06.16.08
Posted in DRM, GNU/Linux, Patents, FOSS at 3:38 am by Roy Schestowitz
…Because some things should not be said out in public
Nokia can almost be understood. It is struggling to hop from one strand of technology (proprietary software) onto another while obeying and meetings the demands of investors and partners in the media industry, for example. But what Ari Jaaksi did the other day (revealing this dilemma) was rather tactless and in a new blog post he explains just what he meant.
Companies like Nokia need to learn the open source way of working. This means not only fulfilling the letter of GPL, LGPL etc. but also the spirit. In my mind this means integrating the corporate work with the open source community, participating, contributing back the code, building the code in open projects and not only releasing it when mandatory, not forking, etc.
Ryan Paul weighs in on this as well and defends, where possible, what Nokia does.
Another point that is missing from this debate is the part that is played by end users. Regardless of how Nokia and open source software developers view restrictive business practices, it is pressure from the consumer that will eventually make such practices untenable. Regular users are increasingly fighting back as they become aware of the hidden costs built into locks and DRM. These mechanisms are easily circumventable, and they cease to stay relevant when they are repeatedly cracked.
Nokia was seen defending DRM in the past, so there will always be doubt and skepticism. In fact, see some of the reactions to this latest incident. One the more direct responses comes from Balzac:
Oh please, educate me, Nokia.
Nokia: “We want to educate open-source developers.”
Oh please, educate me, Nokia. Actually, never-mind. Kiss my ass instead. BTW, I call it free software, not “open source”.
Nokia: “There are certain business rules [developers] need to obey, such as DRM, IPR [intellectual property rights], SIM locks and subsidised business models.”
You think I need obey? I prefer civil disobedience. DRM? Why would I obey your plan to steal my freedom? “Intellectual property”? What’s that? There is Copyright law and Patent law but to my knowledge, there is no “intellectual property” law.
It’s a good idea to Boycott Nokia. They have an exceedingly imperious and arrogant attitude. Didn’t they just buy Trolltech? Whichever pinhead from Nokia wrote this garbage just did a disservice to Trolltech. It makes Trolltech look like obedient “open source” developers who are in the process of being re-educated by Nokia.
This was posted in response to this gripe.
You better start playing by the rules because else the other companies might do it faster than Nokia and you will lose the opportunity. Oh: And just as a remind: when you go open source, you *must* play by the rules by honoring the license of the software.
Really, it’s sad to listen to things like this from someone controlling the company who owns Trolltech I am sure that the vice-president of companies like Red Hat wouldn’t say nonsense like the above. But it’s no surprise coming from someone in a company that seems to be absolutely in favor of software patents in Europe according to FFII.
Assuming we study the progression of intellectual monopolies and also the subversion by corporations like Novell, Nokia is a large player worth keeping an eye on. It’s discussed in the IRC channel at the moment. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend 
View as PDF
06.12.08
Posted in Microsoft, DRM, GNU/Linux, Novell, Patents, GPL, Fraud, Kernel at 2:00 pm by Roy Schestowitz
“Play by the rules or pick up those toys and go home”
Microsoft’s understanding of open source consistently mirrors its own ambitions — ones that define it to be hybrid and vendor-dependent. Here is the latest example.
It’s official: Microsoft will not accept any external code contributions to its planned Dynamic Language Runtime (DLR), which will run Microsoft’s new scripting languages for the web and Silverlight content on .NET
Microsoft will, though, continue to accept source-code contributions to its slowly emerging implementation of Ruby for .NET, IronRuby. Contributions are helping to build IronRuby and shepherd the language towards the first-full release.
[…]
The reason Microsoft decided to leave the DLR closed, despite taking contributions to the languages that will run inside it, is to protect itself from unwanted licenses and IP claims.
If you look more closely you’ll find that what Microsoft wants is free labour — moreover labour that results in developers and end-user getting dependent on proprietary and pricey programs.
“Give us code, lots of code, more code…”
“But it’s ours. We control it.”
That’s not open source (Free software aside). The story behind Microsoft’s grab of Ruby with .NET is noteworthy also, particularly in light of those Silverlight-bound ‘extensions’. It’s mainly about control. Remember what Microsoft said just days ago and this quick interpretation also: “So could you ask, what is this collaborative development, this new syntagm [Microsoft’s] Mr. Matusow is using all over the place? Well, buried deep towards the very end of his post,”
Sadly enough, Nokia too seems far from committed. It is adamant about enforcing software patents, DRM and other consumer-hostile mechanisms. Bruce Pernes has just responded to that latest lecture from Ari Jaaksi.
…perhaps the community has some education for Jaaksi and Nokia. Jaaksi hosted me at a Nokia dinner in 2000, he’s a nice guy and has been interested in Linux for a long time. But Nokia’s barking up the wrong tree this time, because Nokia can do everything it wants with DRM, IPR, and SIM locks without bothering the Linux developers about it - and both Nokia and the Linux developers will like it better that way. It’s surprising that Nokia doesn’t understand that at this late date.
Here is what Pamela Jones said about this: “Do what you like, but if you wish to use the code, you obey the license. If not, please write your own. Personally, I won’t use DRM’d products. I can wait. I understand Hollywood is a problem for you, but until they wake up and realize they are destroying their old business model by scrupulously avoiding any new ones, instead trying to graft the old one onto a new age, I’ll just avoid their offerings. I can live without Hollywood, I find, when it’s something this vital. I understand that puts Nokia in a tough spot, because they want to do deals with Hollywood. Go ahead and do deals, but leave me out. And please don’t use FOSS code until you are ready to play by the rules. I just won’t buy or use any Nokia phones if you break the rules. I think that’s fair.”
Why can’t these 2 companies simply abide by the rules and spirit of the licences/establishments they embrace (OSI in the former case and GPL in the latter)? Novell is no exception. Novell too happens to be among those sinners. It uses GNU/Linux to sell proprietary software (”mixed source”) and it signs software patent deals. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.07.08
Posted in Microsoft, DRM, FOSS at 4:24 am by Roy Schestowitz
Risks to culture, match made in heaven
Microsoft and intellectual monopoly (IPR) are by no means strangers. They need each other.
In previous posts we showed how Microsoft defended — even enforced — DRM and music player ‘tax’ when it conspired with the MPAA/RIAA for Zune. It’s just the tip of the iceberg when you consider the secret engineering and designs for Windows Vista (an unimproved operating system with facilities Hollywood craves for).
This is not some crazy conspiracy theory. It’s a finely-documented fact and its evidence is not even concealed by those who are involved (they just don’t voluntarily speak about it, unless asked). We recently wrote about another very real conspiracy called the ACTA [1, 2, 3]. The documents have already been leaked (kudos to Wiki Leaks) and here is some inspiring analysis of this.
I’ve recently heard through a grapevine that ACTA negotiants have reportedly signed non-disclosure agreements as a condition of their participation in this week’s secret closed-door meeting in Geneva.
This is an amazing and frightening step backwards in the history of global governance. It also epitomizes the ACTA negotiants’ dismissive attitude towards the importance of credible, transparent trade policy-making in the current global environment.
Anyone who would seek to radically transform the world’s trade in intangible assets without the participation of most of the world’s governments has learned little from the Asian Financial Crisis, the Iraq War, or the ongoing real estate and credit catastrophe.
You may soon find that another cycle is gradually being closed. The media companies require particular restrictions for effective enforcement. Whether people care about software patents or not, the following scoop from The Register mustn’t be missed.
Microsoft’s brainwave is called Device Manners Policy (DMP) and it could ensure that if a sign says “No photography allowe[d]”, then your camera or your phone’s camera won’t work.
I so look forward to the future. Got to love intellectual monopolies that pass laws secretly!
In case it’s not obvious, some of the above renders Free software illegal, globally. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.01.08
Posted in Microsoft, DRM, Intellectual Property, Patents, Europe, America at 8:34 am by Roy Schestowitz
Europe and Software Patents
Harmonisation… like the merging of portions of slime
Harmonisation, unlike “contamination” or “pollution”, has a positive connotation. But there is nothing too positive about bringing a system that everyone admits is already broken beyond repair (USPTO) and merging it with one that is still more functional (EPO, among others).
Nevertheless, it is in the monopolists’ interest to force and impose dysfunctional aspects of their own system upon all others. This way, others who live across the Atlantic are equally disadvantaged (”disadvantaged” as in Microsoft ‘Genuine’ ‘Advantage’). And that’s just what McCreevy (also see [1, 2, 3, 4]) appears to be striving to achieve. [via Digital Majority]
The May agenda takes up a number of problems. For starters, the E.U. wants to draw a road map for harmonizing patent law. Progress could be slow, however, because U.S. reform has bogged down in Congress and the European Commission may not have the legal right to amend the European Patent Convention.
Later on, the same folks could travel across the pacific to achieve similar things. Australia and Japan have already been defeated as far as software patents are concerned.
Community Patent… against the free software community
Nicolas Sarkozy’s strong sympathy towards intellectual monopolies [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8] has not been noted for a while, but have a quick look at this new article. [via Digital Majority]
EU hopes for Community patent under French Presidency
[…]
“If there is enough political will, I am confident of having a solution soon, maybe even under the French Presidency,” Vijzak stated.
Much like “harmonisation”, “community” sounds as though it’s a positive thing. This is seemingly about togetherness and happiness, but in reality it’s something altogether different. “Open XML” is a recent case of naming something for better reception (or blind acceptance). There are many more such examples.
“”Open XML” is a recent case of naming something for better reception (or blind acceptance).”Remember, for instance, that Microsoft ‘advertises’ the DRM features in Windows Vista as ones that apply only to “premium content”, but this hides the fact that all content is intended to fall under this category one day. The misuse of words like “advantage”, “premium”, “trusted”, “secure” and “open” are nothing new and they mustn’t lead to the deception that their repetitive use is supposed to achieve. Conversely, there are words like “criminals”, “thieves”, “pirates”, “terrorists”, “hackers” (meaning already deformed), etc. which are merely serving an agenda of daemonisation; expect them to be foolishly echoed in conferences and the media.
Prior art… when there’s no real ‘art’ at all
The sad news from the UK, regarding software patents to be specific, continues to be followed by reports that demonstrate a degree of sanity. Here is one such example that is new.
UK business method patent struck out
[…]
The patent (number 2,171,877) relates to a method of making pre-paid telephone calls that is available for use from any telephone, and t[he] hardware for doing so.
In a ruling dated May 23, His Honour Judge Fysh (sitting as a High Court judge) found the patent invalid on the grounds of obviousness - based on a study of the prior art - and excluded matter under Article 52 of the European Patent Convention.
Overall, it means that the juridical (legal system) is more rational than the lenient patent office (imaginary property system), which probably accepts applications because it is more profitable. The cost is later paid by those who are hit by frivolous lawsuits. The burden is passed to victims and revenue sunk in lawyers’ bank accounts. It’s quite a funny mechanism.
DRM Everywhere, Possession of Universally-accessible Media a Crime
That ugly thing called ACTA [1, 2] is the antithesis of the Declaration of Independence. The following pattern of criticism possibly explains just why.
Criticism from NGOs
Canadian law expert David Fewer, staff counsel at the University of Ottawa’s Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic, told the Ottawa Citizen that the discussion paper was very close to a potential Christmas wish-list by Hollywood companies.
Knowledge Ecology International (KEI), in an earlier statement filed to USTR, warned against a lack in differentiation and clearness of core terms, like counterfeiting, infringement or piracy. “Is Microsoft a “pirate” for insisting on the right to continue to infringe the z4 patents in order to use an infringing DRM technology to protect Microsoft software itself from infringement by unauthorised uses?” KEI asked in its statement.
In this particular context, consider again the old sins of the British Library, which seems like a hostage of Microsoft nowadays, if not just its cheerleader [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. This article is not new, but it is timely and it is excellent.
The British Library - ‘The world’s knowledge’ DRM’d and for a price
[…]
DRM is part of the plan, and I encourage you to read the entire Microsoft document. It would make my grandmother roll over in her grave. Some of the librarians at the British Library are deeply troubled too about what DRM is doing to libraries. How will we access the materials if the DRM company goes out of business someday?
If they duplicate what they have done at the British Library, I think it’s fair to say that it is the death of public libraries as we have known them, and the world’s knowledge will be available only DRM’d and for a price.
P.S. DRM doesn’t work.
It won’t block any serious criminals.
All it does is annoy and degrade the honest
… and give monopolies a way to stay that way.
Troll-Eat-Troll World
The verdict on Alcatel-Lucent and Microsoft is already in. These long legal battles between the two companies [1, 2, 3, 4] have the latest infringement claims detailed.
Microsoft Corp. violated an Alcatel-Lucent patent to produce its Xbox video-game player, a lawyer for Alcatel-Lucent told jurors who are considering a demand for $419 million in damages.
“They’ve taken” the patent “and made millions and millions of dollars,” John Desmarais, a lawyer for Alcatel- Lucent, said to the jury.
[…]
A jury in the same court decided last year that Microsoft’s Windows Media Player infringed patents for the MP3 digital-audio standard and awarded Alcatel-Lucent a record $1.52 billion in damages. Senior U.S. District Judge Rudi Brewster vacated that verdict, now under appeal.
In the second trial, another jury concluded April 4 that Microsoft should pay $368 million to Alcatel-Lucent for infringing two patents.
There is meanwhile a warning that patent trolls may be set to attack PaaS.
If the advent of PaaS stirs up a plague of patent trolls to resurrect long-dead patents and bring suits against providers or users it could become a nightmare for the nascent industry. The providers who suffer most will be those based in countries that enforce business methods patents most rigorously: the United States, Australia, Japan and Singapore, according to Wikipedia’s article on the topic. In contrast, “patent protection for business method patents in Israel, China, India, Mexico, and most of Europe is difficult.”
Deep inside, Microsoft has always known this was a recipe for trouble. That realisation had emerged even before it became a monopoly. What an iintellectual waste. █
“If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today’s ideas were invented, and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today.”
–Bill Gates
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
05.27.08
Posted in DRM, GNU/Linux, Novell, Patents, GPL, Europe, America, FOSS at 10:03 am by Roy Schestowitz
Keeping up to date with laws against digital freedom…
Bruce Perens and the GNU GPL
One of the most prominent defenders of the integrity of “Open Source” seems to be Bruce Perens, whom long-time readers probably know we strongly endorse. Unlike many others with involvement inside or outside the OSI, Perens maintains a healthy relationship with the Free software movement and he wishes to rectify some emerging issues. He has also been protesting against the Novell/Microsoft deal like nobody else did.
In the following new video from Linux Magazin (Germany), Perens talks about limiting the number of licences. This interview seems to strictly require JavaScript to be enabled and Adobe Flash to be installed on your system.
In another item, the validity of the GPL is cautiously defended [via Tux Machines]. Like many other articles which arrive from the legal journals, there seems to be an element of FUD (balance), but overall there are some positive messages also.
Open source licensing suits settle in short order
[…]
Although settled, these lawsuits are thought to reveal a growing assertiveness in the open source community to enforce open source rights and licences. The fact that the defendants each settled the claims in short order (despite – in at least Verizon’s case – having the deep pockets to defend the claim to a judicial resolution) also suggests that the claims had serious merit.
We covered this issue before using some further examples that serve as case studies.
The United States and Software Patents
A big judgment [1, 2, 3, 4] still lies ahead and this new article from ECT [via Digital Majority] covers some of the background, summarised thusly:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington held a rare full-court hearing on May 8 to decide whether to limit “process patents.” The decision in this case — which is expected within a few months — may have a wide-ranging effect on the patenting practices of e-commerce companies.
Europe and Software Patents
The situation in Europe seems a little more complicated (ambiguity and loopholes lead to this), especially in recent days. Digital Majority sums up a subscribers-only article using the following snippet.
However, as illustrated by Kapur, the EPO will generally remain the better forum for obtaining software patents while the “technical contribution” requirement remains good law in the UK. In contrast, current EPO jurisprudence8 allows any claim which involves the use of or is to a piece of hardware however mundane to bypass the Article 52 exclusion and move on to an assessment of inventive step.
DRM Caging in Finland
When Richard Stallman delivered his talk in Manchester earlier this month, he talked about Finland as the land where more laws needed to be bought in order to ensure further limitation/illegalisation of Free software. Slashdot brings an English translation (from Finnish) of an article suggesting a key reversal in Finland.
Due to an appeal court decision from a couple of days back, breaking the not very effective CSS copy protection used on most commercial DVD-Video discs is now a criminal act in Finland (robo translated). The verdict is contrary to what a district court thought of the same case last year when two local electronic rights activists were declared not guilty after having framed themselves by spreading information on how to break CSS. Back then, it was to the activists’ benefit has CSS been badly broken and inneffective ever since DeCSS came out.
Stallman was probably right. It was just a matter of time and there are even more draconian steaming piles trying to force their way through (behind people’s backs of course because it stifles opposition). █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
05.26.08
Posted in DRM, Patents, FOSS at 11:31 am by Roy Schestowitz
Only a couple of days ago, Glyn Moody mentioned and warned about the ACTA. Readers’ attention is advised. It should ideally be diverted the following large-scale document that has just been posted to a blog. Accompanying remarks from Hans at LXer:
[This is news because May 22th a discussion paper appeared at WikiLeaks. In March, when it was yet unknown what ACTA would look like, IP Justice published the white paper the ‘Full Story” links too. It’s a paper about how the rich governments try to almost forbid P2P, stifle innovation through broader ‘piracy protection’, colonize poor countries and create more opportunities to spy on its citizens. All that in a secret undemocratic way; taking away digital rights. However, their excuses are quite good: Stopping dangerous fake-medicines, car parts etc. - hkwint]
In a separate yet related context, namely encryption of E-mail, especially now that Britain intends to snoop on every bit of communication, the following came up yesterday in conversation with a reader: “FWIW you’ll have to look for the original, to be authoritative, but here is a copy. Note points 29-33.”
All of this is related laterally to what we cover in this Web site. Think along the lines of “Trusted Computing” (computers that won’t trust you), back doors, DRM, borderless network filtering (censorship), software patents and DMCA law. All those Orwellian things which Free software prepared to combat are trying to raise their ugly heads with the help of politicians. Be alert and spread the knowledge. █
“If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today’s ideas were invented, and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today.”
–Bill Gates
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
05.25.08
Posted in Microsoft, DRM, GNU/Linux, Novell, SLES/SLED, Mono, FOSS at 12:30 pm by Roy Schestowitz
Novell’s chief booster in Linux Magazine appears to be pushing Mono a little further at the moment, either for the sake of Microsoft Linux.NET©, or maybe just innocently enough because he likes it.
Joe ‘Zonker’ Brockmeier takes Banshee’s 1.0 alpha for a spin to see if it can handle the competition. Verdict? Banshee stacks up with the best of them for media playback.
This might bring some old issues back to mind.
With Moonlight striving to be feature-compatible w.r.t. Silverlight, one has to wonder when — not if — Microsoft DRM will enter the Mono universe and maybe intrude programs like Banshee too. We pondered these possibilities before because if it ever materialises, then we may find ourselves handling the toxic combination of DRM and software patents, which Richard Stallman persistently warns about, including in this new interview:
Kichu Mubarak: What according to you are the largest challenges faced by Free software movement?
RMS says: “The biggest threat comes from laws that prohibit distribution of certain free software. Some countries have laws prohibiting software that enables users to overcome Digital Restrictions Management. Some countries allow software techniques and structures to be patented. Both of those laws have the effect of censoring free software.
Remember that Microsoft admits loving DRM. Not only this; it fights for it, along with partners. By association, needn’t Novell learn to love it too? If not sooner, then later. Why is it that everyone seems asleep at the wheel? █
“In this business, by the time you realize you’re in trouble, it’s too late to save yourself. Unless you’re running scared all the time, you’re gone.”
–Bill Gates
Related posts on DRM:
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
05.19.08
Posted in Law, Microsoft, DRM, Windows, Europe, Asia, Vista, FOSS, EFF at 12:04 am by Roy Schestowitz
Deliberate or just a side-effect?
Some months ago we drew attention to what seemed like the possibility of Microsoft fighting patents-free video playback on the Web. Its former employee was at it along with the long-time partner called Apple [1, 2, 3, 4]. The politics here are complicated because companies that collaborate sometimes compete with one another (take Cisco and Nokia for example).
It is widely known by now — or at least ought to be known — that Microsoft collaborates with the media industry (see reference 5.b-g) a lot more than most other companies in the same sector. It happens to be doing ‘legwork’ for moguls, which sometimes involves amending (read: spoiling) laws. Just take, for instance, this recent incident.
Microsoft Misleads on Copyright Reform
[…]
The Hill Times this week includes an astonishingly misleading and factually incorrect article on Canadian copyright written by Microsoft.
Look back at the Nokia/Ogg kerkuffle [1, 2, 3]. It elucidates the issue and demonstrates how articulate brainwash, which takes the form of a whitepaper/report, can eventually reverse decisions or make new ones. Microsoft almost successfully pulled a fast one when striving to block the acquisition of DoubleClick by Google, as reported by eWeek at the time. Analysts are a similar problem that we shall revisit routinely.
“It’s otherwise too hard to compete with libre and gratis.”For more information about Microsoft’s relationship with the media industry, see [1-8] at the bottom and consider them in sequence (roughly chronological). Microsoft sets precedence in the entertainment world just as it always aspires to ‘tax’ Free software, e.g. with software patent deals. It’s otherwise too hard to compete with libre and gratis.
A couple of weeks ago came this shot from the EFF. It came immediately after Microsoft had shamelessly betrayed innocent customers with its phased-out DRM.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation says that Microsoft has “betrayed” MSN Music customers and wants the company to make things right by issuing an apology, refunds, and eliminate digital rights management technology from the Zune music player.
The latest news, however, is only related to all of the above. The EFF is at it again, having just noticed what a dangerous precedence Microsoft sets on behalf of broadcasters.
After further investigation of reports of Vista refusing to record NBC, we have found at least one case where a user receiving digital TV over-the-air has been blocked from recording TV shows. Justin Sanders, who took this screenshot, says he was recording Raleigh’s HDTV channel WNCN-DT1 on his Vista machine when a popup stating that “restrictions set by the broadcaster … prohibit recording of this program” appeared.
This is significant: this is the first case we’ve heard of equipment voluntarily obeying broadcast flag-like restrictions on TV content digitally broadcast over-the-air.
The broadcast flag is a small piece of data broadcast alongside a digital TV program. The ability to flag broadcast content was created by the ATSC standard which governs digital TV broadcasts in the United States. By itself the broadcast flag cannot restrict use of broadcast content. Instead, its force comes from a tech mandate law - an FCC regulation - which required manufacturers of DTV-receiving devices to detect and respond to “switched on” broadcast flags. EFF and others opposed the use of the broadcast flag and fought successfully to have the FCC regulation overturned by the courts. We did that because it handed control over your hardware to a remote authority, limited your right to your fair use of media, and would have made illegal open source products like MythTV. As a result of that victory, manufacturers are not legally required to force their devices to detect and respond to the flag.
It would now appear that Microsoft has voluntarily chosen to obey such content restrictions in Vista, despite the successful work of thousands of users to defend Microsoft’s right to innovate and our right to fair use.
Coming from Microsoft, this shouldn’t be surprising. Also be aware of the tight Microsoft-NBC connection (they are former partners that are still very close) The DRM cat is out of the bag and if a Forbes article which goes by the headline “Microsoft: We Like DRM,” is anything to go by, then it’s worth keeping an eye on this mess.
Steve Jobs wants the music business to drop restrictions for digital tunes. But Microsoft, which began competing head to head with Apple in the digital music business last fall, is happy with the way things are, says media exec Robbie Bach.
Mind you, Robbie Bach is the Vice President accused of inside-trading, which is a crime (mentioned here along with others). Being a Microsoft executive, needless to say he’s above the law though.
More on Microsoft’s DRM in Windows Vista:
In other related news, remember that set-top boxes are typically very ‘user-aware’. They act as spyware that ‘phones home’ to the broadcasters. In that respect, this new alarming article is very relevant too.
1984: The amendments on the Telecom Package are killing fundamental freedoms
Brussels – Guy Bono is indignant about the freedom-killing amendments that have been submitted in the framework of the “Telecom Package”, that is currently being discussed in the European Parliament.
[…]
For the socialist member of the European Parliament: “What Orwell predicted in “1984” is becoming reality: one wants to know everything about you, trace you, spy everything you are doing, and direct your behaviour. The only difference is that the dictator is not a politician, but made up by large multinationals!”
Windows Vista has already stepped further into the status of “malicious spyware”. We covered this before. It gets even worse (back doors and control). █
___
[1] Music industry meeting could change the Zune
Bryan Lee, corporate vice present for Microsoft’s entertainment business, told me today that the meeting was set up as part of the deal struck between Microsoft and music business honchos, who are always wary of piracy… The meeting was supposed to take place “some time after the holidays,” he said. It also talks about the future of the zune.
[2] Microsoft May Build a Copyright Cop Into Every Zune
If you like to download the latest episodes of “Heroes” or other NBC shows from BitTorrent, maybe you shouldn’t buy a Microsoft Zune to watch them on.
[3] A Legitimate Reason to Hate the Zune (And Microsoft Too)
Here’s the situation: Microsoft has agreed to pay a portion of the profits from the sales of the Zune to a record company (Universal) because the Zune will undoubtedly be used to store unpurchased songs.
[…]
Here it is important to remember a few simple things. The money goes to the Universal, not to the artists.
[…]
Microsoft’s move sets a bad precedent and turns all consumers into thieves without evidence.
[4] Universal to seek money for each iPod sold
“It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don’t see why we wouldn’t do that… but maybe not in the same way,” Morris said. His “same way” comment is a reference to the Zune, which Universal already gets $1 from after signing a deal with Microsoft.
[5] Piracy figures are inflated say criminologists
A draft report by the Australian Institute of Criminology says copyright holders are making up piracy figures in order to sway governments to their side.
[6] UK music industry pines for the good old days, seeks an iPod tax
But that’s different from what the UK’s music industry is demanding. I happily pay Apple every time I download a song from iTunes. EMI and crew get a piece of that $.99 fee to cover their costs of discovering and marketing artists.
What I’m not going to pay is for the right to move that song to my computer, or to my phone, or wherever, just as I never had to pay to move a song from vinyl to cassette tape. The music industry incurs no cost in that transfer, and offers me no help in facilitating it. Why should it get paid for that transfer?
[7] Copyright cops demand Ipod tax
British legal eagles have been trying to unshackle the UK from a law which makes a criminal out of you every time you copy one of your own CDs to your mp3 player for some time now, but the Music Business Group (MBG) says it won’t support the change in legislation unless manufacturers impose the tax.
[8] Japan to tax MP3 players
According to a report in the Asahi Shimbun newspaper, Japan’s Agency for Cultural Affairs wants to force MP3 player manufacturers to pay a royalty charge to copyright holders that may have lost out as a result of illegally recorded content.
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
« Previous entries ·
Highlight: Novell was the first to acknowledge that Microsoft FUD tactics had substance. Novell then used anti-Linux FUD to market itself. 
Highlight: Xandros let Microsoft make patent claims and brag about (paid-for) OOXML support. 
Highlight: Linspire's CEO not only fell into Microsoft arms, but he also assisted the company's attack on GNU/Linux. 
Highlight: Microsoft craves pseudo (proprietary) standards and gets its way using proxies and influence which it buys. 
Highlight: The invasion into the open source world is intended to leave Linux companies neglected, due to financial incentives from Microsoft. 
Analysis: Xen, an open source hypervisor, possibly fell victim to Microsoft's aggressive (and stealthy) acquisition-by-proxy strategy.