Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Almost as good as Evil BIt! (Score 5, Insightful) 202

by CrystalFalcon (#44790081) Attached to: Time For X-No-Wiretap HTTP Header?

Yes, of course!

This is guaranteed to work almost as good as the Evil Bit, an extra field in IPv4 headers where senders of packets indicate malicious intent, so that people administering firewalls can discard such packets if desired.

(The problem in the first place was that the people wiretapping didn't give a shit about rules, etiquette, and being decent. More rules and etiquette aren't the solution to that problem.)

Rick

+ - Suggestion: Send Flowers To Europarl For Rejecting ACTA->

Submitted by CrystalFalcon
CrystalFalcon (233559) writes "Pirate Party founder Rick Falkvinge suggests we should send flowers to the 478 Members of European Parliament who voted to reject ACTA on July 4. Seeing as politicians rarely get a grain of appreciation, and apart from being a genuinely nice thing to do, such a show of love for doing the right thing could also have far-reaching beneficial effects as the next battles come. Citizens reaching out to policymakers in that way would be remembered."
Link to Original Source

+ - European Parliament Presses For Final Vote on ACTA->

Submitted by CrystalFalcon
CrystalFalcon (233559) writes "The European Parliament has decided to not wait for a legal opinion on ACTA from the European Court of Justice, but presses for a final vote for or against it, possibly in as little as ten weeks. There is no more years-long delay: if we want to kill ACTA, the last chance is right just now.

If ACTA passes, the copyright and patent monopolies will be set in stone for the coming decades, just like happened with TRIPS. We need reform in these areas, badly, and therefore, ACTA needs to die."

Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Misleading to call it "non-copied" (Score 5, Insightful) 657

by CrystalFalcon (#38825775) Attached to: Non-Copied Photo Is Ruled Copyright Infringement

It's not misleading in the slightest to call it non-copied for the simple reason that it was not a copy, and that the copyright monopoly only covers direct copies, nothing else.

Yes, they used similar inspiration and similar techniques. But that is specifically not covered by the copyright monopoly, which has always been about protecting a specific expression of a creative idea, and never the idea itself.

For more, see this article on Falkvinge on Infopolicy.

Comment: This is how you do it. It's the whole damned idea. (Score 5, Informative) 657

by CrystalFalcon (#38825719) Attached to: Non-Copied Photo Is Ruled Copyright Infringement

Yes, the images are arguably similar. But there is absolutely no merit whatsoever to the claim that one would be a copy of the other, thus violating the copyright monopoly. What the judge has done here is to set a precedent that states that the monopoly does not just cover the creative work, but extends to a general creative idea, which completely shatters the traditional notion that the copyright monopoly only covers a specific expression of an idea, and never the idea itself.

So what’s the big deal, then? In this case, they sought to recreate the image and took a similar one. Why is that not a violation of the copyright monopoly?

Because that’s exactly how you do it if you don’t want to pay a license fee on the original terms. You create a similar work yourself, entirely by yourself, and compete. It’s the whole damned idea.

Article by Falkvinge on this verdict.

Comment: Re:He seems to confuse the purpose of copyright (Score 4, Insightful) 543

by CrystalFalcon (#38647042) Attached to: Pirate Party Leader: Copyright Laws Ridiculous

Actually, the copyright monopoly is a balance between the public's interest in availability of culture, and the SAME public's interest in having new culture created.

Individuals and creators and the copyright industry are not stakeholders in that balance, but beneficiaries of the monopoly (just like Blackwater Security or whatever their name is this week is a beneficiary of United States foreign policy, without that meaning that they get a seat at the drafting table).

Comment: Re:Original article is on Techdirt (Score 2) 543

by CrystalFalcon (#38646470) Attached to: Pirate Party Leader: Copyright Laws Ridiculous

Thank you, good sir. Those are very kind words.

Although, I prefer the swarm as an organization rather than a hierarchical structure, so "stand behind a leader" isn't really what happens when I work. When I "lead", in quotes, I say out loud that I'm going to do something to accomplish a goal, and that others are welcome to follow me in that action if they like. Usually, a couple of hundred or thousand do.

Othertimes, other people in the swarm -- or the group as a whole -- decides on a course of action that I take part in.

I don't command military style. (Despite holding officer's rank in the Swedish Army, for trivia.)

Cheers,
Rick

Comment: Original article is on Techdirt (Score 5, Informative) 543

by CrystalFalcon (#38645730) Attached to: Pirate Party Leader: Copyright Laws Ridiculous

Use the second link.

The original source of this message is the column on Techdirt named It is time to stop pretending to endorse the copyright monopoly. The ITWorld reporter (the first link in the story) muddles the message to some degree, and also introduces heavy bias into the story (see the headers over the comments section, for instance).

The original message is that yes, the copyright monopoly (or four/five monopolies) are ridiculous, but we should stop pretending to support them all while criticizing the draconian laws that are de facto needed to sustain them. IT World muddles this to that we should stop "following" the copyright monopoly laws. That is a different message (which I might have said too, but not in this particular article).

Comment: Re:He seems to confuse the purpose of copyright (Score 5, Informative) 543

by CrystalFalcon (#38645678) Attached to: Pirate Party Leader: Copyright Laws Ridiculous

The purposes of the copyright monpoly vary between legislations, so there is not "one" purpose.

In the United States, it is "to promote the progress and the useful arts", nothing more, nothing less. That is a direct quote from the constitution.

Piracy

Pirate Party Leader: Copyright Laws Ridiculous 543

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the we're-not-listening dept.
smitty777 writes "Rick Falkvinge, better known as the leader for Sweden's Pirate Party, recommends doing away with copyright laws since no one is following them anyway. FTA: '...he uses examples from the buttonmakers guild in 1600s France to justify eliminating the five major parts of copyright law today. The first two are cover duplication and public performance, and piracy today has ruined those. The next two cover rights of the creator to get credit and prevent other performances, satires, remixes, etc they don't like. Falkvinge says giving credit is important, but not worthy of a law. Finally, "neighboring rights" are used by the music industry to block duplication, which Falkvinge rejects.'"

"More software projects have gone awry for lack of calendar time than for all other causes combined." -- Fred Brooks, Jr., _The Mythical Man Month_

Working...