Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Linux users march on city hall (my title: Che Guevara to be raised from the dead)
CNET News.com ^ | August 15, 2002, 3:53 PM PT | Lisa M. Bowman

Posted on 08/15/2002 4:54:26 PM PDT by Bush2000

Linux users march on city hall

A small but enthusiastic crowd of Linux lovers hit the streets of San Francisco on Thursday, hoping to trumpet the virtues of open source to lawmakers and voters.

Led by Michael Tiemann, chief technology officer of Linux seller Red Hat, the group marched the mile-long stretch from the LinuxWorld conference to San Francisco City Hall. There Tiemann unveiled the Digital Software Security Act, a proposal that would prohibit the state from buying software that doesn't open its code. Tiemann, wearing a red fedora and clutching a map so he could find his destination, said he also wanted to point out the hypocrisy of the state, which is one of the holdouts in the antitrust battle against Microsoft even as it runs the company's software in government offices.

"While they're spending money suing the monopolist, they're also feeding the monopolist with the other hand," Tiemann told the crowd.

The march attracted the zealous, the fearful and the merely curious.

One marcher, a hotshot Linux programmer who goes by the name of Tack, said it's important that government types listen to open-source advocates before passing laws dealing with technology. He said he's already suffering from federal laws that outlaw certain types of programming that could crack copy protections. "Instead of being able to focus on developing a new technology for my client, I have to think like a lawyer, said Tack, who described himself as a "freelance tech guy." "I don't want to land in jail."

Another marcher, Tim Sullivan, said the event is a chance for programmers to actively protect their right to code.

"I think this is a good chance to stand up for our freedoms," said Sullivan, 22, a computer science student at Oregon State University. "I'm not really a policy person, but it's pretty evident that it's ridiculous to stop people from writing software."

Forming a band of two dozen bobbing red hats, the group snaked through downtown San Francisco, stopping periodically to hear Tiemann cite rights eroded. He spoke of foreign programmers afraid to travel to the United States, content companies with too much power in Washington, and governments financially strangled by their reliance on proprietary software.

Hoping to reach regular folks, marchers wound up Market Street and past rows of outdoor chess players and department store bag-laden tourists. They stopped briefly at the Metreon shopping center, at a cable car turnaround, and finally, on the steps of city hall. Occasionally they chanted "Balance the budget. Switch to Linux." Few outsiders looked up from their activities to acknowledge the crowd.

At one point, marchers came across a historical plaque that was sponsored by Microsoft. They groaned and quickly papered over the software giant's name with a bumper sticker poking fun at proprietary software that doesn't allow programmers to tinker. "Why would you buy a car with the hood welded shut?" it read.

Turnout was on the low end of the 20 to 100 people Tiemann expected. Some programmers complained of the early 10:30 a.m. start time. One said he had to drag his friend out of bed. Others cited the fast clip of the gangly Tiemann, who took off promptly from the conference hall and rushed up the street, forcing some programmers to jog breathlessly behind him.

But open-source guru Bruce Perens, who marched alongside Tiemann, lamented that most technologists simply aren't paying attention. "It's obvious only a tiny bit of people from (LinuxWorld) turned out, and that presents a problem," he said. "Either they don't understand the issues or they have a business partnership that doesn't allow them to talk about it."

City officials did not greet the marchers when they arrived at city hall. Tiemann said he picked the city hall destination--despite the fact he's pushing his proposal at the state level--because it was the closest major government landmark to the LinuxWorld show. No state legislators have expressed official support for the bill, but Tiemann said he has some meetings planned with lawmakers in the next few days. State Assemblyman Juan Vargas, D-San Diego, has met with proposal author Walt Pennington but took no position one way or the other, spokesman George Balgos said.

The move comes as several government entities across the globe are considering legislation that would require considering open-source alternatives to proprietary software such as Microsoft's.

Not surprisingly, proponents of proprietary software are acting swiftly to quash such endeavors. The Computing Technology Industry Association (CompTIA), a computer industry lobbying group that along with Microsoft has campaigned against open source, said a mandate to pick open software could drive IT companies out of business, endanger 200,000 technology jobs in the state, and restrict choice.

"Such purchase decisions should be made on the basis of objective criteria without a presumption that proprietary, hybrid or open-source software would be the best solution in every case stated," Grant Mydland, CompTIA's director of state government relations and grassroots programs, said in a statement Thursday.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Front Page News; Technical
KEYWORDS: linux; zealots
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-149 next last
Turnout was on the low end of the 20 to 100 people Tiemann expected.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!


"The life of a single human being is worth a million times more than all the property of the richest man on earth... Far more important than a good remuneration is the pride of serving one's neighbor. Much more definitive and much more lasting than all the gold that one can accumulate is the gratitude of a people."
--Che Guevara


Where have I heard that before?!?

1 posted on 08/15/2002 4:54:26 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
More Che:

"If we plan to redistribute the wealth of those who have too much in order to give it to those who have nothing; if we intend to make creative work a daily, dynamic source of all our happiness, then we have goals towards which to work."
-Che Guevara

2 posted on 08/15/2002 4:56:30 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
What wuz that guy smokin'?
3 posted on 08/15/2002 5:49:32 PM PDT by The Duke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Duke
What wuz that guy smokin'?

Ask Stallman.
4 posted on 08/15/2002 5:53:21 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
To paraphrase Mussolini, think of Fascism as the merger of the corporation and the state. There is no better an example of this incestuous relationship than companies like Microsoft.
5 posted on 08/16/2002 4:18:28 PM PDT by dheretic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
"One marcher, a hotshot Linux programmer who goes by the name of Tack"

That pretty much says all anyone needs to know about these loons, doncha think? :)

Of course the rest of the paragraph, where he bitches about how new laws might put him in jail for writing pirateware, well, that's priceless too.

And the bit about buying a car if the hood is welded shut? I wonder if these numnuts would board an airliner if they're prohibited from opening the engine cowls?

The linuxers are more and more starting to remind me of the "coalition" of fruitcake factions that always present themselves as the Democratic Party's mainstream constituency.

6 posted on 08/16/2002 4:24:49 PM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dheretic
"To paraphrase Mussolini, think of Fascism as the merger of the corporation and the state. There is no better an example of this incestuous relationship than companies like Microsoft."

Except, perhaps, for the pack of mad dog "competitors" who opted to "compete" in the courtroom rather than the showroom. BWaaaaahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaa, etc.

7 posted on 08/16/2002 4:26:24 PM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

There is no better an example of this incestuous relationship than companies like Microsoft.

Actually, Enron is the winner in this division: they basically existed to game the energy regulations, gave millions to politicians, might still be in business if G*r* had won and implemented the Kyoto treaty.

8 posted on 08/16/2002 4:33:19 PM PDT by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe
Of course the rest of the paragraph, where he bitches about how new laws might put him in jail for writing pirateware, well, that's priceless too.

Tell that to the Norweigan kid whom the MPAA is trying to imprison for writing software to view DVDs (view, not copy). But the "Digital Software Security Act" is misguided; these guys should be trying to get bad laws like the DMCA repealed or struck down, rather than trying to have government forcibly impose their preferences.

9 posted on 08/16/2002 4:40:42 PM PDT by ThinkDifferent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ThinkDifferent
I'm supposed to feel sorry for some h@ck0rz d00d who got busted for rytng krakwarez?

Cry me a river.

10 posted on 08/16/2002 4:53:30 PM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ThinkDifferent
... these guys should be trying to get bad laws like the DMCA repealed or struck down, rather than trying to have government forcibly impose their preferences.

How about a simpler approach: License the freakin' drivers for Linux from the MPAA and play your DVDs. But ... NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ... you've gotta be drama queens ...
11 posted on 08/16/2002 5:02:07 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
How about a simpler approach: License the freakin' drivers for Linux from the MPAA and play your DVDs. But ... NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ... you've gotta be drama queens ...

Better idea: just write the software anyway. F#$% IP law, we don't need to obey such fascist drivel as that trash currently on the USC.

Technology should not be bound by such petty and pathetic ideas such as ensuring "fairness" and "compensation." Just because you invented something does not give you a right to profit from it if the only way you can profit from it is to abridge the rights of the public. I gain nothing from the DMCA and similar legislation. It does not bring me better products and services that are more versatile in how I can use them. It does not enhance my rights, it only tells me, "research this area of Computer Science and go to prison if you publish your term paper."

I hope I live to see the day that Jack Valenti and Hilary Rosen are escorted to a federal prison by US Marshalls for the corruption that their organizations force upon the public. The **AA, DVDCCA and BSA are damn good arguments for establishing a corporate death penalty statute (give the state supreme court the discressionary power to revoke the charter and force the liquidation of the assets).

12 posted on 08/16/2002 6:32:13 PM PDT by dheretic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe
The linuxers are more and more starting to remind me of the "coalition" of fruitcake factions that always present themselves as the Democratic Party's mainstream constituency.

As opposed to Microsoft which is looking more like it's run by the reanimated corpses of the HUAC. Calling its competition unAmerican(tm) and implying that it is communistic is pathetic. Funny thing Don, I'm running RH 7.3 right now and 2/3 candidates I've voted for are Libertarians, not Republicans. I'm typical of the Linux users I've met.

13 posted on 08/16/2002 6:36:17 PM PDT by dheretic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dheretic
Better idea: just write the software anyway. F#$% IP law, we don't need to obey such fascist drivel as that trash currently on the USC.

You do that, dood. Enjoy the orange jumpsuit.

Technology should not be bound by such petty and pathetic ideas such as ensuring "fairness" and "compensation." Just because you invented something does not give you a right to profit from it if the only way you can profit from it is to abridge the rights of the public. I gain nothing from the DMCA and similar legislation. It does not bring me better products and services that are more versatile in how I can use them. It does not enhance my rights, it only tells me, "research this area of Computer Science and go to prison if you publish your term paper."

Thanks, CheI hope I live to see the day that Jack Valenti and Hilary Rosen are escorted to a federal prison by US Marshalls for the corruption that their organizations force upon the public.

You have a better chance of resurrecting Che.

The **AA, DVDCCA and BSA are damn good arguments for establishing a corporate death penalty statute (give the state supreme court the discressionary power to revoke the charter and force the liquidation of the assets).

Corporate death penalty?!? Put your mouthpiece back in your mouth immediately!
14 posted on 08/16/2002 6:43:32 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dheretic
"2/3 candidates I've voted for are Libertarians, not Republicans. I'm typical of the Linux users I've met."

Heheheh, you're a funny guy, ya know!

If you had any idea of the measure of contempt I reserve for Libertarians... oh, my achin' sides!

15 posted on 08/16/2002 6:43:46 PM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dheretic; Bush2000
"Better idea: just write the software anyway. F#$% IP law, we don't need to obey such fascist drivel as that trash currently on the USC."

And the Libertinas wonder why normal folk hold them in such contempt?

"Technology should not be bound by such petty and pathetic ideas such as ensuring 'fairness' and 'compensation.'"

Spoken like a true bolshevik, tovarish!

I see B2K's Che' reference was spot on!

"Just because you invented something does not give you a right to profit from it if the only way you can profit from it is to abridge the rights of the public."

I love it! You're possessed by the ghost of Gueverra!

My sides! Sh!t, d00d, yer killin' me!

C'mon, tell us how you really feel. Go ahead, let it rip: I know you're dyin' to blurt out something about The Glorious People's Revolution. Go ahead. You're among friends. You can trust everyone here. We would never dream of calling in the White Coat Squad for you, umm... Comrade "Che'"

(I can't take it anymore, my sides are gonna split!)

16 posted on 08/16/2002 6:49:58 PM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000


17 posted on 08/16/2002 6:51:37 PM PDT by Incorrigible
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dheretic
As opposed to Microsoft which is looking more like it's run by the reanimated corpses of the HUAC. Calling its competition unAmerican(tm) and implying that it is communistic is pathetic.

Hardly pathetic. Your goals match line-by-line... nationalization of private property, redistribution of wealth, united Bolsheviks striving against corporate oppression, etc, etc. You're rubbing elbows with Marx, dood!

Funny thing Don, I'm running RH 7.3 right now and 2/3 candidates I've voted for are Libertarians, not Republicans. I'm typical of the Linux users I've met.

Grrrrrrreat. You're in lovely company. Your friendly neighborhood Libertarians just want to grow their own weed without "the man" killing their buzz. And let's not forget their fondness for child pornographers: Information just wants to be free, right? Puh-lease.
18 posted on 08/16/2002 6:52:07 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000

TorvalsChe.gif

19 posted on 08/16/2002 6:54:33 PM PDT by Incorrigible
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dheretic
"As opposed to Microsoft which is looking more like it's run by the reanimated corpses of the HUAC. Calling its competition unAmerican(tm) and implying that it is communistic is pathetic."

This is really hilarious, coming as it does from a spittlechin who just finished ejaculating such marxist tripe like, "F#$% IP law, we don't need to obey such fascist drivel as that trash currently on the USC," and, "Technology should not be bound by such petty and pathetic ideas such as ensuring 'fairness' and 'compensation,'" and, "because you invented something does not give you a right to profit from it" -- good grief you commies are a hoot!

20 posted on 08/16/2002 6:57:02 PM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Incorrigible
Heheheheh, someone needs to slap that image into every thread where some dinkus tinkles something about "did you know Bill Gates is an athiest?"
21 posted on 08/16/2002 6:59:36 PM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Incorrigible
Dude, I dig your cut-and-paste job. But we've gotta talk about some Photoshop basics ... ;-)
22 posted on 08/16/2002 7:01:35 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
I've met some of those type guys in real life -- that's how they really look! :)
23 posted on 08/16/2002 7:06:41 PM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
How about a simpler approach: License the freakin' drivers for Linux from the MPAA and play your DVDs. But ... NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ... you've gotta be drama queens ...

Just one problem: MPAA/RIAA insists on region encoding as part of the standard. We don't accept that, and will go on hacking our DVD players and buying the backstreet Asian models that don't have this "feature" until RIAA goes broke.

24 posted on 08/16/2002 7:12:19 PM PDT by BlazingArizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BlazingArizona
"Just one problem: MPAA/RIAA insists on region encoding as part of the standard. We don't accept that, and will go on hacking our DVD players and buying the backstreet Asian models that don't have this 'feature' until RIAA goes broke."

I hear ya man. All the bastard grocers around here pull the same sh!t with their food sales. Well to hell with their policies. I'll just keep stealing it, until they either come to their senses and start giving it away, or go broke.

It's for the people, after all.

25 posted on 08/16/2002 7:14:56 PM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe
How do you build a better mouse trap if you cannot find out how a mouse trap works? If a corporation did it, it would be patent infringment with a slap on the wrist. If a person does it, it is cyber terrorism with manadatory prison sentences. Why should corporations enjoy more freedom than citizens?
26 posted on 08/16/2002 7:15:32 PM PDT by AaronAnderson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AaronAnderson
"If a corporation did it, it would be patent infringment with a slap on the wrist. If a person does it, it is cyber terrorism with manadatory prison sentences. Why should corporations enjoy more freedom than citizens?"

Do you really believe that crap, or are you just typing out of your copy of the Communist Manifesto?

A "slap on the wrist"? Oh, there go my damn sides again!

27 posted on 08/16/2002 7:18:04 PM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
Hardly pathetic. Your goals match line-by-line... nationalization of private property, redistribution of wealth, united Bolsheviks striving against corporate oppression, etc, etc. You're rubbing elbows with Marx, dood!

How does this differ from m$ licensing 6.0, where you do not own any m$ products but only borrow them by the grace of m$, m$ can freely monitor/take your information without consent, effectively giving them complete control over all your information, and lobbying congress to enforce crap laws like the DMCA to prevent people from finding out how bad their products are and creating better ones.

Read the contitution, it says we the people, not we the corporations. IP laws are a compromise between the people and businesses; the people will grant companies exclusive rights to a work preventing someone else who may have produced the same work from capitalizing on it in return for future inovations and enhancements from the business. Corporations would love to lock all IP down and make sure no one knows how their product works so they would not have to innovate to stay competitive and lay back and collect royalties. If corporations don't hold up their end of the bargain and screw consumers, than turn about is fair play. I don't want big brother or big bill in my house, they are both unwelcome.

28 posted on 08/16/2002 7:32:54 PM PDT by AaronAnderson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe
I hear ya man. All the bastard grocers around here pull the same sh!t with their food sales. Well to hell with their policies. I'll just keep stealing it, until they either come to their senses and start giving it away, or go broke.

If I buy a DVD off eBay from Japan, I fail to see why it's a crime to want to be able to play it in America.

29 posted on 08/16/2002 7:33:41 PM PDT by NovemberCharlie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe
it sure ain't a prison sentence, just a cash payment from the pockets of the stock holders. Billions of dollars have been stolen by corporate thieves but few if any will ever be punished for it, let alone sent to prison for it. However, if Don Joe reverse engineers a bad encryption code to let consumers enjoy their copies of The Last Action hero on Linux, their prefered operating system, Joe goes up the river for years. Of course, Don Joe believes we need to go back to the robber barron period where consumer rights were non existant and the trusts ruled the market, so I am sure this point will be lost on him.
30 posted on 08/16/2002 7:44:18 PM PDT by AaronAnderson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: AaronAnderson
How does this differ from m$ licensing 6.0, where you do not own any m$ products but only borrow them by the grace of m$, m$ can freely monitor/take your information without consent, effectively giving them complete control over all your information, and lobbying congress to enforce crap laws like the DMCA to prevent people from finding out how bad their products are and creating better ones.

Geez, talk about run-on sentences. Wipe away the drool. Let's address your points. MS products are the private property of MS. They invested in them. They paid salaries to engineers and testers and product designers. Not you. They offer those products with certain conditions and restrictions -- in pretty much the same way that many other products have conditions and restrictions. (I don't see any contradictions of capitalism yet).

If you don't like the license agreement, don't use the product! It's as simple as that. Nobody is forcing you to use them. But the thing here is that you don't have any intention of using the products. You're using this little forum to prop up your ranting soapbox diatribes against MS.

Read the contitution, it says we the people, not we the corporations. IP laws are a compromise between the people and businesses; the people will grant companies exclusive rights to a work preventing someone else who may have produced the same work from capitalizing on it in return for future inovations and enhancements from the business. Corporations would love to lock all IP down and make sure no one knows how their product works so they would not have to innovate to stay competitive and lay back and collect royalties. If corporations don't hold up their end of the bargain and screw consumers, than turn about is fair play. I don't want big brother or big bill in my house, they are both unwelcome.

It's rather hypocritical for you to offer up the Constitution as validation for your point of view and then rip it up like a ragged cloth when it doesn't suit your purposes. The Constitution clearly recognizes the concept of intellectual property. This isn't new. Patents aren't new. But they certainly are inconvenient concepts for those who want to shred the Constitution because it happens to conflict with their world view; namely, that they should be able to rip off private property from the "evil corporations". Sorry, like it or not, DMCA is Constitutional until the USSC says it ain't. Go fish.
31 posted on 08/16/2002 9:09:03 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: NovemberCharlie
If I buy a DVD off eBay from Japan, I fail to see why it's a crime to want to be able to play it in America.

It's not a crime to want to play it in America. What ever gave you that impression?
32 posted on 08/16/2002 9:10:40 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
I misspoke. The point is, the DVD player will not play a legally purchased disc.
33 posted on 08/16/2002 9:13:27 PM PDT by NovemberCharlie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
MS products are the private property of MS. They invested in them. They paid salaries to engineers and testers and product designers. Not you. They offer those products with certain conditions and restrictions -- in pretty much the same way that many other products have conditions and restrictions. (I don't see any contradictions of capitalism yet).

This license states that you are not buying a product, something that you posess, but a service. This service comes with a license that says m$ can do whatever they want with your computer and data, and you have no recourse if they botch something up, deliberate or not. This flys in the face of consumer protection and consumer rights. If I want to play a WB DVD in a panisonic DVD player, even though WB is a partner with sony and has signed an exclusive DVD player deal with them, as a consumer I should be able to do it since I purchased the intellectual property. I shouldn't have have to consult a lawyer everytime I install a piece of software to make sure I don't break some obscure clause stating I can only run the software on tuesdays because that is Andy Griffith's favorite day. Software should be treated as any other intellectual property, such as a book, where one can do anything they want with it except reproduce it. I mean, one can even <*gasp*> quote from it using the fair use clause. How much fair use do you think we will ever see from any m$ product?

If you don't like the license agreement, don't use the product! It's as simple as that. Nobody is forcing you to use them. But the thing here is that you don't have any intention of using the products. You're using this little forum to prop up your ranting soapbox diatribes against MS.

Yeah, you are right, I will never buy any of their products and avoid using them as much as possible. However, I have never be swindled by a con man who sells $5,000 dance lessons to elderly old women but I still believe that consumers should be protected from them. Yes, the snake oil salesmen could turn quite a profit if left to their own devices, but the consumer has rights (what a concept) and they deserve to be protected.

It's rather hypocritical for you to offer up the Constitution as validation for your point of view and then rip it up like a ragged cloth when it doesn't suit your purposes. The Constitution clearly recognizes the concept of intellectual property. This isn't new. Patents aren't new. But they certainly are inconvenient concepts for those who want to shred the Constitution because it happens to conflict with their world view; namely, that they should be able to rip off private property from the "evil corporations". Sorry, like it or not, DMCA is Constitutional until the USSC says it ain't. Go fish.

I have <*never*> contested that IP should not be protected or that all IP should be somehow socialized. I am however completely against the idea that companies somehow have the right to control usage of their product once somebody buys it in the marketplace. If I go to barns and nobles and buy a book, I can take it home and read it, throw it away, burn it, use it for toilet paper, read it to friends, borrow it to friends, etc. Now imagine that random house emplaces the same legalistic EULA's like m$'s so I when I take the book home I have to read the first 100 pages which is the license. Then I must abide by the rule that I must read the book every night for ten minutes before I go to bed or the Feds will come in and confiscate all my books because I broke the EULA. Or Imagine I "buy" a toyota camry (in the future you do not own anything, you only lease items or property from companies) and as I cross the california state line the car suddenly dies and and message pops up on the dashboard saying that toyota is in a contract dispute with the california government so all toyota cars will not function within it's boarders.

The difference between you and me is that I don't believe corporate ownership and manipulation of a product beyond the point of sale is good for the consumer. I don't see that corporate ownership of everything is any better than the government ownership of everything. I believe that if you buy a product, you own it, you just don't have the right to reproduce and sell it. Our IP system has worked fine for two hundred years with a balance of ownership and fair use, heck we even have a library of congress that contains an enormous amount of information. Will we ever see software stored there? The current extortion of the laws regarding digital media only hinders innovation through legislation and only aids corporations and not the consumer.

34 posted on 08/16/2002 10:17:27 PM PDT by AaronAnderson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: AaronAnderson; Bush2000
Read the contitution, it says we the people, not we the corporations. IP laws are a compromise between the people and businesses; the people will grant companies exclusive rights to a work preventing someone else who may have produced the same work from capitalizing on it in return for future inovations and enhancements from the business. Corporations would love to lock all IP down and make sure no one knows how their product works so they would not have to innovate to stay competitive and lay back and collect royalties. If corporations don't hold up their end of the bargain and screw consumers, than turn about is fair play. I don't want big brother or big bill in my house, they are both unwelcome."

Yo, Ralphie!

I hear they're gonna bring back the Corvair.

Boo!

Hey, I had ya goin' there for a minute, didn't I, ah ha ha ha ha ha!!!!

Just kidding. Your tripe is far far far to the left of anything Nader ever puked up. You sound like an aircheck tape from a Pacifica station.

35 posted on 08/16/2002 11:37:57 PM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: NovemberCharlie
"If I buy a DVD off eBay from Japan, I fail to see why it's a crime to want to be able to play it in America."

OK, thanks for being up-front and honest about your inability to understand this arguably complex concept.

I'll type reaaaaal slow for ya: it's a crime because it's illegal.

Now go take off the day.

36 posted on 08/16/2002 11:39:33 PM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: AaronAnderson
"it sure ain't a prison sentence, just a cash payment from the pockets of the stock holders. Billions of dollars have been stolen by corporate thieves but few if any will ever be punished for it, let alone sent to prison for it. However, if Don Joe reverse engineers a bad encryption code to let consumers enjoy their copies of The Last Action hero on Linux, their prefered operating system, Joe goes up the river for years. Of course, Don Joe believes we need to go back to the robber barron period where consumer rights were non existant and the trusts ruled the market, so I am sure this point will be lost on him."

More communist agitprop.

Shouldn't you be getting into the bodypaint and crazyman costume to go protest a WTO meeting?

37 posted on 08/16/2002 11:40:44 PM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: AaronAnderson
"The difference between you and me is that I don't believe corporate ownership and manipulation of a product beyond the point of sale is good for the consumer."

Totally immaterial to the argument at hand. You do not "buy" software (unless you're talking about a scenario where you pay me to write you some code under "work for hire" conditions), and you never have "bought" software. You are buying restricted rights to use it.

Get that through your thick liberskull!

38 posted on 08/16/2002 11:44:44 PM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
Your goals match line-by-line... nationalization of private property, redistribution of wealth, united Bolsheviks striving against corporate oppression, etc, etc.

This coming from a Bush supporter, a republican president whose peacetime spending has outstripped Clinton's. Go be a compassionate conservative with someone else's rights.

39 posted on 08/17/2002 11:11:36 AM PDT by dheretic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe
Do you really believe that crap, or are you just typing out of your copy of the Communist Manifesto?

People like you are the reason why few intelligent people take the threat of Communism seriously. You see Communists under every rock, in every tree and around every corner. It never occurs to people like you that the fight of Capitalism versus Communism is irrelevant. It has always been a fight between liberalism and authoritarianism. Most people lean toward the latter, not the former. Your corporation-worship puts you squarely into the latter. Every institution in society must be held to the same ethical standards. Corporations exist because the states allow them to. They are a way of getting around the idea of the owners *gasp* actually being accountable for the actions of their companies.

40 posted on 08/17/2002 11:19:08 AM PDT by dheretic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: dheretic
What a joke. You still sound like a rabid commie, sheesh!
41 posted on 08/17/2002 11:24:02 AM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe
You are buying restricted rights to use it.

Only in states that have contract law set up like that. It would be quite easy for a state to declare that vendors cannot force a contract on customers thus nullfying EULAs.

42 posted on 08/17/2002 11:24:45 AM PDT by dheretic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe
What a joke. You still sound like a rabid commie, sheesh!

Keep on posting, I enjoy the feel of vindication.....

43 posted on 08/17/2002 11:25:53 AM PDT by dheretic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: dheretic; Bush2000
"This coming from a Bush supporter, a republican president whose peacetime spending has outstripped Clinton's. Go be a compassionate conservative with someone else's rights."

This coming from a marxist-anarchist-Libertarian. Go do information-wants-to-be-free with someone else's property.

44 posted on 08/17/2002 11:31:06 AM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

Or more appropriately, do it with your own property.

I'll never cease to be amazed at the amount of "compassion" and "generosity" and "liberty" you lefties like to impose using other people's property.

45 posted on 08/17/2002 11:32:32 AM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
The article makes no comment about redistribution of wealth. It did indicate that programmers were concerned about their ability to write software. Did we read the same article?
46 posted on 08/17/2002 11:33:36 AM PDT by RWG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dheretic
"I enjoy the feel of vindication....."

Call it what you will, but as long as you continue to stroke it, it'll always be your "special purpose". I bet you're glad you found it, eh?

47 posted on 08/17/2002 11:34:03 AM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: RWG
"The article makes no comment about redistribution of wealth. It did indicate that programmers were concerned about their ability to write software. Did we read the same article?"

Tres drole'!

Kinda like second story men complaining about the proliferation of anti-pick locksets and how it infringes their right to pick locks, while saying nothing about their activites once the locks are picked.

They "were concerned about their ability to write software", were they?

How touching.

It reminds me of the plight of women who are "were concerned about their ability to exercize their 'right to choose.'"

Divorce the word from its context, and it sounds so bloody innocent, doesn't it.

48 posted on 08/17/2002 11:37:36 AM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: AaronAnderson
This license states that you are not buying a product, something that you posess, but a service. This service comes with a license that says m$ can do whatever they want with your computer and data, and you have no recourse if they botch something up, deliberate or not. This flys in the face of consumer protection and consumer rights.

First, check your "S" key: It seems to be transposed with the "$" key. Second, you can think of software as a kind of interactive cable TV. You don't "own" it in any sense. It's a service. The data and your interactions are clearly covered by the service agreement. Your rights as a consumer are simple: If you don't like it, don't buy. It's that simple. The terms are clear, if you bother to read the license. Illiteracy, ignorance, or apathy isn't an excuse not to pay attention to the terms: They are revealed.

Software should be treated as any other intellectual property, such as a book, where one can do anything they want with it except reproduce it.

Except that's the fundamental problem: Your freeloading bretheren want everything for free and, therefore, are reproducing it. That's the crux of the problem and the reason that the license exists.

However, I have never be swindled by a con man who sells $5,000 dance lessons to elderly old women but I still believe that consumers should be protected from them.

The terms are spelled out in black and white. They're legally binding. If that still isn't enough for you, you might want to try "Hooked on Phonics".

The difference between you and me is that I don't believe corporate ownership and manipulation of a product beyond the point of sale is good for the consumer.

There are far more differences than that, bub. If software were like any other physical consumer good (like a book or a chair or a loaf of braid), I'd agree. But it's not. It can be readily reproduced. It can be readily distributed in a way that physical goods can't. Therefore, it needs special protections to prevent a*holes from stealing it.

I don't see that corporate ownership of everything is any better than the government ownership of everything.

I never said it was. But I do have a problem with anyone -- particularly government -- confiscating private property.

I believe that if you buy a product, you own it, you just don't have the right to reproduce and sell it.

You do own the software media.

Our IP system has worked fine for two hundred years with a balance of ownership and fair use, heck we even have a library of congress that contains an enormous amount of information. Will we ever see software stored there? The current extortion of the laws regarding digital media only hinders innovation through legislation and only aids corporations and not the consumer.

This may come as a surprise but software is a relatively new concept. The founders foresaw the protection of intellectual property -- ideas, as it were -- under the blanket of the Constitution. Software represents a bag of ideas. Companies have to be protected. Or else people will abuse it. That you can't accept that fact is particularly galling. You don't mind daytripping with a blindfold on, saying that people shouldn't have the right to reproduce software, but all the while ignoring the fact that eliminating restrictions would create precisely that result. Stunning.
49 posted on 08/17/2002 12:52:33 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: dheretic
This coming from a Bush supporter, a republican president whose peacetime spending has outstripped Clinton's. Go be a compassionate conservative with someone else's rights.

I support Bush because the alternative is far worse. Shouldn't you be out protesting against corporate oppression alongside the other anarchists?
50 posted on 08/17/2002 12:54:56 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-149 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson