Check out my real blog

OK, I know this is low...but here's another plug for my real blog. Read it at:

http://johnthomson.org/blog/

Sorry blogger. I don't want me or anyone else making money off of my blog.

Success!

Finally moved over to my own site on wordpress: http://johnthomson.org/blog

Click the link above to go to the new site.

Hearing on "Net Neutrality"

The Senate committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation recently held a hearing on the neutrality, or end to end, principle as it will apply to new laws regulating broadband Internet access. Perhaps not surprisingly, Vint Cerf and Larry Lessig both showed up to defend the end to end principle. What struck me was the fact that, watching this video archive of the hearing, on a non-neutral internet it might be possible that invaluable modern access to government such as this may be lessened on a non-neutral net. If the regulatory infrastructure is changed so that certain entities or applications are given priority over others, it's conceivable that even a government could have diminished access. What's worse is that citizens who lack Internet access are deprived of the ability to view resources such as this in the first place.

Linus, GPL, and DRM Hardware

Linux kernel creator Linux Torvalds is clarifying his opposition to GNU 3.0 (which is a new version of the license which protects many open source software applications). He offers an interesting perspective that DRM of content is more dangerous than that of hardware because (it seems) people will want to be able to manipulate content and will find DRM protected works overly restrictive.

If enough interesting content is licensed that way, DRM eventually becomes marginalized. Yes, it takes decades, but that's really no different at all from how the GPL works. The GPL has taken decades, and it hasn't "marginalized" commercial proprietary software yet, but it's gotten to the point where fewer people at least _worry_ about it. As long as you expect Disney to feed your brain and just sit there on your couch, Disney & co will always be able to control the content you see. DRM is the smallest part of it - the crap we see and hear every day (regardless of any protection) is a much bigger issue.

The argument then takes a problematic turn towards why DRM for software is OK: because hardware locks are essentially not a software problem. The fact that a system may technologically ensure that rights management is present and enforced is an issue on which to fight with hardware vendors.

Sure, DRM may mean that you can not _install_ or _run_ your changes on somebody else's hardware. But it in no way changes the fact that you got all the source code, and you can make changes (and use their changes) to it. That requirement has always been there, even with plain GPLv2. You have the source. The difference? The hardware may only run signed kernels. The fact that the hardware is closed is a _hardware_ license issue. Not a software license issue. I'd suggest you take it up with your hardware vendor, and quite possibly just decide to not buy the hardware. Vote with your feet.

The problem in this argument is that he forgets the power of law. Previous legislative attempts to mandate the use of DRM in all hardware would make it impossible for consumers to "vote with their feet" and select non-DRM hardware.

WordPress, not yet

An attempt to migrate my Blogger posts to WordPress on my site (without backing up) has killed my template as well as some time. Interestingly enough, Google cache and archive.org don't have backup copies either, so some of my template links and blog features are gone for the moment.

Copyright to restrict competition

A recent remark from the Microsoft VP of the Windows Media division reveals copyright's growth into an anti-competitive tool:

The intention is to reduce the number of licensors to a manageable level, to lock out "hobbyists" and other entities that Microsoft doesn't want to have to trouble itself with.

Essentially, the licensing of their copyrighted Digital Rights Management is knowingly being used to keep developers from developing innovative uses based on their product. Yes, this is perfectly within their rights under the law. But one has to wonder how this is "promoting progress for the useful arts." Old school Microsoft might have realized that these hobbyists were just the types that used to drive advancing the features of their product (even if was through buy-outs).

Friedman on Civil Society in the Middle East

I don't always agree with NY Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman, but in a piece today on Addicted to Oil he made a brief, but very insightful remark about the development of civil society in the middle east:

The mosque became an alternative power center because it was the only place the government's iron fist could not fully penetrate. As such, it became a place where people were able to associate freely, incubate local leaders and generate a shared opposition ideology.
That is why the minute any of these Arab countries hold free and fair elections, the Islamists burst ahead.

So the theory goes, in a repressive society which does not allow much in the way of freedom of speech, ideas will begin to flow in the places where government power is weak. Absent an open coffee house or town hall, civil society may begin to form around a more closed and perhaps radical place of worship. This really highlights the importance of place in the creation of publics. Perhaps this is why China is going to such great lengths to control speech on the Internet.

BBC NEWS | Entertainment | Song sites face legal crackdown

BBC NEWS | Entertainment | Song sites face legal crackdown It was only a matter of time before the public education of copyright law required that people start being thrown in jail. I guess you have to break a few eggs... What is even more interesting is that this article is about lyric and guitar tabulature posting. The actual market value of these printed materials is evidentally irrelevant when compared to the audacity of fans putting in the work of listening to someone's music and putting in the effort to transcribe the lyrics or guitar chords. One might think that there was a rule that brute-force (not carbon) copying like this was a fair use; but they'd be wrong.