tedswiss writes: Fate has dropped a unique opportunity upon my lap: I teach at a moderately small independent school who has as one of its alums Richard Taylor. Mr. Taylor is both speaking at our start-of-year festivities and being honored with this year's "Distinguished Alum Award." Having followed and been disgusted by the MPAA's corporate practices regarding DRM and government lobbying in the past (Anyone remember DeCSS?), I would love to make his visit help to truly educate our student body, not just indoctrinate them. The school administration is sympathetic to my plight, but I want to present them with more than just my complaints. To the/. community: How would you best make use of this opportunity if you found yourself in my shoes?
JonathanF writes: "If you were hoping judges would see reason and realize that just using a program that could violate copyright law was about as illegal as leaving your back door unlocked, think again: an Arizona district judge has ruled that a couple who hosted files in KaZaA is liable for over $40K in damages just because they "made available" songs that could have been pirated by someone, somewhere. There's legal precedent, but how long do we have before the BitTorrent crew is sued?"
willdavid writes: "By John Carroll (ZDNet Blogs):
Microsoft, apparently, is helping the folks at Mono to port Silverlight to Linux. This is good news, as the primary fear I've heard from developers is that Silverlight will be locked to Microsoft platforms and products. Microsoft has already committed to supporting Silverlight cross-browser on Windows, and has a version that runs on Mac OS X (which is even available from the Apple web site). The last step is Linux, and Microsoft is working with Novell and Mono to make this happen. http://blogs.zdnet.com/carroll/?p=1737"
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes: "Can it be that the RIAA, or the "Big 4" record companies it represents, are short on funds? It turns out that despite the Judge's order, entered a month ago, telling them to pay Debbie Foster $68,685.23 in attorneys fees, in Capitol v. Foster, they have failed to make payment, and Ms. Foster has now had to ask the Court to enter Judgment, so that she can commence "post judgment collection proceedings". According to Ms. Foster's motion papers (pdf), her attorneys received no response to their email inquiry about payment. Perhaps the RIAA should ask their lawyers for a loan."
An anonymous reader writes: This year's
Usenix security symposium
includes a
paper
that implements a "cheat" utility, which allows any non-privileged user to
run his/her program, e.g., like so
cheat 99% program
thereby insuring that the programs would get 99% of the CPU
cycles, regardless of the presence of any other applications in the
system, and in some cases (like Linux), in a way that keeps the program
invisible from CPU monitoring tools (like 'top'). The utility exclusively
uses standard interfaces and can be trivially implemented by any
beginner non-privileged programmer. Recent efforts to improve the
support for multimedia applications make systems more susceptible to
the attack.
All prevalent operating systems but Mac OS X are vulnerable, though by
this kerneltrap story,
it appears that the new CFS Linux scheduler attempts to address the
problem that were raised by the paper.
privacyprof writes: One of the most common responses of those unconcerned about government surveillance or privacy invasions is "I've got nothing to hide." According to the "nothing to hide" argument, there is no threat to privacy unless the government uncovers unlawful activity, in which case a person has no legitimate justification to claim that it remain private. The "nothing to hide" argument is quite prevalent. Is there a way to respond to the "nothing to hide" argument that would really register with people in the general public? In a short essay, "I've Got Nothing to Hide" and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy, Professor Daniel Solove takes on the "nothing to hide" argument and exposes its faulty underpinnings.
anonymous reader writes: A great deal of attention is paid to numbers, but rarely does one actually ask what these numbers mean. One problem that many people have been trying to tackle is gauging the extent of use of Free software, including Linux. Questionnaires are not a solution here and neither are statistics, which are usually derived from the wrong data. The following article looks at the various challenges at hand and concludes that the growth rate of Linux is likely to remain an enigma.
Posted
by
Zonk
from the they-is-special-you-understand dept.
pilsner.urquell writes "Microsoft yesterday issued a statement proclaiming that it isn't bound by GPLv3. Groklaw has a very humorous rejoinder to the company's claim. From that article: 'They think they can so declare, like an emperor, and it becomes fiat. It's not so easy. I gather Microsoft's lawyers have begun to discern the GPL pickle they are in. In any case it won't be providing any support or updates or anything at all in connection with those toxic (to them) vouchers it distributed as part of the Novell deal ... These two -- I can't decide if it's an elaborate dance like a tango or more like those games where you place a cloth with numbers on the floor and you have to get into a pretzel with your hands and feet to touch all the right numbers. Whichever it is, Novell and Microsoft keep having to strike the oddest poses to try to get around the GPL. If they think this new announcement has succeeded, I believe they will find they are mistaken. In other words, not to put too fine a point on it, GPLv3 worked.'" EWeek has further analysis of this proclamation.