Janet Hawtin | 1 Aug 01:54 2006
Picon

Re: Re: circumvention

Note: This is a personal opinion not LA position.

Peter Miller wrote:

>         "to 'circumvent a technological measure' means to descramble a
>         scrambled work [...] without the authority of the copyright
>         owner"

Yep Bravo to Rusty and Anthony.
The guys have put in a huge effort to raise awareness on this issue.
It is great news that the AG has taken on board their ideas and Kim's work.

But as a person I am also uncomfortable with a lot of the wider implications of 
the DMCA and still trying to see what can be done to get the issues into public 
forums.

> On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 13:50 +1000, Pia Waugh wrote:
> 
>>PMiller wrote:
>>
>>>I do not accept that we, the people, must sacrifice our Fair Dealing
>>>rights, but if we must, how are we the people going to be compensated
>>>for the loss of our Fair Dealing rights?  What additional tax (the
>>>normal way of compensating the people) is to be levied on the industry
>>>in return for the economic value of the Fair Dealing rights lost to the
>>>people?

Peter Drahos AU amongst others in the UK and EU have initiated the Adelphi 
Charter which outlines base access rights. http://www.adelphicharter.org/

(Continue reading)

Alexis Rose | 1 Aug 06:30 2006
Picon

(no subject)


Jonathan Oxer | 2 Aug 02:18 2006
Picon

linux.conf.au 2008 bound for Melbourne

Hi LA,

Congratulations to Donna Benjamin and Team Mel8ourne! In 2008
linux.conf.au will return to the city where CALU kicked off the whole
LCA phenomenon.

The decision this year was really tough with very well presented bids
from both Melbourne and Hobart. Both proposals contained a lot of flair,
and Hobart as a potential destination was definitely a big drawcard for
many people. In the end though the LA Committee felt that the Melbourne
team's plans were more well developed, and with Donna's enthusiasm and
organisational ability there is no doubt that they will pull off an
absolutely awesome conference in 2008.

The Mel8ourne website is at http://www.mel8ourne.org/

Rock on Melbourne!

Cheers   :-)

Jonathan Oxer
President
Linux Australia
Pia Waugh | 1 Aug 12:03 2006
Picon

Reminder! linux.conf.au Call For Participation still open!

The linux.conf.au 2007 Call For Particiation is open for only one more
month! Get your talks, papers and miniconf proposals in soon! Don't miss out
and if you are considering it, then just go ahead and do it!

All the details are below. Good luck and we look forward to getting some
excellent submissions for lca2007.

The lca2007 team!

Important dates
===============

   * Submissions open: July 1, 2006
   * Submissions deadline: September 1, 2006
   * Notifications by review committee: October 15, 2006
   * Conference begins: January 15, 2007

Presentations are the main part of the conference and consist of a 40 minute
talk followed by 10 minutes for questions. Presentations provide an an ideal
opportunity to present a new technology or idea to the community.

Papers related to their presentation can be submitted by academics who are
accepted to give a presentation in the conference. These papers are
peer-reviewed by an international papers committee. Papers will be included
in the conference proceedings. The papers track allows students, researchers
and academics to have their work formally recognised.

Tutorials are half-day presentations which provide an opportunity to provide
an in-depth and hands on look at a specific technology. These tutorials
should be interactive, and the level of expertise required by participants
should be clear so people can choose tutorials appropriate to their level.

Mini-confs form an important part of linux.conf.au by providing an
opportunity for various groups within the community to come together to
share ideas and experiences. Mini-confs can be 1 or 2 day events, and an
appropriate room will be provided by the linux.conf.au team.

There will be other opportunities to participate in linux.conf.au 2007, such
as poster sessions, lighting talks and BOFs however organisation of these
events will happen immediately before, or at the conference.
Topics

Most presentations will be of a technical nature, however we encourage
presentations covering educational, organisational, community or similar
aspects of open source software. Promotional presentations, commercial
advertisements, sales pitches and their like are not appropriate for this
conference.

Streams
=======

Submissions on the following topics are encouraged:

    * System administration:
     - Monitoring
     - Deployment
     - Best practices
     - Linux deployments, practical experiences and war stories

    * Deep hacking:
     - Low level design and implementation of large and complex pieces of
       software such as kernels, database engines, or compilers.

    * The Craft of Programming 
     - Programming languages 
     - Tools 
     - Project management

    * Free culture 
     - Open-source in education 
     - Important legal 
     - Advocacy 
     - Community 
     - Government

    * The user experience
     - Open media, multi-media 
     - Desktop environment
     - End-user applications, productivity apps

    * Cool hacks
     - Anything which doesn't fall under one of the other topics, as
       open-source.

Submission Guidelines
=====================

Proposals for presentations and tutorials should be around 400 words and
should detail the subject you want to talk about and include links to any
other relevant details, such as a project home page. Remember this proposal
needs to convince our programme committee that you should be talking at
linux.conf.au 2007.

Proposals for miniconfs can be up to 2000 words, and should detail the
community involved, the expected number of attendees, proposed activities
and detail any support you would like from the organising committee. This
proposal needs to convince us that you can organise an interesting,
successful miniconf that people are going to want to go to!

Papers should be no longer than 14 pages and are reliant upon the related
presentation being accepted for linux.conf.au.

Papers and proposals should be submitted in an appropriate open format, such
as 7-bit ASCII text, HTML, DocBook or LaTeX.

Submission requires pre-registration, providing the following information:

   * Full name (and preferred handle, if any)
   * Complete email address
   * Affiliation with commercial or relevant organisations
   * Postal address
   * Telephone and/or mobile numbers, with area and country codes.
   * Short biography, in around 1 - 3 paragraphs. The biography should
     include any previous speaking or organising experience.

Proposals, papers and miniconfs and should be submitted through our web form
at http://lca2007.linux.org.au/cfp/submit

Any featured software in papers must be available under a licence compatible
with the Open Source Definition. Any papers that are accompanied by
non-disclosure agreement forms will be rejected. All successful papers must
be eligible for republication on-line and on distribution media given to
conference attendees. linux.conf.au requires publication rights to accepted
papers, including the publication of the audio proceedings as well as
publication and reproduction rights to any video filmed during the
presentations. These rights are non-exclusive.  Copyright ownership is
retained by the author. Submitting an abstract indicates understanding of
and consent to these conditions.

In the event that you miss one of the deadlines we reserve the right to
revoke any offer to present your paper. We take having the paper for the
conference proceedings very seriously and late submissions place an undue
burden on our formatting team.

--

-- 
Linux Australia                                         http://linux.org.au/

    "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it
               would be a merrier world." - J. R. R. Tolkien
David Lloyd | 2 Aug 02:55 2006
Picon

Re: linux.conf.au 2008 bound for Melbourne


Jonathan,

> Congratulations to Donna Benjamin and Team Mel8ourne! In 2008
> linux.conf.au will return to the city where CALU kicked off the whole
> LCA phenomenon.

Congratulations to Melbourne, but I hope that Hobart submits a proposal 
for 2009!

DSL
Jonathan Oxer | 2 Aug 03:06 2006
Picon

Re: linux.conf.au 2008 bound for Melbourne

On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 10:25 +0930, David Lloyd wrote:

> Congratulations to Melbourne, but I hope that Hobart submits a proposal 
> for 2009!

Exactly what I told them.

Cheers   :-)

Jonathan
Janet Hawtin | 2 Aug 19:06 2006
Picon

Fwd: [A2k] WIPO broadcasting/webcasting treaty: Revised Draft Basic Proposal just published

Thiru Balasubramaniam posted:

The new WIPO Revised Draft Basic Proposal (SCCR/15/2) for the upcoming
WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (11-13,
September 2006) was published on WIPO's website on 31 July, 2006.
Here is the link to the basic draft proposal in English, French,
Spanish, Arabic and Mandarin.
http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/doc_details.jsp?doc_id=64712
This document numbers 108 pages in English.

-------

That is the latest draft document about the broadcast of sound and
video on the internet. For a response to the earlier draft from Robin
Gross at IP Justice check out
http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=286&res=1600_ff&print=0

Janet
James Purser | 3 Aug 06:23 2006

Press Release for Open Source On The Air - A new online radio programme

"Open Source On The Air" to launch 9th August

James and Karin Purser, producer/presenters of the Linux Australia
Update and the LUG Roundup podcasts, have announced the launch of a new
weekly online programme "Open Source On The Air".

"We've been doing the podcasts for slightly over a year now and we felt
that it was time to move it up a level." said James.

"The new programme allows us to look at more of the Free and Open Source
Software community in Australia. We'll be talking to a range of people, 
from hard core developers and power users through to members of the
vibrant business community that is growing around Open Source Software
and solutions."

The new programme will take a magazine format consisting of four core
segments. James and Karin be airing weekly interviews with people active
in the open source community, business leaders, politicians and software
innovators.

More information on Open Source On The Air can be found here
( http://www.localfoss.org/node/188 )

Open Source On The Air will broadcast live from 9:30pm AEST (+1000) this
Wednesday 9th August. Guests will include Anthony Towns, Debian Project
Leader and Robert Yearsley of Bluebox Technology
( http://blueboxtech.net ).

James Purser
Producer/Presenter, Open Source On The Air
Mob: 0406 576 553

_______________________________________________
Press-contacts mailing list
Press-contacts@...
http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/press-contacts
Peter Miller | 3 Aug 06:20 2006
Picon
Picon

Developed Capability Equals Intent

Here are some words I'm trying to whittle down to a quick pithy way to
explain to non-geeks what the problem with the DMCA is.  How to I
squeeze this into a 10 second sound bite?  Feedback appreciated.

The short version:

        There is a saying that developed capability equals intent.  It
        means that if a nation (or multinational corporation) has
        developed and deployed a technology, they intend to use it.
        Sony has already shown that it wants to take control of playing
        your CDs away from you.  For years DVD players prevent certain
        actions (which most consumers find reasonable) from happening,
        such as skipping the insulting copyright banner.  We must assume
        that the entertainment industry intends to take control of our
        gadgets away from us.  Don't let them, sign the Linux Australia
        petition today.

The long version...

Developed Capability Equals Intent

There is a saying, attributed the intelligence community, which states
that developed capability equals intent.  It means that if a nation
develops and deploys a weapon, other nations must work on the assumption
that the weapon is intended to be used.

In the discussion of any law which grants additional and broad legal
force to technological protection measures, and makes it a crime to even
attempt to bypass these imposed restrictions of our own consumer goods,
we must assume that the developed capability of the entertainment
industry - to take control of our electronic gadgets away from us -
equals their intent.

The entertainment industry has already demonstrated that it has this
developed capability for control.  Look at Sony's spectacular copy
protected CD fiasco; you can assume that there will be another attempt,
and not just by Sony, and that the next attempt will be more subtle.
For years, our DVD players have had the capability to prevent us from
fast forwarding over those annoying "all our customers are thieves and
we will get you" portions of the DVD; and, yes, they are getting longer.
They can already do it, what will they do with it next?  Product
placement sections in the middle of the movie you can't fast forward
over?

Imagine a time when all books, not just expensive textbooks, are only
ever published on discs.  Imagine, for a moment, you can only read them
in "authorised" book readers - you will not be able to lend it to a
friend or sell it second hand to another student - and it won't work on
your second home computer, either.  The technology is already here.  It
already exists.  We must assume that the intent is to completely wrest
from consumers all control of copyright material - including where it is
played, how it is played, what it is played on, and by whom.

Imagine a time when your home computer will not do anything you say
until you have paid the annual (monthly? weekly?) fee to Microsoft.
This capability already exists, it is called WGA.  The only reason your
Microsoft Windows computer still listens to you is because Microsoft
hasn't yet spread WGA widely enough to turn on its more draconian
functions.

How does this affect you, the consumer?  If all copyright material
becomes subject to unavoidable technical protection measures

      * Lending libraries will cease to exist.  Why borrow a copy when
        you will have to pay the publisher for an activation key anyway?
        and why would be publisher charge a reduced fee?  Of course you
        would buy a copy instead.  The disenfranchises a huge number of
        citizens.

      * Copyright purchase will be turned into an annual copyright rent,
        if the publisher chooses to have license keys expire every 12
        months.  This technology already exists, we must assume this is
        their intent.  Do you want your doctor to spend half of your
        appointment arguing with a web interface to pay the fee so he
        can consult the textbook needed to treat your rare disease?

      * Research and study becomes much more difficult, and much more
        expensive.  Students will no longer be able to recover the cost
        of text books by selling them second hand.   And the school
        library is gone, so students will have no choice but to purchase
        text books.  Search engines and indexes and catalogues will only
        ever be populated with "authorised" material, and the cataloguer
        will be motivated to keep the authorising agency happy, not the
        consumer.

      * Meaningful review and criticism will disappear.  What publisher
        is going to give a journalist an activation key for the purpose
        of review if there is any chance of a bad review?  The only
        reviews ever published will be glowing ones, even if the product
        is not fit for purpose.  This will damage our economy, because
        consumers will no longer be able to make informed decisions.

      * Reporting the news will become end-to-end propaganda.  The only
        coverage that will be "authorised" will be stories which benefit
        the copyright holders.

Consumers must assume that developed capability equals intent.
Ubiquitous technical protection measures are a threat to the vital
communication necessary for a healthy democracy, and a healthy economy.
Consumers must assume that unless these overly broad extensions to
copyright are stopped, more and more of their consumer electronics and
home computers are going to cede control to content publishers, and not
to the consumer.

Sign the Linux Australia petition today.

--

-- 
Regards
Peter Miller <millerp@...>
/\/\*        http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~millerp/

PGP public key ID: 1024D/D0EDB64D
fingerprint = AD0A C5DF C426 4F03 5D53  2BDB 18D8 A4E2 D0ED B64D
See http://www.keyserver.net or any PGP keyserver for public key.
Janet Hawtin | 3 Aug 11:44 2006
Picon

Re: Developed Capability Equals Intent

Peter Miller wrote:
> Here are some words I'm trying to whittle down to a quick pithy way to
> explain to non-geeks what the problem with the DMCA is.  How to I
> squeeze this into a 10 second sound bite?  Feedback appreciated.
> 
> The short version:
> 
>         There is a saying that developed capability equals intent.  It
>         means that if a nation (or multinational corporation) has
>         developed and deployed a technology, they intend to use it.
>         Sony has already shown that it wants to take control of playing
>         your CDs away from you.  For years DVD players prevent certain
>         actions (which most consumers find reasonable) from happening,
>         such as skipping the insulting copyright banner.  We must assume
>         that the entertainment industry intends to take control of our
>         gadgets away from us.  Don't let them, sign the Linux Australia
>         petition today.

I would be careful of that argument.
The main threat of the DMCA for developers is that it will assume that if you 
have created a tool for X use and someone else uses it for Y(being copyright 
infringement) you are a felon for creating the tool.

In this context developing a tool = intent is the kind of argument that DMCA 
lobby would use. I would argue that you are a felon when you infringe copyright 
and a developer when you make a tool and that the development of a chair does 
not make you responsible when people hit each other over the head with them.

I do agree that intent to colonise our desktops has been demonstrated by Sony 
and Microsoft. I do agree that we need to argue that they should not have the 
right so assume right of way on our desktops. They have developed and used these 
tools to compromise(Sony,WGA) our systems without our knowledge, and against our 
interests.

MS now proposes to scrape our hard drives to see what Apple music we have 
installed. That must be an interesting proposal for trade practices 
organisations. Which music publishers and creators will be permitted to scan our 
hard drives.Which won't. MS has not demonstrated any caution about its access to 
our desktop; what makes them a privileged party on our equipment.

We do not have to draw a long bow to connect tools with intent.
These people are demonstrating and promoting their intent.
Their actual and advertised actions are real and tangible.
The tools are just furniture which should not have been used on our systems 
without our permission. A rootkit is more of an explosive device than a chair 
but still there are some constructive purposes for explosives. Its the act of 
making a market share brawl out of my desktop without my say so that irks me.

And yes sign the petition today !

Gmane