois, Iowa, New Jersey, and Oklahoma.
Re:And you claim to live in a free society (Score:2)
Eternal vigilance, man.
zo.
Infoworld's vendetta (Score:2)
issue the past two years. (To the point where my
eyes glaze over when I see the word.) If I believe
half the stuff they claim, it sounds like the
end of the software industry.
Yet another example... (Score:3)
I like this bit: "if software companies are liable for glitches, it will stifle innovation." I say good; far better that our technology is reliable, rather than just being The New k-r@D l33t $7uPh Microsoft and its ilk try to push on us on a yearly basis.
Of course, there needs to be a law out there forbidding any software license (or any other IP license for that matter) from prohibiting activities defined as fair use. No more of this presumption-of-guilt crap from IP-based businesses who see someone copying a DVD to his hard drive and assuming he's going to pirate it. Come to think of it, I've often wondered if fair use should be formally defined; anyone have a take on that?
----------
Read: (Score:2)
"We have spent alot on propaganda. Maybe the people who we are trying to brainwash arent fucking idiots."
What is wrong with Infoworld's claims? (Score:1)
Hmm...this is baaaaaad... (Score:3)
Just a couple of thought here:
Don't write your congressman:Because this is a uniform set of proposed state laws, your congressional rep in DC can't do much about it. Instead, contact your representatives in your state legislatures.
The software manufacturers want the best of both worlds:There has been a debate in recent years about whether software constitutes a product or a service. In broad terms, vendors selling a product are more accountable to consumers than those selling a service. UCITA sounds like an attempt by corporate giants to treat their software as a product, while still maintaining the lower liability thresholds associated with a service. It really sucks.
Here's an idea...Let's get UCITA ammended. Software makers could have a choice: either (a) open source your software under GPL and enjoy the limited liability associated with a service, or (b) put out a closed source product and be held accountable. That might just cause some vendors to make better software...
Which States? (Score:1)
Does anybody know which 10 states they're concentrating on? I'm certain my letter will have a greater effect if California is actually considering this legislation. I'd hate to look silly by writing about a bill not under consideration.
Bugs won't ever be fixed again. (Score:1)
Re:Yet another example... (Score:1)
I remember when a certain Congressman said that copyright laws ought to be changed so that they would match copy protection (rough paraphrase). That Congressman was Al Gore, who had introduced the bill to mandate SCMS, and who (big surprise) was part of the Clinton/Gore Administration that backed the Orwellian version of the DMCA. (You know, the one that outlaws exercising your right to copy under the real copyright laws if it happens to conflict with "technological protection measures".)
it is about to be done (Score:2)
there are stirrings and rumours about making places like bugtraq illegal, as they allow for illegal activities. if the government is allowed to say that x site does not help by posting bugs, but is in fact an "evil den of hacker iniquity" then we are very much screwed.
Interesting timing (Score:1)
--
So submit an alternative... (Score:3)
[the fight] will never be won - but you have to keep fighting. Set yourself mentally for the fact that you are in a fight that will last your lifetime.
There's a way to put a stake through its heart:
Come up with an alternative and start lobbying to get THAT passed. This puts them in much the same position we are in now, and we've got more voters and callers.
Once an alternative, setting forth OUR idea of what the law should be, is in place, they have to convince legislators, not just to fill in the void, but to repeal a popular law and replace it with an unpopular one. And you even get to argue on the relative merits!
(Of course as any movie fan knows, occasionally the baddie gets the stake pulled OUT of it's heart. So it's not necessarily a win for all time. But at least you get to sleep more easily for a few decades. B-) )
Re:Won't take responsibility (Score:1)
I'm not familiar with Caldera's programs, is xbill something that THEY write? If so, then they should be responsible.
Debian shouldn't be responsible for their *unstable* release, because they advertise it as such.
If you can't install a distro, well, that's probably not gonna cost your company a full day's work, like a hole in Outlook can.
I'm all for equal treatment. The point I had in my head, was that software companies that make crappy products that can cripple your system and/or business should accept responsibility. I would hold any *NIX to the same criteria.
OTOH GNU/OSS programs fall into a different category, since they are not written by companies. In my mind, companes have a higher responsibility to their customers, than coders working on an independent project. This is because people are actually paying for the product. Software companies are paid to produce programs, whereas people who write code to be helpful do it as an aside.
I hope I've addressed your issues, if not, I check my responses regularly
Re:And you claim to live in a free society (Score:3)
And, for the most part we still have some of our rights given to us by the constitution, but that list is getting shorter.
You have it backwards. Unfortunately, this belief that the Constitution gives us (the people) rights is not correct.
The Constitution does not give us rights, it is supposed to sharply define what (hopefully few) rights the government has. In the view of the Founding Fathers, we already have the rights (God-given and all that), and it's the government that has to be given some rights for the benefit of society as a whole.
The government and the special interest groups have come to believe that the government and the Constitution are the source of our rights, and have been acting in that fashion for quite some time now.
No, the original intent was that the government take the minimally necessary steps to ensure the safety and well-being of all. However, it has become an instrument of special interest groups to try to carve out areas of interest and profits for themselves.
It's well past time for everyone to see the folly of such an attitude. It is like with a community park, where the neighbors don't get along with each other any more. First one person stakes a claim on "his" portion of the park. Then everyone now becomes intent on stakings claims to "their" parts of the park. Soon the park is broken up into all these little areas, all clearly marked. Sure, now you've got your own space, and no one will disturb you without your permission. But you can't play frisbee in the park, nor have a picnic, or just go for a stroll without a lot of negotiation. This is tedious and time-consuming. The park as a whole as lost much of it's value.
Contrast that with a more community-minded attitude (such as with OSS). Everyone shares the park, and helps maintain it. You don't have all these boundries to worry about. You just go ahead and have that frisbee game, or walk your dog, or have a picnic. Of course, this system is subject to abuse. Some people may leave litter after their picnic, or some dog crap after a walk. But the answer to this is education, not legislation. That's what we strive for in the free/OSS community, and that's what we should strive for in the rest of the world too.
Aside: Hrmmmm... I'm in a very Libertarian mood today. I wonder why?
Iowa already Anti-UCITA (Score:2)
I find it hard to believe that UCITA would get out of committee in the Iowa Legislature, as three of the biggest businesses in the state, in addition to the Universities and the state Attorney General are lined up against it.
Re:Hmm...this is baaaaaad... (Score:2)
2. Such an amendment should not require GPL; that is only way flavor of open source license.
Re:Infoworld's vendetta (Score:1)
I haven't read through it lately so this is from memory, but in addition to all the controls on liability, lawsuits, etc., I believe there's a difference in how licensing is handled for individuals and corporations - individuals have the option of returning the software for a refund if they don't like the click license. Businesses get no such protection.
-- fencepost
Moderators (Score:2)
1. You may not make any negative comments about
this post through any electronic or
non-electronic medium.
2. You agree to give me a +1 karma point,
regardless of its fitness of description.
3. You agree to moderate up all future posts
posted by me and my affiliates.
4. The author is not responsible for any physical
or mental damage resulting from the reading of
this post, including but not limited to:
vomiting, browser-crashing, parkinson,
alzheimer, and loss of nerve cells.
5. The author reserves the right to install a
device in your brain to monitor the compliance
of this agreement, and to deactivate related
brain functions if a violation is found.
Excellent List of States - Updated (Score:4)
Great links!
Proclaiming our Freedom! (Score:1)
Because we're free to pass any totalitarian legislation we want. duh.
Ctimes2
Which 10 states?! (Score:2)
UCITA in Oregon (Score:3)
What is especially appalling is that of the four people on the committee, two are IP landsharks, one is a VP of Microsoft, & only the last one is an elected official.
Guess which way this committe is leaning.
Geoff
Re:In which states is UCITA up for a vote soon? (Score:4)
Try the enemeywww.ucitaonline.com [ucitaonline.com]
You can even sign up for e-mail updates!
What happened in Virginia (a warning) (Score:3)
Virginia opted for what I'm sure seemed like a reasonable compromize between my (and other's) fears and the desires of corporate America. They passed the bill so that they could continue to lure companies to Virginia (and keep the ones they have.) Then they said that the bill wouldn't go into affect until after a period of study of its affects (seems kind of odd that they can study something that isn't working, but it sounded good at the time.)
Maybe I've been reading /. too much and have become paranoid, but I've never seen the results of that study and the bill recently, and quietly, came into affect.
So here's my warning: If your state tries this with you and says that their going to do a study, find out who is doing the study, what methods they are going to use, and what the results are. Find out what conditions need to exist in order for the study to invalidate the bill. This will tell you a lot about how serious they are about the study, and whether or not you need to get a new representative.
Re:It's sad, but true (Score:1)
Liter? Mah SUV doesn't take dem wimpy French liters, it takes gallons like a real car should.
Only thing that comes in liters is dem big coke bottles.
Re:And you claim to live in a free society (Score:1)
Re:Make UCITA Meaningless (Score:1)
Re:In which states is UCITA up for a vote soon? (Score:1)
The reason that I ask is that if you read their FAQ, they seem to villify all Linux supporters who oppose UCITA. In particular they have an entire section devoted to "Myths". In this section they claim that slashdotters are worried about things that aren't true in UCITA.
Well, when push comes to shove, who is right? If it turns out that UCITA passes, and the things that they say are false end up being true, are they responsible?
I assume that they're not. (I don't even know what it would mean for them to be responsible.) Which means that anyone can say anything w/out regard to its truthfulness, just so long as it makes their side look good.
So, how should I (someone woefully uniformed about UCITA) determine whether the /. interpretation of UCITA is true or the ucitaonline interpretation is true? Any suggestions? Please keep in mind IANAL, so to read the actual law would not help. I'm not qualified to interpret it.
Re:Liability (Score:2)
Why does the threat of liability undermine the GPL?
--
Re:So submit an alternative... (Score:1)
If we the people don't like how the government is doing its job, then get involved! Run for political office, where *you* can vote on these things.
At least support candidates that are in agreement with your views. If none exist, then educate them!
If you don't have the time, then donate to organizations that do education and lobbying for the sake of your causes.
Re:Moderators (Score:1)
12 step plans and totalitarian democracies. (Score:1)
But people have to stop treating "The Government" and "Corporations" as if they were a person that can be "fixed", if only we could send them into some 12 step program. These animals are made up of many people, each reflecting their self interest, all in the context of our social norms.
What you get, is what "we" are. Many "see" what the government has become, yet continue along doing exactly the things that made it that way.
Why does a jury grant millions when some stupid idiot spills hot coffee on herself? Worse, what sick state of mind drew the idiot to even consider the very concept of suing in the first place? Government didn't make her do this, she learned this skill from the society she lives in. The moral direction is clear "Take anything you can, by any means, just don't get caught." (Law suits have no risk in "getting caught", other than risking the $36 fee and some time).
Why do we spend so much time persecuting people doing things that might, could, possibly, maybe, cause damage? Heck, we don't stop there, we persecute things that don't cause damage! I don't care what your feelings are on guns, drugs, cell phones, drinking, driving cars bigger than you think "I" need, porn, wearing seat belts, or whatever. I'm not talking "government" here, I'm talking Mothers Against Everything, I'm talking every radio talk show in existence, I'm talking every poll, on every issue. It's always the same. Again, our moral compass is clear, "do onto others, all that won't splash on me".
80% of the population wants a totalitarian system. Just ask. They're screaming for it each and every day, in the papers, on radio, in township meetings, and public protests. They write their congressmen demanding it, every day. Oh, well, just as long as it isn't aimed at them, you see. Memo to Everyone: Just stop it! If my "illegal" behavior doesn't alter your life, property, or right to exist, in some tangible way, then mind your own damned business repeal the damned law.
Hold me fully responsible when I shoot you, and not one second before. Attempted legalcide (using law to maximally bludgeon your victims, right or wrong) should be a serious moral, ethical, and legal offense. Standing by watching others be bludgeoned by law should be a moral and ethical outrages. That is the definition of a free society.
Until people stop being all so eager to take freedom away from everyone else, things will only get worse.
Anyway, the first step in any 12 step plan is "recognize the problem". Let's start with that.
UTICA (Score:1)
Re:Excellent List of States - Updated (Score:1)
No, it isn't. (Score:1)
Er, given that it has only been passed in two states, it's merely an example that corporations try to get favorable legislation passed. Read the article and not the use of:
"Long Odds For Software Law"
"What once seemed a sure bet . . . is languishing in statehouses across the country"
"[Buissness groups are] gearing up to wage a major lobbying war in the states -- a war they didn't think they would have to wage."
"If the legislation doesn't gain momentum in the states this year, its passage across the United States could drag on interminably, which would open the door to significant changes in the language of the law."
Your post is yet another example of Katzian corporationphobes on
Re:I'm from Virginia ... (Score:1)
Re:And you claim to live in a free society (Score:1)
So your post is as foolish as saying "How is it that Western Europeans constantly proclaim their amazingly free society when totalitarian legislation like this can become law in Portugal and Finland?" while the European Commission considers adopting rules that would remove teeth from the legislation anyway.
Re:Liability (Score:1)
Because the vast majority of people who write GPL'd software don't make money off their software (or don't make much, anyway), and therefore can't afford to defend themselves against lawsuits. Also, the policy of "release early, release often" followed by most Open Source programmers guarentees that there will be bugs in the released software. Holding open-source programmers liable for bugs in their products would destroy this practice and reduce the quality of the software.
More sites! (Score:1)
The Uniform Commisioner's [nccusl.org] page on UCITA is not as informative. The Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility have a page [cpsr.org] which has not been updated for some time.
Pro-Information and I vote! (Score:2)
You can make a difference at the state level, and it only takes a few hours of your time. Talk to your neighbors. Give rides to the polls. Pollwatch. Work the phones for that candidate from now until election day.
Even if you don't give a darn about the federal elections, you can make a noticable difference in the local elections. Our statehouse race was decided by less than 50 votes in our district. Push against UCITA. Find out your candidates' positions on UCITA. Get commitments from them, and commit to the candidate who takes positions that are closest to yours.
If this is your one single issue for a statehouse race, let candidates know that you are pro-information - and you vote!
Re:And you claim to live in a free society (Score:1)
We pass unconstitutional laws all the time. It usually requires a lawsuit that addresses the issue of constitutionality to get it overturned. For instance, the Communications Decency Act.
*shrug*
James
Re:Yet another example... (Score:2)
So you believe that non-disclosure agreement you signed when you went to work for a company should be illegal?
Some rights cannot be contracted away. For example, even if you sign a contract permitting someone to kill you, they still cannot legally kill you.
Other rights can be voluntarily given up. For example, you can voluntarily place a work you created in the public domain, thus giving up all copyrights you had in that work.
Now, why do you believe IP rights should belong to the former class rather than the latter?