|FROM ||From: "Steve Milo"
|SUBJECT ||Subject: [hangout] Re: [NMLUG] Re: legal music downloads?
|From owner-hangout-destenys-at-mrbrklyn.com Sat Jul 31 23:35:11 2004
Received: from www2.mrbrklyn.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mrbrklyn.com (8.12.11/8.11.2/SuSE Linux 8.11.1-0.5) with ESMTP id i713ZBKs028675
for ; Sat, 31 Jul 2004 23:35:11 -0400
Received: (from mdom-at-localhost)
by www2.mrbrklyn.com (8.12.11/8.12.3/Submit) id i713ZAr7028674
for hangout-destenys; Sat, 31 Jul 2004 23:35:10 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: www2.mrbrklyn.com: mdom set sender to owner-hangouts-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com using -f
Received: from freedom-it.com (flatbush.mrbrklyn.com [10.0.0.62])
by mrbrklyn.com (8.12.11/8.11.2/SuSE Linux 8.11.1-0.5) with ESMTP id i713ZAjP028669;
Sat, 31 Jul 2004 23:35:10 -0400
From: "Steve Milo"
To: New Mexico Linux Users Group Mail List
Subject: [hangout] Re: [NMLUG] Re: legal music downloads?
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 23:36:34 -0500
X-Mailer: Open WebMail 2.30 20040131
X-OriginatingIP: 126.96.36.199 (slavik914)
Reply-To: "Steve Milo"
List: New Yorker GNU Linux Scene
Admin: To unsubscribe send unsubscribe name-at-domian.com in the body to hangout-request-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on www2.mrbrklyn.com
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.9 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS
In the context of everything else the Constitution is designed to protect
(individual), it is not wrong.
Authors and inventors, not corporations and businesses.
Granted, by law a corporation is considered an individual but as you see it
explicitly states 'Authors and Inventors'.
The fact is that the focus of what that phrase means is too fixated
on 'limited times'. I believe it is safe to assume that fixation stems from
corporations and their laywers abusing the system to 'protect their vested
The intent is to protect not only creators and inventors, but citizens of
this country. Thats why that document has 'All men are created equal' in its
opening remarks. The europeans screwed this up with their 'constitution' by
stating 'all nations are created equal', but thats besides this point.
What modern day software company's are seeking to do, and it is more relevant
today than it was in decades past, are trying (somewhat successfully
unfortunatly) to put consumers (citizens) in a position where they relinquish
their individual rights. Essentially do what the government in the ussr and
the germans during WW2 tried to do.
Microsoft announced its search engine can now search individual hard drives
(how is it that within 10 years microsoft has managed to brainwash so many
people into thinking something like this is a good thing?)
Apple is suing RealNetworks for innovating a new app that can play RN music
instead of Apple. This is essentially what happened in the mid 90's, all the
innovative company's were litigated out of existence.
How does any of this have anything to do with national security?
It is right in your own backyard. Everyone walks on eggshells due to fear of
being litigated for innovating. How so? EULA's and patended software.
You cant deconstruct what you purchase to make it more secure, you have no
clue what is going on behind the scenes of your software. When someone comes
along and asks you what something does, you give them a completely abstract
answer which the person posing the question wont fully understand.
Essentially walking around 'pretending' like you know what your talking
about, but not really knowing what is going on. This goes back to you not
having a clue as to what is going on in the software you are using.
This is not only the dumbing down of the end user but the dumbing down of the
person who is supposed to know the software and hardware, the 'computer
scientist'. All in the name of software corporations working to garuantee a
profit, minimize competition and essentially put the fear of the US
Government in everyones hearts (see just about every case where a software
corporation has been in legal trouble for the last 10 years).
All I can say to this is get with the program, if you are too lazy or dont
know how to get around using propietary software pack it up and change your
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 14:02:51 -0600, John Fleck wrote
> On Sat, 2004-07-31 at 13:29, Steve Milo wrote:
> > It appears that many of you fail to realize that copyright is designed to
> > protect the consumer.
> This is simply wrong. The constitution is explicit on this point -
> the purpose of copyright is to encourage individuals to produce intellectual
> works by giving them control over, and therefore the opportunity to
> profit from, those works: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful
> Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the
> exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;". It could
> be argued that the "limited times" bit has been rather abused in recent
> decades (see the Eldred case), but the intent protecting creators,
> not consumers, is black letter law.
> NMLUG mailing list
Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org)
NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc