Patrick’s Rants

Optimal Copyright length
Full study
The value of the public domain

Tivo apparently doesn’t like the upcoming version of the GPL, General Public License, version 3 according to anInformation Week article.
Tivo is cool and has geek appeal since it is uses Linux-based software. The major appeal for those who want to hack at it - and in this case, I’m using the traditional definition of “one who tinkers with software”, not “one who breaks in” - is that the GPL requires anyone who distributes GPL code to release their source code. This means that if you take GPL code, hack at it and make it “better” or add to it you must release all your changes if you distribute the modified code. Unfortunately, Tivo wants to take code that they got for free, lock it up and sell it to you with no way for you to make changes. Worse is building it so that it doesn’t work if you alter the code at all. That is really not the spirit behind the GPL.

Here’s the thing Tivo: If you want to take our free code and modify it you have to abide by the license in the code you receive. Your company is already in trouble with geeks. A cool appliance device that runs Linux-based software had the geek appeal for a while. Try to shut us out and we build MythTV boxes instead (not to mention the possible copyright infringement suits you will face if you violate our license).

Groklaw.net review of GPL 3.

In this rather long article, “A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection“, Peter Gutmann writes about the hazards of Windows Vista, the hidden costs of Digital Rights Management (or as Slashdotters refer to it Digital Restrictions Management since it’s designed to restrict our rights to view digital materials) and what it will do to our hardware. This is what happens when we let a company - Microsoft - get too big. Monopoly laws are supposed to protect us and haven’t.

This is why I try not to keep feeding the beast.

Sony is settling a recent case brought against them for installing “root kits” when trying to play a “copy protected” music CD. The software installed itself whether the user (owner of the CD) clicked on the “I Agree” button or not. This software hid itself on your computer and watched to see that you didn’t make copies of the “protected” CD. It also allowed others to load software on your computer and hide it using the same methods.
Geeks and regular people were up in arms. And Sony was looking at possible criminal charges. Now that a settlement has been reached, some are postulating that this is the beginning of real consumer protections against monstrosities perpetrated under the guise of “content protection”.
Sony Settlement [pdf]

Well, they’ve done it again. Those tea bagging bastards have purchased new legislation that makes you and I criminals in a perversion of guilty until settled (by the way this is not criminal law, but civil law) This new legislation¹ tries to close the “analog hole” that would allow you to copy something while it’s playing. I am so sick of the tea bagging bastards that can’t be bothered to bring us better quality movies starring nutso actors and instead blame their drain circling business model on people who would “steal” from them. Steal? The thing is, I pay for the movies I buy. I pay rental fees to Netflix for the movies that I only want to watch a time or two and return. And then these movies have a mini movie calling me a thief before I get to see my movie. That’s why I’m getting a new DVD player. If it doesn’t exist, someone should invent it.
I guess the reason that I get so upset with the criminal name calling is that I would never make a copy of a movie or CD to “distribute”, yet I am lumped in with anyone who ever sold/gave away a copy of a movie or song when these laws come out. My mom is penalized because she won’t be able to watch Babylon 5 later than 90 minutes after it airs. (And neither will any of you maties)

1 - Law making ears illegal. Well not really, but a decent write up on the A-hole law.
Comments on the stupidity of artificially propping up businesses dependent upon copyright law

Anybody listening to Will Smith’s Switch is being called a music thief.

But don’t download, go out and buy the record
*(Heyyyy)

or at the very least being encouraged to buy vs download. Look. I rent or buy movies legitimately. I don’t buy much er… any music (my wife and kids do any music buying that goes on around here… all under my watchful, “can you listen to that CD wherever you want?” eye). It seems like legitimate purchasers of music and movies are being continually bombarded with “don’t steal this record” and “don’t steal this movie”. Remember the so-called “pirates” completely bypass any reference to theft leaving only legitimate users to suffer through your accusations.
Hey Will, download this!

In a new twist to the so called piracy issue, Disney has admited that DVDs are only worth about $2.75 despite the fact they regularly sell for $15 - $30 or more depending upon the set. As published in the June 19th edition of Newsweek, Disney is simultaneously releasing their new movie, “Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants”, in theaters in the US and on DVD in China. Expect ticket prices to be $10 on average while the DVD will run close to $3.

As an aside, why the bloody *(^&*%*$% does everyone team up with Microsoft for news? If you type in newsweek.com you get msnbc.com/newsweek, want to check out the Today show? msnbc.com. MSNBC is a collaboration between Microsoft and NBC. This only makes me mistrust the Major News Media news that much more.

But you knew that. Disney has made a business from “exploiting” expired copyrights from the likes of the the Brothers Grimm and then buying laws that extend copyright law on their own work almost indefinately.

Note: original linked article here

The Motion Picture Association of America won’t be happy until it is illegal to watch the original airing of TV shows and movies without a signed contract.
Last week the courts threw out a law that would severly limit - even criminalize - the mere copying of television shows by placing a so-called Broadcast Flag into the signal of presumably “valuable” shows. This Flag would tell your VCR, Tivo, or other recording device whether it was “legal” for you to copy the show off the air and watch it at a different time. I’m sure that many people did such a thing with the last episode of Friends and Seinfeld perhaps popping some corn and watching the final episodes with their friends some even, shhhhh… don’t tell anyone, on a different night than the show actually aired.
The courts said that the FCC didn’t have the authority to require the Broadcast Flag so our esteemed MPAA is attempting to get that authority written into law. Then they will repropose the Broadcast Flag.
In a recent post titled “Hollywood Loserism” I rant about the legitimate copies of movies that begin with an anti download “pirate” commercial. Keep calling your customers criminals and keep wondering why people stop buying your products.
It is the 21st Century. The MPAA and the RIAA have to develop new business models and stop depending upon Congress to strong arm the American public suing grandmothers and 10 year old kids. But I guess that’s what we should continue to expect from a government that thinks “randomly” strip searching grannys at the airport will keep Osama Bin Ladin and his cohorts at bay…

When I watched the movie “Sideways”, I couldn’t help but yell at the opening of the DVD. The opening was essentially a commercial about downloading movies from the internet, calling anyone who downloads a “pirate”.
First off, pirating and bootlegging have to do with people making money from selling illegal copies of movies. Copyright infringement is illegal, it’s covered under the United States code, USC 17. However the movie studios and the musical recording industry (mostly the music industry) have turned to suing Suzy Downloader claiming thousands of dollars in “losses” due to illegal file sharing. The fact of the matter is Suzy would have never bought the songs she has on her hard drive or if she would have it would be far fewer than she actually downloaded. Truth be told they only “lost” a few hundred dollars in revenue, if that. Of course they use a different accounting style to figure out how big their losses are. Even Enron and Worldcom were not as creative with accounting as the record industry is. Of course no one is snooping into their books because they are showing losses instead of propping up income.
These companies continue to add software, restrictions on use of music and movies, hard coding of our DVD players and collect a small royalty on each and every blank CD sold whether it will be used for music or data. The companies that continue to treat me like a thief, reminding me not to “steal” their “Intellectual Property” will see fewer and fewer of my dollars. I don’t download music or movies. I like buying the DVDs with extra features as opposed to downloading screeners (copies specifically for reviewers and Academy voters) but the legal copies are the ones calling me a criminal.
To the music industry I say, stop ripping of the artists and stop turning out “boy band” crap. The movie studios have not been as bad yet - presumably due to the long download times, but you keep running ads showing all the people who will “lose their jobs” due to Pirates and I will stop watching movies too. Put more of those don’t steal ads at the beginning of your DVDs and I will return them. Accuse me of stealing and I stop buying. Next time I actually go to the theater I’m going to ask for my money back if you play a “don’t be a pirate” commercial at the beginning of the film. I will tell all my friends to not go to this film as well. I am not paying to be accused of stealing. I am paying for content, the right to enjoy the film while I’m watching it, to take a break from reality for a while. You keep calling your customers thieves they will eventually begin acting like thieves or drop you from their lives. Either way you lose.
Older copyright rant