Hi This may be off subject but I feel this DOES affect ALL of us. Has anyone read the article in the latest Linux format, as it seems that if we are forced to use Digital rights Management software, (if similar laws are introduced in the EU and potentially in the UK) then open source is at risk as there is no guarentee that people will compile this rights management software in to their kernels etc, even though for freely distributable software it's legal to just copy it. I think the SSSCA will make this compulsory but this is not yet law in the US but if it is passed as law then it will eventually affect us in the UK. As a community we need to fight this, but IMO we need to support it, in terms of protecting real copyright, films, music etc. Otherwise we will be seen as condoning piracy, but just oppose the way the industry is going about this. Perhaps point out to the groups behind this that when Linux is used for example in a beowulf cluster to examine scientific data, then using commercial software would cost taxpayers more, and could jepodise projects, not to mention without Linux films like Shrek would not be possible as Linux was used to render the graphics, because it is more stable, cheaper, and open source so it can be tailored to suit it's use, something people can't do with closed source software the same reason beowulf clusters work so well on Linux. I would be interested to start a thread on this so we can discuss how to respond, and perhaps lobby people like sony (who incedently have released a Linux add on for the PS/2), disney, (Linux helps them render films etc). Paul
The article I read (Headlined "Linux under threat?") claims, "the very core of the Linux operating system could be illegal." Hmm. Okay. Bit of a shame really. The article lists the big supporters of this action to be (among others) AOL and Mircosoft. -- Matt __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com
--- Matt Johnson <johnsonmlw@yahoo.com> wrote: > The article I read (Headlined "Linux under threat?")
claims,
"the very core of the Linux operating system could be illegal."
Hmm. Okay. Bit of a shame really.
The article lists the big supporters of this action to be (among others) AOL and Mircosoft.
I too read that article and was shocked. But then it is hardly a big surprise that Microsoft would be in league with backing the statement that "the core of the Linux OS could be illegial"............. Personally, I think it is a load of rubbish. Open Source (thanks to Richard Stallman) has grown to immeasureable proportions, and I for one would like to see it remain that way. Afterall, this is our only way bouycoting proprietry (ahem) OSes.... Regards, Thomas Adam ===== Thomas Adam "The Linux Weekend Mechanic" -- www.linuxgazette.com ________________________________________________________________ Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great. Go to http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/nokia/ discover and win it! The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.
On Wednesday 05 December 2001 6:36 pm, Thomas Adam wrote: [snip]
Personally, I think it is a load of rubbish. Open Source (thanks to Richard Stallman) has grown to immeasureable proportions, and I for one would like to see it remain that way.
Unfortunately, this is *not* aload of rubbish. The SSSCA has been around for a while and looks like it could actually become law, at least in a number of states. The bill was originally drawn up by the US equivelent of a Think Tank. Unfortunately, alot of state legislative bodies tend to take what they say as being gospal and simply get lead by the nose. Looking at the current government's track record over here, the 'if the US think it's good then it must be good' mindset means that if it gets through over there, something similar will get through over here. And don't kid yourself into thinking that laws that daft won't get through over here. Basically the a large part of the SSSCA is just the same as our disasterous RIP bill, except that they've taken it a bit further and they want to be able to spy on you electronically. Under the SSSCA the makers of OS's etc need to build in back doors so that the law enforcement services (read NSA, CIA, FBI) can secretly get into your PC.
Afterall, this is our only way bouycoting proprietry (ahem) OSes....
Regards,
Thomas Adam
===== Thomas Adam
"The Linux Weekend Mechanic" -- www.linuxgazette.com
________________________________________________________________ Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great. Go to http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/nokia/ discover and win it! The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.
-- Gary Stainburn This email does not contain private or confidential material as it may be snooped on by interested government parties for unknown and undisclosed purposes - Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, 2000
Looking at the current government's track record over here, the 'if the US think it's good then it must be good' mindset means that if it gets through over there, something similar will get through over here.
Problem is that in practice no-one (on the legislature) may even be competant to render an opinion. IIRC the US DMCA was passed without the people concerned understanding (or mostly even having read) it.
And don't kid yourself into thinking that laws that daft won't get through over here. Basically the a large part of the SSSCA is just the same as our disasterous RIP bill, except that they've taken it a bit further and they want to be able to spy on you electronically. Under the SSSCA the makers of OS's etc need to build in back doors so that the law enforcement services (read NSA, CIA, FBI) can secretly get into your PC.
Or more likely read any "script kiddie"... In other words we have something supposedly mandating security the most likely effect of which would be to mandate zero security. -- Mark Evans St. Peter's CofE High School Phone: +44 1392 204764 X109 Fax: +44 1392 204763
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:37:02 +0000 Gary Stainburn <gary.stainburn@ringways.co.uk> wrote:
And don't kid yourself into thinking that laws that daft won't get through over here. Basically the a large part of the SSSCA is just the same as our disasterous RIP bill, except that they've taken it a bit further and they want to be able to spy on you electronically. Under the SSSCA the makers of OS's etc need to build in back doors so that the law enforcement services (read NSA, CIA, FBI) can secretly get into your PC.
Don't know why you all worry. If the law is an ass, ignore it. The law of the land exists as a manifestation of the public will, not as a whim of MS and the government. I have no problem doing what I think is right, law or no law. As long as the moral stance is broadly in line with the established norms of our society, go for it. There are plenty of cases where the law follows the citizens of a country rather than vice versa. Mass public protest - I *like* that! -- Phillip Deackes Using Debian Linux /"\ \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN X AGAINST HTML MAIL AND NEWS / \
If only it was so easy... Much as I might like the idea of being burned at the stake for using Linux, that won't help people in schools to use the best software when they don't have permission because it's illegal. OK - it probably won't come to that, but the attempts to use the law against open source are worrying. On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Phillip Deackes wrote:
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:37:02 +0000 Gary Stainburn <gary.stainburn@ringways.co.uk> wrote:
And don't kid yourself into thinking that laws that daft won't get through over here. Basically the a large part of the SSSCA is just the same as our disasterous RIP bill, except that they've taken it a bit further and they want to be able to spy on you electronically. Under the SSSCA the makers of OS's etc need to build in back doors so that the law enforcement services (read NSA, CIA, FBI) can secretly get into your PC.
Don't know why you all worry. If the law is an ass, ignore it. The law of the land exists as a manifestation of the public will, not as a whim of MS and the government. I have no problem doing what I think is right, law or no law. As long as the moral stance is broadly in line with the established norms of our society, go for it. There are plenty of cases where the law follows the citizens of a country rather than vice versa.
Mass public protest - I *like* that!
-- ------------------- Roger Whittaker SuSE Linux Ltd The Kinetic Centre Theobald Street Borehamwood Herts WD6 4PJ ------------------ 020 8387 1482 ------------------ roger@suse.co.uk ------------------
Don't know why you all worry. If the law is an ass, ignore it. The law of the land exists as a manifestation of the public will, not as a whim of MS and the government. I have no problem doing what I think is right, law or no law. As long as the moral stance is broadly in line with the established norms of our society, go for it. There are plenty of cases where the law follows the citizens of a country rather than vice versa.
Mass public protest - I *like* that!
Try getting tha passed the Governers in my school (read 'any school' obviously)! Not that I don't like your thinking - works for many of my hats, but not when I wear my Teacher/ICT coordinator one. -- Matt __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com
On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 07:00:32PM +0000, Phillip Deackes wrote:
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:37:02 +0000 Gary Stainburn <gary.stainburn@ringways.co.uk> wrote:
And don't kid yourself into thinking that laws that daft won't get through over here. Basically the a large part of the SSSCA is just the same as our disasterous RIP bill, except that they've taken it a bit further and they want to be able to spy on you electronically. Under the SSSCA the makers of OS's etc need to build in back doors so that the law enforcement services (read NSA, CIA, FBI) can secretly get into your PC.
Don't know why you all worry. If the law is an ass, ignore it. The law of the land exists as a manifestation of the public will, not as a whim of MS and the government. I have no problem doing what I think is right, law or no law. As long as the moral stance is broadly in line with the established norms of our society, go for it. There are plenty of cases where the law follows the citizens of a country rather than vice versa.
The law has historically been imposed as a means to protect property and of course the more property you've got the more influence you have in shaping what becomes law. Ordinary people have little say in what becomes law, it's largely always been the rich/powerful and that still remains overwhelmingly the case. Now it seems that the intelligence services have made a grab for more law, not because they're interested in paedophiles, terrorists are drug smugglers, but because they're interested in grabbing intellectual property and more `jobs for the boys'. Public compliance is guaranteed by wittering on about the danger of paedophiles etc. Essentially pushing the point that if you don't support the law then you support perverts, terrorists .... There's a really interesting article about this nonsense by Dr Ross Anderson & how they're using the WTC attacks as a fig-leaf: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/wtc.html
Mass public protest - I *like* that!
Yay! The penguinistas should march on Menwith Hill, MI6 Vauxhall and parliament in no particular order and kick the lot out - our taxes would halve over night ;-) Sorry to stray OT a bit but I guess it's important to know what the real agenda & motives behind all this legislation are. -- Frank *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Boroughbridge. Tel: 01423 323019 --------- PGP keyID: 0xC0B341A3 *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* http://www.esperance-linux.co.uk/ "If you ever want to get anywhere in politics, my boy, you're going to have to get a toehold in the public eye."
participants (8)
-
Frank Shute -
Gary Stainburn -
Mark Evans -
Matt Johnson -
Paul Sutton -
Phillip Deackes -
Roger Whittaker -
Thomas Adam