OESF Portables Forum
General Forums => General Discussion => Topic started by: TonyOlsen on May 20, 2004, 10:21:16 am
-
Some of us have been able to get Video Encoding working, and some of us haven\'t. (I haven\'t... and I\'ve been trying to get it working for weeks now...)
In here I use the term \"Encoders\". When I say \"Encoders\" I mean people who are able to succesfully encode video files for the Zaurus. I am NOT talking about software.
I didn\'t know how to word this so I\'m just going to say it... I would think that someone who has it working might want to volunteer to encode video files for other people. The other people could list (offline... NOT on the forum) which videos they need encoded for the Zaurus, and the person who is set up to encode could look at the list and choose which files he/she wants to encode for them. Those people would talk to that person offline, setup a method to transfer the original video over the internet, then the encoder encodes it, and then sends it back.
This could be a great opportunity for the \"Encoders\". There are 2 reasons why... and I won\'t say which one is better :wink: :
* Because it makes you feel good to help someone else
* Because you could \"forget\" to erase the original file you offered to encode for someone else after the encoding is done... and you could... er... add it to the list of videos you currently have?
It\'s a win-win situation and both sides benefit.
With that in mind, this forum is a place for \"Encoders\" to post their names and offline contact info. (Also, this forum is for discussing this idea) Then someone on the forum would send a list of videos (offline) they have which they would want reencoded for the Zaurus and the Encoder would choose a few (or even just 1) from that list, and arrangments to transfer the files would be set up.
For legal purposes, it is assumed that the Encoders will only offer to re-encode videos which he/she owns on DVD/VHS/VCD/etc... and that the forum participants likewise own the originals.
*gag*
Also, I have a webserver and I can receive files via AOL Instant Messenger, so I can help with the transfer of these files if help is needed.
Also, it is important for the Encoders to mention which video players their newly compressed videos will support (and it is assumed they have succesfully done this at least once and it works... otherwise this is a big waste of time ).
Again, this forum is for discussing this idea and for the posting of \"Encoders\" offline contact information, the codecs they use, and which video players their resulting videos will support.
Have Fun!!
-
Hm... I\'m surprised. No comments... no takers? Any thoughts, input, etc?
Ahm\' the sheriff of this here ghost town! Silence... wind blows, tumble weed rolls past...
-
But this filesharing thing would probably be just as complicated as the encoding!
Wouldn\'t it be better if someone posted _really_ detailed instructions?
-
I forget what video format ( mpeg 1? ) the Z supports by default but might I suggest Knoppix is tried for this. For those running MS Windows, you would have to boot the Knoppix CD and then enter whatever commandline/script is required to convert your video before booting back to your regularly scheduled program/OS.
If there are those who feel the desire to convert files for others then that\'s great too. Doing it yourself is usually the way to go or, it is for me....
Just a thought.
lob
-
But this filesharing thing would probably be just as complicated as the encoding!
Nah... it would be as easy as going to a private URL to download...
Wouldn\'t it be better if someone posted _really_ detailed instructions?
They\'ve already been posted and I followed them, but to no avail. I even installed WindowsXP on my machine to try to get Windows Media Encoder and Movie Maker working... but they couldn\'t recognize the MP3 codecs I had installed.
The thing is that even with the detailed instructions, diffferent machines will need different troubleshooting. That\'s why I proposed this...
I forget what video format ( mpeg 1? ) the Z supports by default
MPEG 4... but a very picky version of MPEG 4. And audio only works with MP3. I have 4 encoders on my machine and I encode all the time. It isn\'t the a simple matter of encoding... it\'s getting the very picky combination of codecs, bitrate, and size. In fact, the ONLY version of MPEG 4 it supports is Microsoft\'s MPEG 4... BUT Microsoft doesn\'t let you use the MP3 codec when exporting, and Zaurus doesn\'t recognize Microsoft\'s audio codec... so you have to hack the Windows Media encoder to get it to spit out MP3 with the video. It\'s a big headache and not many have gotten it to work.
...and last I heard, it has only worked on Windows2000 or WindowsXP machines. Linux is currently not an option (ironic, isn\'t it?).
If only RealNetworks had RealPlayer for the Zaurus... then I would be set!
I would guess that there are only 5-7 people on the entire ZUG user group who have actually gotten it to work correctly. ...and I would guess that about 30 people have really tried. That makes those who have actually gotten it to work a rare commodety. ...and valuable.
-
I have been using a script to encode for the Z. It is based on mplayer and mencoder and uses oggenc and oggmerge. I am getting pretty good results ( not perfect but very usable). I posted it on my site, but so far have only gotten a couple of feedbacks after several hundred hits. The disadvantage is that you need to find a suitable AV delay value for encoding and depending on the performance of your Z or the settings you choose, you might lose AV sync every now and then on complex scenes (high motion) but these are not cumulative and mplayer will resync the audio even if it has to drop frames to do it. Movies with black borders on the top and bottom fare better than fullscreen ones. You might tweak the settings a little bit. Been using on the 5600. I use a version of this script to convert mythtv recordings for playback on the Z using nuvexport. Works pretty well. I would appreciate any feedback from anybody who tries the script though.
http://cmisip.home.insightbb.com/index.htm (http://cmisip.home.insightbb.com/index.htm)
-
I\'ll try it out tonight! Thanks!
-
I have to repsond to this thread...I had coffee shooting through my nose when I was dying of laughter...
I didn\'t know how to word this so I\'m just going to say it... I would think that someone who has it working might want to volunteer to encode video files for other people.
High quality encodings can take as long as 5-6 hours...sounds like this volunteer has a lot of time to burn In addition, the uploading of a full DVD (up to 8 Gig) would take a couple of days, even with broadband.
Also, I have a webserver and I can receive files via AOL Instant Messenger, so I can help with the transfer of these files if help is needed.
I refer you to http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2004/April/04_crm_263.htm (http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2004/April/04_crm_263.htm). I would recommend that this is not the right time to be thinking about this. Seems like there are not alot of places to hide form having a federal \"friend\" knock on your door and \"borrow\" your computer for a while
Anyways...(the above answers were somewhat tongue-in-cheek) in all seriousness...
Your upload/encoding idea won\'t work...too much bandwidth for high quality encoding...and too much time it takes to encode good quality stuff.
Do a search for my userid on this site. Awhile back I posted a short but sweet how-to for encoding good quality videos with vidomi.
-
the uploading of a full DVD (up to 8 Gig) would take a couple of days, even with broadband.
No, no, no... I\'m not talking about DVD files... I\'m tlaking about 400-700 MB DivX (or other) files. I buy DVDs and then put them on my computer and put the DVD in a box so that it doesn\'t clutter up. I assumed that everyone knew that I wasn\'t talking about MPEG1 or MPEG2 files, but something of a higher compression.
I\'m not tlaking about compressing files... I\'m talking about recompressing them using another codec, bitrate, etc, combination. For example, my 1,000 kbps DivX files would probably be best as a 200-300 kbps on my Zaurus. Also, the 640x480 video would shrink to 320x240, so hopefully there wouldn\'t be too much qualirty loss, although I\'m sure that some would still happen.
Normal Broadband should only take about 2 hours to upload a file like that, and about 30 minutes to send it back...
High quality encodings can take as long as 5-6 hours
I know... but that isn\'t 5-6 hours of YOUR time... it\'s 5-6 hours of your computer\'s time. It goes without saying that these encodings will likely be the last thing you do on the computer at night and then you can see the result in the morning.
I refer you to http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2004/April/04_crm_263.htm (http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2004/April/04_crm_263.htm). I would recommend that this is not the right time to be thinking about this. Seems like there are not alot of places to hide form having a federal \"friend\" knock on your door and \"borrow\" your computer for a while
You\'re probably right... What\'s this world coming to? Congress is passing laws to support business models instead of letting good business models stand for themselves. Old dynasaurs are vying for immortality instead of just dying, not caring if their efforts are holding up technological advancements. *Gag* *Sheesh* Micky still isn\'t public domain... Man... I\'d welcome a thread to bash the record industry, but it probably doesn\'t have much to do with \"Zaurus\"...
-
By the way... your link brought up:
\"We are sorry, but we are unable to locate the page you requested on the Department of Justice Website.\"
What did it say?
-
Basically \"All your base...\"
-
\"...are belong to us\" :twisted:
-
I have been using a script to encode for the Z. It is based on mplayer and mencoder and uses oggenc and oggmerge. I am getting pretty good results ( not perfect but very usable). I posted it on my site, but so far have only gotten a couple of feedbacks after several hundred hits. The disadvantage is that you need to find a suitable AV delay value for encoding and depending on the performance of your Z or the settings you choose, you might lose AV sync every now and then on complex scenes (high motion) but these are not cumulative and mplayer will resync the audio even if it has to drop frames to do it. Movies with black borders on the top and bottom fare better than fullscreen ones. You might tweak the settings a little bit. Been using on the 5600. I use a version of this script to convert mythtv recordings for playback on the Z using nuvexport. Works pretty well. I would appreciate any feedback from anybody who tries the script though.
http://cmisip.home.insightbb.com/index.htm (http://cmisip.home.insightbb.com/index.htm)
After reading it I just came to the obvious point I missed at the beginning... this is a LINUX script meant to run on a LINUX Intel machine.
I don\'t have Linux on my Intel machine (it\'s my work\'s machine and they are Windows-based).
Is there a Windows version of this?
-
Looks like I had an extra period on the end of that link...anyways...try this link:
http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2004/April/04_crm_263.htm (http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2004/April/04_crm_263.htm)
I know... but that isn\'t 5-6 hours of YOUR time... it\'s 5-6 hours of your computer\'s time. It goes without saying that these encodings will likely be the last thing you do on the computer at night and then you can see the result in the morning.
Hehe...you don\'t know me...it is my time! I spend alot of time on my computer. :-P
You\'re probably right... What\'s this world coming to? Congress is passing laws to support business models instead of letting good business models stand for themselves. Old dynasaurs are vying for immortality instead of just dying, not caring if their efforts are holding up technological advancements. *Gag* *Sheesh* Micky still isn\'t public domain... Man... I\'d welcome a thread to bash the record industry, but it probably doesn\'t have much to do with \"Zaurus\"...
Trust me...I am on your side. I fully concur with you. Unfortunately, we have laws that were made that protect corporations more than it does us, and also, unfortunately, we have to abide by them, or you may end up as a target as shown by Operation Fastlink. It goes to show that if you are going to \"trade\" files, you had better do it real secretly. Your posting to ask for folks to engage in \"trading\" in a public forum makes you a potential target for the MPAA, RIAA, and USA. Just my .02...be safe.
Again, look for my thread on encoding video for the Z with vidomi. You will get 100% excellent rip everytime.
-
Again, look for my thread on encoding video for the Z with vidomi. You will get 100% excellent rip everytime.
All I saw was stuff that runs on Linux machines. I skimmed through all of the video encoding part and didn\'t see anything mentioning something that works on Windows. Did I miss it?
There has to be a legal avenue to have people re-encode video for you. There are many companies that broadcast video on secure servers.... but the video has to be uploaded to the server to begin with. If encoding services can be legal, then why can\'t they use the internet to transfer that information (as long as the transfers aren\'t public and noone else can use them).
This is a real need and I feel it is a valid legal business... I was only attempting to get a freebie by appealing to various motivations for offering that service. I don\'t publically share videos with others. My web server is for personal files, but I could use it to help transfer files via private links on my server to and from \"encoders\", if that help was needed.
How could we do this publically and legally? I\'m serious about wanting to set something up and there must be a legal way to do it. I own all of my movies on DVD, so having them on my Zaurus should be perfectly legal.
I resent the facist RIAA corrupting the system, like a \"big brother\", so that people can\'t even speak openly on public boards without the fear of retaliation. Is this the new age freedom everyone keeps talking about?
To the RIAA: \"No, you may NOT borrow my computer and terrorize my family! You are not welcome in my home and you are not welcome on my land! I will persue voting for any and all laws that extinguish your existance! I will make sure that anyone I vote for knows to veto any \"amendment to the constitution\" you whisper into Congress\'s ears. Get a real job!\"
Boy... talk about a sore spot...
-
I revisited http://www.double.co.nz/zaurus/ (http://www.double.co.nz/zaurus/) and found a step in the Windows Media Encoder I had missed. I\'m now trying it again. I\'ll let you know if my test video file works. If it does it will be the first real video file I have ever gotten working on the Zaurus.
Wish me luck!
-
I created a 300 kbps WMV file, and the default playing took it, but I only get audio... no video. Maybe it\'s because the video size was more than 320x240... but only slightly (like 360x200 or something). Should that keep it from playing in the deault QTopia Movie Player?
-
All I saw was stuff that runs on Linux machines. I skimmed through all of the video encoding part and didn\'t see anything mentioning something that works on Windows. Did I miss it?
Yes. Vidomi is a Windows application...my howto was for Visomi. It will produce a DIVX for you...very highly compressed and very high quality.
There has to be a legal avenue to have people re-encode video for you. There are many companies that broadcast video on secure servers.... but the video has to be uploaded to the server to begin with. If encoding services can be legal, then why can\'t they use the internet to transfer that information (as long as the transfers aren\'t public and noone else can use them).
This is a real need and I feel it is a valid legal business... I was only attempting to get a freebie by appealing to various motivations for offering that service. I don\'t publically share videos with others. My web server is for personal files, but I could use it to help transfer files via private links on my server to and from \"encoders\", if that help was needed.
There is a legal avenue. Send your DVDs via mail to a service/person and have them convert them for a fee for you. Its legal since this falls under the \"fairuse\" portion of copyright law.
-
I own all of my movies on DVD, so having them on my Zaurus should be perfectly legal.
Yes, it should be, but it isn\'t, thanks to a little law you may have heard of called the \"DMCA\". It would be legal in many other countries, but not in the US. Yes, this country is fillled to the brim with unindicted federal felons.
Most people don\'t know this, but hardcore porn isn\'t legal either under federal law, even when all the actors are ]18.
-
Hi All,
I\'m not an expert on this field. But I will try to tell what I have done...
Fırst of all I have installed mplayer on my SL5600 and struggled with user rights. In the terminal I have become root by \"su\" then went to the mnt/cf/vıdeo directory.
mplayer -quiet \"-framedrop or -hardframedrop\" shrek.avi resulted a decent view of frafman of shrek2. Some little A-V sync problem happens. but not much...
For encoding I have used virtualdub which is free. you should install the codecs before. And I think video-fullprocess-compression should be selected for video compression from menu and audio-fullprocess-compression.
I advise to change brightness (increase) from video-filter menu a little bit more....
Mugur
TURKEY
-
Tony i suggest you learn yourself how to encode the videos. I am going to look into it after the weekend, and i will let you know how i get on. I suggest though that you get nimo codec pack, and gspot codec appliance for a start - no links, check google.
-
Hi,
I also use virtualdub on XP, re-encode to DIVX 250kbps, no audio. Audio is demuxed and re-encoded to .ogg format at roughly 64kbps using BeSweet and the two files are merged with OggMux. It appears that ogg uses less CPU than mp3 on the Z.
Playback is via mplayer on my SL5500, from SD card.
I am now experimenting with changing the framerate from 25fps to 16.67fps (i.e. 2/3rds) to see if that makes playback smoother (less hiccups).
See www.doom9.net for all the tools and guides you could wish for :-)
Arnie
-
\"...are belong to us\" :twisted:
followed your resume link:
Written for Internet Explorer. Other browsers may not render correctly.
I just don\'t know where to begin with a statement like that. Do you really not grasp that you are saying to people when you make a statement like that?
Scott
-
Yes, it should be, but it isn\'t, thanks to a little law you may have heard of called the \"DMCA\".
Why do lawmakers pass these laws? Don\'t they know that a PDA capable of holding 10 DVD movies is better than 1 portable DVD player capable of only holding 1 DVD movie? Where\'s the logic in making the PDA Movie-playing option illegal? Is it because most lawmakers are computer-illiterate and don\'t understand the technological impact their laws are having? ...or is it because they are greedy and fall to the temptation of bribes?
My family has Alzheimer’s and I imagined a future device, that ironically may look something like a borg implant, but not as invasive. A head-mounted camera will be strapped to the right of the head and a micro display (such as \"Micro Optical\") would be attached to the glasses. A computer worn on the belt (Zaurus? ) would record all video seen in a 1 minute cycle. If the computer notices a pause in what the person is doing (some artificial intellegence may be needed... or maybe a big red button labelled \"I forgot\")... When this is triggered, the computer automatically plays back the last 20 seconds of video. If that isn\'t of help then it will go back further.
In other words, a person may be asked to go get something, but on the way there forget what he is doing... so the computer helps him remember. I call it \"computer aided memory\".
...but the copyright folks (RIAA, etc) would have a fit with this device. This person would be banned from all movie theaters and book stores. Even libraries may end up being foced to keep this handicapped person out.
...and no I\'m not making this up. I\'m sincere.
Written for Internet Explorer. Other browsers may not render correctly.
I just don\'t know where to begin with a statement like that. Do you really not grasp that you are saying to people when you make a statement like that?
I\'m not a microsoft-only person, but all of my jobs have been. I haven\'t seen Netscape at work in many years. Every time I recommend giving up functionality on a page in order to make it \"cross-browser-compatitble\" it gets universally turned down. I\'m trying to find a Java job, but everyone is isn\'t foolishly going to .NET. My online resume, aimed at the kind of people I work for, uses features that only IE supports. If you are a non-microsoft center and would like to hire me, then I\'ll create a universal-browser version of my resume for you... but my experience is that the \"open-source\" community doesn\'t pay a lot for developers... so why should my resume target the \"open-source\" market?
...and I\'m NOT a UNIX person... yet... so I\'m not trying to target those people yet either.
I don\'t need a resume to work for the \"open-source\" market... everyone participates... so why would my online resume need to be geared towards them?
Because I have chosen to use some IE features, my online resume looks a little cooler and I\'ve gotten many interviews based on that fact alone. I don\'t think I\'ll be changing that soon...
...but I\'ll be sure my homepage is as cross-browser compatible as possible. In fact, go ahead and take a look at it in Netscape. It should hopefully work: http://www.geocities.com/userdimensions (http://www.geocities.com/userdimensions)
-------------------------
By the way... I got Windows Media Encoder working last night. It appears that the reuslting file needs to be less than the 320x240 boundary for it to work. ... and the resulting file only works in the QTopia MoviePlayer.
...but the compression isn\'t that good. Windows Media is a good compression, but in order to get the video to work you have to turn off VBR (Variable Bit Rate), 2-pass encoding, advanced audio codecs, etc... so the resulting video file isn\'t as good as others. I\'ll keep trying other options.
By the way... the 16-bit colors really distort the image from time to time. I can often easily see the color difference between one color layer and another. But... it is still better than my old 256 color (8-bit) VGA IBM PC-110.
-
Basically \"All your base...\"
\"...are belong to us\"
I found this on the internet:
History of \'All Your Base\'
Toaplan creates the Zero Wing video game.
Toaplan releases a port for the Sega Genesis console with the addition of an intro scene, which is then translated into english (very poorly) and released in the United States.
Toaplan goes out of business.
Someone from a Zany Video Game Quotes website notices the poor translation, and highlights the game.
Overclocked.org does a humorous voiceover of the Zero Wing intro in a fake Wayne Newton voice.
Dozens of game-related messageboards begin to post quotes from the parody, and images altered to show the phrase.
Most of the threads lose interest and die off quickly as the trend is pronounced dead countless times.
The Flash movie/video is released with images from the threads and music taken from the origional game someone had added the phrase \"all your base\" to.
AYB explosively expands to the general (non game messageboard-reading) public.
The origional site for the video is shut down within hours due to excessive traffic, and moves to PlanetStarsiege.
Lycos ponders how \"All your Base\" was transformed from obscurity to a top 50 search practically overnight.
Mainstream media begin to notice the trend, and stories appear in Time Magazine, USA Today, Fox News, The Los Angeles Times, Tech TV, Wired, and many others.
As the \'remix\' used in the video goes from 58 hits a day to several thousand per day, mp3.com notices the track has been ripped directly from the video game and pulls the music off their site due to copyright violations. It is later returned unchanged.
The trend continues to grow as it expands into nearly every corner of the web.
Large websites like Angelfire and Hewlett Packard sneak \"all your base\" references into their designs.
\"All Your Base\" is pronounced dead several times every day, yet it\'s 15 minutes of fame continue for some reason...
Now... I\'m probably missing something that others may know.... but... what does this statement mean today? What is it\'s definition today? ...or is this another \"Emperor\'s New Clothes\" syndrome where people claim to be \"in the loop\" and know that something is up only because they don\'t want to appear foolish for saying they don\'t know. Well... I don\'t know. Can someone enlighten me?
-
The place I program for is currently 100% Windows (although Linux server #1 should be coming along shortly). Of the 14 of us, I use Firefox as well as 2 others in the department. The head of the dept. uses Opera. So at least 4 of the 14 of us don\'t use IE. Of the visitors to my homepage, ~80% use windows while only ~70% of visitors use IE. Even if you designed your site with IE in mind, statements like \'other browsers may not render correctly\' don\'t appeal even to the Windows camp as even they know IE is one of the least standards compliant browsers. Keep in mind, none of us are web programmers and personally I couldn\'t care less.
Back to the subject. I\'ve had problems with VirtualDub in full processing mode. Sometimes the videos it produces seem to hiccup or stop altogether. When I used Windows, I used the Gordian Knot rip pack from doom9.org for complete DVD To divx conversions. I\'d used VDub to remove the flack but I\'ve had trouble in full processing mode. If I only want to transcode an existing AVI I\'d often use Flask (flaskmpeg.net, it\'s stupid easy) although those videos occassionally suffer the VDub fate as well. And, as much as Windows users probably hate to hear me say it... I\'ve never had a problem with mencoder/transcode under Linux. Not as easy but twice as good.
Unfortunately, I don\'t yet have a Z to test on so I can\'t really tell you what works on it and what doesn\'t.
-
Yes, it should be, but it isn\'t, thanks to a little law you may have heard of called the \"DMCA\". It would be legal in many other countries, but not in the US. Yes, this country is fillled to the brim with unindicted federal felons.
You are not correct on this. The DMCA applies to the distribution of a device (or software) to the public that bypasses a copyright protection. In fact, if you read the DMCA it specifically states the following:
1201© OTHER RIGHTS, ETC., NOT AFFECTED- (1) Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title.
So you are completely protected under the law to rip a backup of your own DVD.
-
So you are completely protected under the law to rip a backup of your own DVD.
The same argument was brought up by the defense in Universal vs Corley (the 2600 DeCSS lawsuit). The court rejected it.
First, they contend that subsection 1201©(1) can be read to allow the circumvention... when the material will be put to \"fair uses\" exempt from copyright liability. We disagree that subsection 1201©(1) permits such a reading. Instead, it clearly and simply clarifies that the DMCA targets the circumvention of digital walls guarding copyright material... but does not concern itself with the use of those materials after circumvention has occurred... The Appellant\'s much more expansive interpretation of subsection 1201©(1) is not only outside the range of plausible readings of the provision, but is also clearly refuted by the statute\'s legislative history.
Ignorance is bliss. It has also been ruled that just because the copyright owner gave permission to the manufacturer of the DVD player to decrypt DVDs, that permission does not extend to the actual DVD owner. The bottom line is that there is simply no legal way to decrypt a DVD (in the USA, in 2004) without permission from the copyright owner, for any purpose whatsoever.
That\'s why laws like congressman Rick Boucher\'s fair use protection act are so desperately in need of support!
-
The place I program for is currently 100% Windows (although Linux server #1 should be coming along shortly). Of the 14 of us, I use Firefox as well as 2 others in the department. The head of the dept. uses Opera. So at least 4 of the 14 of us don\'t use IE. Of the visitors to my homepage, ~80% use windows while only ~70% of visitors use IE.
My web applications at work keep track of the website usage and sends me a report of the browsers that have visited the site. To date (at this location... which I\'ve been at for 13 months), 99% of the users have been using IE... and we\'re talking about thousands of corporate users. Only 1 exception: my friend wanted to view my pages on his Pocket PC with Pocket IE. His was the ONLY non-IE browser to look at my corporate (Internal) website.
It seems that smaller businesses and smaller offices often have more of a variety, but in bigger businesses, like this one, a department, usually called \"IS\" is in charge of setting up everyone\'s computer and so all computer\'s are 100% the same. I\'m not saying that I like this... but this is the way it currently is, so I would be wasting my limited time to develop a Netscape version of this page.
Keep in mind, none of us are web programmers and personally I couldn\'t care less.
Then you might not know how hard it is to program for Netscape versus IE. The only way to make things 100% cross-browser compatible is to not use any features... or at least limit them. There is VERY complex code available to try to figure out which browser you\'re using and create code on the fly for that browser, but even THAT code can\'t do it right. So... you can either make bland static (non-dynamic) pages (with little interaction) or advanced pages geared to 1 browser or another. Since you are not a web developer you will just have to take my word for it and understand that you might be seeing \"ie only\" pages a lot in the future... and that isn\'t a political statement... it\'s just conformity with the majority so that I have an increased chance to get work.
For example... I would be decreasing my odds of finding a job if switched to being an Opera web developer. Especially since many of the non-IE browsers are \"open source\", which means that the people using them are \"open source\"-types of people... and we \"open source\" people are used to getting things for free... so why would we hire a web developer to do it for us? Marketing a web developer to any non-IE market is more-or-less a waste of time.
The DMCA applies to the distribution of a device (or software) to the public that bypasses a copyright protection.
\"device (or software) ... that bypasses a copyright protection\"... are you talking about \"open source\", \"pirating\" or both? Does this law affect code being \"open source\". (I heard that a law like that was in the works, but I don\'t know any more about it).
So you are completely protected under the law to rip a backup of your own DVD.
Hurray!! Let my Zaurus embarrass the Portable DVD player market.
-
Where\'s the logic in making the PDA Movie-playing option illegal? Is it because most lawmakers are computer-illiterate and don\'t understand the technological impact their laws are having? ...or is it because they are greedy and fall to the temptation of bribes?
Some of both. There are some congresspeople who are so in the pocket of the industry that they are corrupt beyond all repair. But the optimist in me believes that most of them have simply only heard and understood one side of the debate, thanks to the legions of lobbyists in Washington, and that they will want to do the right thing once the counterarguments finally come out.
Someone said that the best thing that could ever happen is some congressman\'s kid gets sued by the RIAA.
-
p.s. IANAL, but I have discussed these issues extensively with someone who is.
-
That mentioning of Knoppix earlier was because I suspected you were a Microsoft user. Knoppix is GNU/Linux on a CDROM that\'ll boot from the CDROM and that means it does not need to be installed on your hard disk. If your work computer can boot from the CD then you can use it there too. And it does a darn good job of automatically setting up everything from network to display. It\'s got mplayer, mencode, and tons more stuff on the CDROM so you should be able to mess with using those scripts to see if it\'ll generate something your Z media player can play. You can mount filesystems for reading or R/W\'ing once you get though going or use a USB HD to save off the file for later xfer to the Z. I don\'t recall if Knoppix connects out-of-the-box with the Z or not.
Or, you can wait until Microsoft releases a version of their software that\'ll let you export for playback on your Z. Isn\'t funny how fewer and fewer options are available on the MS platform as Microsoft puts more and more software developer out of business...
1) go to http://www.knoppix.net (http://www.knoppix.net)
2) go to the download section and download the 700MB ISO image
3) burn the ISO image to a CDROM
4) shutdown your HD based OS
5) insert the Knoppix CD and boot your computer from the Knoppix CD
note: the BIOS needs to be set to boot from CD and it doesn\'t install anything on your HD
lob
-
Someone said that the best thing that could ever happen is some congressman\'s kid gets sued by the RIAA.
Wow! That would be cool! A real \"eye opener\"...
-
T- Do what you will with your pages. All I was suggesting is that your ad might not be the best way to attract employers. It sounds like \"I can only write for IE\" rather than \"I only need to write for IE\". I am probably wrong as I don\'t know much about web programming. I was only trying to be constructively critical. Go ahead and rip on my page... like how almost every page\'s title says it was made by GoLive6. Honestly I don\'t know where that came from as I use Dreamweaver. More importantly did anyone ever tell you that you kinda look like Mathew Broderick?
Anyway, did Flask work out for you?
-
Knoppix is GNU/Linux on a CDROM that\'ll boot from the CDROM and that means it does not need to be installed on your hard disk.
Yes, I have a copy of it. I think it is awesome how it boots from a CD!! I\'ll have to give mencoder on Knoppix a try sometime. Thanks!... (I didn\'t know it was on there....)
Isn\'t funny how fewer and fewer options are available on the MS platform as Microsoft puts more and more software developer out of business...
I agree. Actually, I would take it one step further... piece by piece the entire software development market will get replaced by open source... and then all of the developers (like me) are out of a job. But... unlike many congressmen, I can see past that and realize that the world WOULD be better off that way instead of trying to force people to pay money for something that they shouldn\'t have to.
I\'m preparing myself to make a career change in the next few years because of this...
-
It sounds like \"I can only write for IE\" rather than \"I only need to write for IE\".
I agree... It\'s a very good point. I only added it after one of my Netscape friends pointed out that the page didn\'t load under Netscape well. He recommended I post a warning like that... but I\'m (very) open to a different wording while still minimizing liability for those who view the page using somehting other than IE. :wink:
More importantly did anyone ever tell you that you kinda look like Mathew Broderick?
Yes... did you notice my e-mail address? :wink: (I was called \"Ferris\" by my friends years before I even found out who \"Ferris\" was. Strangers called me Ferris so much that it became my nickname and stuck... I still go by it today, even though age has made me look more different from \"Ferris\" than I used to when I was younger. ).
-
I agree. Actually, I would take it one step further... piece by piece the entire software development market will get replaced by open source... and then all of the developers (like me) are out of a job. But... unlike many congressmen, I can see past that and realize that the world WOULD be better off that way instead of trying to force people to pay money for something that they shouldn\'t have to.
I know this is off topic but this thread has already gone down that path. Software developers will not be out of jobs as OSS gets more popular. They will be hired to work and improve on the OSS and/or create new OSS projects. And there will still be proprietary applications too. It\'s just that you won\'t have so much wasted public money on reinventing the wheel and people will be paid to improve things instead of reinventing. Software development will move more and more to a service industry. It may be that more jobs will get created because it\'ll be common for even 5 person business\'s to have a software person to tweak/customize their office software systems. Instead of waiting for Microsoft to release something that works alittle better than the last version but requires a new computer to run it. ;-)
I\'m not sure where people get these ideas about free software and the end of software development. It sounds alot like how people think that conserving fuel will remove profits from the oil industry and therefore remove money from the economy.... The money will still be spent and will now be used for other things. Embracing OSS means moving forward. IMHO.
lob
BTW, the latest beta version of Knoppix has NTFS R/W capabilities
-
I know this is off topic but this thread has already gone down that path. Software developers will not be out of jobs as OSS gets more popular. They will be hired to work and improve on the OSS and/or create new OSS projects. And there will still be proprietary applications too. It\'s just that you won\'t have so much wasted public money on reinventing the wheel and people will be paid to improve things instead of reinventing. Software development will move more and more to a service industry. It may be that more jobs will get created because it\'ll be common for even 5 person business\'s to have a software person to tweak/customize their office software systems. Instead of waiting for Microsoft to release something that works alittle better than the last version but requires a new computer to run it.
I hope you\'re right.
Embracing OSS means moving forward. IMHO.
I agree.
-
I take all the copyright laws with a grain of salt...
People are sometimes too paranoid about the \"MIB\" coming to get them, and take their computer... If you are doing low-level pirating, etc. Such as download movies, games, programs, etc.. You do NOT have to worry about the feds tracking you. (Of course unless you are using one of those stupid file sharing programs...[but even then, you can claim \"entrapment\" if they take you to court - because who gave you the files?] ) Government agencies go after the BIG FISHES, not 12-yr old joe blow, downloading movies from irc, from a BOT...
For example, with the \"war on drugs\" (pfft) do you see cops on the street selling drugs undercover, and then arresting kids? No. They go after DEALERS, and kids that they pull over, and find some pot on them, and they they tell the kids: \" You can go to jail, or you can tell us who you got this from\". So if anything, they go after the groups/people on the net SERVING all this stuff... the downloaders don\'t have close to anything to worry about..
Also, think about how much personell/time/money would be required to track down all the internet sharing that goes on (especially in a legal way). Keep on sharing people!
P.S. I would do some encoding for others, but I have been just as unsuccessful as well :?
-
I agree. Actually, I would take it one step further... piece by piece the entire software development market will get replaced by open source... and then all of the developers (like me) are out of a job.
Partially correct. Most broad market software categories, like OSes, word processors, databases, desktops, \"basic functionality\" software will be open source in the long term. However, this will NOT put the software developers out of business, for two reasons:
1) The market for customizations and enhancements of open source. In fact, with the money that is saved in licensing and support costs being redirected, this business will continue expanding.
2) More specialized software will continue to exist in its current form. This includes any software which services vertical market segments, or software that needs continual review by non-developers (such as tax software, which needs lawyers and CPAs to keep up). Software engineers will also be needed for servers which aren\'t sold. (think about the legions of developers at places like Google and Yahoo) In addition, the \"leading edge\" of new software categories will probably be proprietary because open source tends to be better at playing catch-up, at least in the aggregate.
So you don\'t need to quit your day job just yet.
but I\'m (very) open to a different wording
How about \"enhanced\" for IE?
-
People are sometimes too paranoid about the \"MIB\" coming to get them
If the definition of terrorism is \"he who inspires fear\", then Ashcroft is more of a terrorist than Bin Laden. IMO.
-
Also, think about how much personell/time/money would be required to track down all the internet sharing that goes on (especially in a legal way).
True... it IS very costly to go after 25% of the nation. ...but the RIAA are rich filthy pigs... they have billions at their disposal (which is another problem). Don\'t forget that recently a 12 year old WAS sued by the RIAA (and she didn\'t even know she was sharing). The chances of the RIAA coming after any of us are close to the chances of getting hit by lightning. But people DO get hit by lightning which is why we should keep fighting the RIAA and those congressmen who are in the RIAA\'s pocket. Education is the key. Most congressmen just don\'t know the details about this issue. Maybe a group of hackers should target congressmen\'s and their children\'s computers and track illegal filesharing and pirating and make it public... so that the congress has to face facts and reconsider these laws. Any hackers out there want to take this on? :twisted: I\'d be willing to post the resulting statistics on my website! ...but I would need mirrors because of the huge amount of traffic it would get.
How about \"enhanced\" for IE?
I like it! I\'ll make the change.
If the definition of terrorism is \"he who inspires fear\", then Ashcroft is more of a terrorist than Bin Laden. IMO.
I agree... which is sad for me because I actually like Ashcroft. But he appears to be misinformed on this. I would actually blame the RIAA more than Ashcroft because Ashcroft is just an ignorant puppet to the RIAA on this issue.
-
I would equate the RIAA suing 12-year-olds and common mild-mannered citizens to the small group of Iraqis who decapitated an american with a knife while on TV. RIAA\'s scare tactics are as terrible as those Iraqi tactics were.
...and we should not give into them.
(Note: I personally believe that most Iragis would find that action terrible and don\'t stand by it, just like most americans find the actions of those few soldiers (who mistreated their prisoners) to be terrible. I consider most Iraqis to by my brethren.)
-
True, the RIAA does in fact sue people.. but have you read about the outcomes of these cases? Most of them are thrown out. There are so many ways you can fight these cases... Like you said the 12 yr old did know she was even sharing, so that could maybe be a virus doing the sharing for her? Also like I said that would be entrapment if I downloaded a file from the RIAA off of kazza.. If they never offered me the file, then it would have never been downloaded...(lol - yeah right)
You could also argue that a hacker took control of your pc, and downloaded all those files. I can go on and on about excuses you can use, but i\'ll leave that up to the lawyers... I would laugh in the face of the person who handed me a subpoena if I was 12...
But like I said, if you are the many who are distributing (DONT STOP!) be careful... but most of the BOTs on IRC, are rooted computers, and the people that are hosting the files, dont even know they are... which presents another argument to the courts: \"but mr. judge.. my computer was hacked!?!\"
-
but have you read about the outcomes of these cases? Most of them are thrown out.
Wow! I didn\'t know! In fact I hadn\'t heard anything about the results of these cases. Do you have a good place to find out more about this (favorite website about this)? This is great news!
Which ones weren\'t thrown out? How much did they have to pay? (To give me an idea of the range of severity versus non-severity)
...has anyone counter-sued? Or... has anyone flat out sued RIAA?
-
I was under the impression that most of the RIAA suits have been \'settled\' out of court for the 2-5k ballpark. CNet claimed in December: \"The campaign to date has yielded 382 lawsuits and 220 settlements averaging close to $3,000 apiece.\"
The notable throw-outs make the news: the Mac guy, the 12 year old girl, the 80 year old grandpa, but most people suck up their losses and throw some cash at it to avoid astronomical legal costs. That\'s been their strategy all along anyway. They have no desire for this to come to court. All they have are made up numbers about how eleventy-billion dollars are lost to music pirates every day even through sales numbers are actually down LESS than distribution numbers. The press will spew these numbers like the venom they are but should they actually have to back up their words with, you know, facts they\'d be in a pretty rough spot.
-
Is there a website that tracks all of these cases and posts statistics?
-
The closes I\'ve seen is slashdot
-
Wow! I didn\'t know! In fact I hadn\'t heard anything about the results of these cases. Do you have a good place to find out more about this (favorite website about this)?
Digitalconsumer.org is a good one. Another good one is Larry Lessig\'s blog: http://www.lessig.org/blog/ (http://www.lessig.org/blog/).
None have gone to court yet. Many people have settled by giving several thousand dollars to the RIAA. Those that haven\'t are still in the early stages (lawsuits are slow). One woman is countersuing the RIAA on racketeering charges. It isn\'t likely to work, but it\'s worth a shot.
-
LOL speaking of counter suits...
The creators of KaZZa or some other file sharing program, have SUED the RIAA, because the RIAA was created illegal account names in KaZZa... pretty much the RIAA did not get proper authority from KaZZa to register accounts, and go after KaZZa users...
COULD IT GET ANY MORE IRONIC?
Here is a link to the article:
http://neowin.net/comments.php?id=13982&category=main (http://neowin.net/comments.php?id=13982&category=main)
HAHAHAAHAH I love it.
As far as the cases being thrown out, let me correct myself, *some* of the cases have been thrown out, and most of the case were settled out of court in the 2-5k ballpark (as noted in LilMikey\'s post). And like he said, alot of those were settled out of court to avoid lawyer\'s fees... I guess I was stating my opinon from my point of view (duh?) and what I would do if I were caught by the RIAA (hah never!) But none-the-less, I think that any lawyer, or person acting as their own lawyer would be able to put up a good fight against the RIAA. Check out http://www.eff.org (http://www.eff.org) for more info on fighting the RIAA.
Another article on RIAA lawsuits:
http://news.com.com/2010-1069-5075853.html (http://news.com.com/2010-1069-5075853.html)
-
As an aside (I know, I hate for this thread to move off-topic) a friend of mine got one of the \"DirectTV\" letters for purchasing a smartcard writer. They requested a few grand and confiscation of his writer and I believe on of his PCs (sorry for being vague, I only saw him briefly a few months ago). He spoke with a lawyer and his lawyer even advised him to take the settlement.
-
Damn, that\'s crazy...
I wonder how they found out he was using a bootlegg card?
I\'m suprised the lawer said to take the settlement?
-
DirectTV got a list from the retailers of everyone that bought a smart card reader capable of writing to the cards used in their recievers and pretty much blanked all of them with a letter requesting the hardware. They nailed a lot of people who legitimately needed a smartcard writer. My friend was not one of them.
-
In that case, I would tell DirecTV to shove it...
But I pretty sure they do have some backing behind them accusing all those people.. and how do they verify if the people use it for legit reasons?
I would tell them I use it for a hobby, of writing to smart cards.. how could someone get in trouble for this? You have links to any articles about this? I\'m interested
-
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/...=thread&tid=126 (http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/07/17/190232&mode=thread&tid=126)
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/...&tid=188&tid=99 (http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/08/13/0351233&mode=thread&tid=123&tid=129&tid=188&tid=99)
He probably wouldn\'t thought about fighting if he had the money to do so... and wasn\'t knee deep in illegal Hu cards.
-
lol...
What is this world coming to? :?
-
It\'s sickeningly reassuring to know some places are even more f-ed than the US of A.
http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/11950 (http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/11950)
The Italian cultural minister, Giuliano Urbani, has proposed a new law that has already been approved by the Italian parliament, and is waiting for Senate approval. The use of any means, including P2P networks, to exchange audiovisual material or software will become a felony punishable by up to 6 years in prison and the confiscation of all the hardware and media. This will be the most repressive law of its kind in the world, and is what happens when the Prime Miniter, Silvio Berlusconi, who controls practically all the media in the country, also has stakes in movie production (Medusa Film) and DVD rental outlets (Blockbuster Italia).
-
audio only works with MP3. I have 4 encoders on my machine and I encode all the time. It isn\'t the a simple matter of encoding... it\'s getting the very picky combination of codecs, bitrate, and size. In fact, the ONLY version of MPEG 4 it supports is Microsoft\'s MPEG 4... BUT Microsoft doesn\'t let you use the MP3 codec when exporting, and Zaurus doesn\'t recognize Microsoft\'s audio codec...
Just for the record, besides MP3, certain settings of Microsoft\'s IMA ADPCM audio you can tweak Windows Media Encoder into outputting videos with work fine (and use less CPU ^^) on the built in player (on my 760 anyway). Also Sharp\'s G.726 ACM audio works, although I had to use Pixlab (the encoding app Sharp sells for making MPEG4 video for the Z) to make videos with that.
Re MP3, MS probably didn\'t have much choice about cutting out free official encoding in it from WME. Once MP3 became as popular as it did Fraunhofer started acting Draconian about using it/charging more/etc.
-
I use linux for my desktop OS, so I have all these neat vorbis tools. When my SL-5500 arrives next week, I\'ll mess around with video encoding and post a method for making optimal files based on arbitrary inputs (not just NTSC DVD files). (I\'ve spent a fair amount of time messing with video encoding starting from the days of the original DivX ;-), so I\'m fairly sure I\'ll be able to figure out what works )
-
Poking around google, I found quite a few helpful websites. And just after I\'d gotten done writing a howto, I found a site that wrote a script to do EVERYTHING for you and was even more optimized. That\'s just my luck for me http://cmisip.home.insightbb.com/zaurus.htm (http://cmisip.home.insightbb.com/zaurus.htm)
-
I haven\'t been on in a few days, but I wanted to respond to DRWowe...regarding DMCA and fair use...
The same argument was brought up by the defense in Universal vs Corley (the 2600 DeCSS lawsuit). The court rejected it.
I cannot agree here...
The issue at hand was the distribution of DeCss. Please see http://www.hklaw.com/Publications/Newslett...33&Article=1863 (http://www.hklaw.com/Publications/Newsletters.asp?ID=333&Article=1863). Fair use was used as a defense, where fair use did not apply, therefore it was rejected. The 2600 site was considered \"distributing\" due to its links to the software and thus a DMCA violator.
The article states:
Section 1201 divides technological measures into two categories: measures that prevent unauthorized access to a copyrighted work and measures that prevent unauthorized copying of a copyrighted work. Making or selling devices or services that are used to circumvent either category of technological measures are prohibited, as is the act of circumventing access control devices. However, the act of circumventing copy control devices is not prohibited. This distinction was intended to preserve the public’s ability to make fair use of copyrighted works.
If you are interested in the case law that helped to define \"fair use\", please see Sony vs. Universal 464 U.S. 417 (1984)(http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getc...l=464&invol=417 (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=464&invol=417)). This was a landmark case that clearly allows you to make a copy of your movies for private viewing on other devices.
-
Hey Tony,
If you want to encode videos there is a very simple way to do it. I started doing it on Saturday, and three hours later i was on a bus down to see my parents watching Futurama and Dilbert. I used the mplayer that came with cacko, i haven\'t yet installed the optimised version 1. So all you need is divx, i used 5.0.3 from nimo codec pack and flaskmpeg. Open your DVD or MPEG-1 in FlaskMpeg, select resize to 320 * 240, DIVX 5.03 slowest setting (quality) bitrate to 300 and MP3 codec to 128k 48kHz. The result is very nice looking full screen movies that seemed to work everytime. When i tried ogg for audio there was lack of sync, even in my windows player. I have yet to fully explore all the different settings, but those above worked very nicely for me!
-
Oh and i hope you realise that it is in windows. Plus, there\'s also a option on the encode screen to set the process to idle so that it doesn\'t affect whatever else you\'re doing on the system (within reason). Enjoy, and let me know how you go on. Sometimes, i had to use MAD audio decoding, instead of FFmpeg but i think that FFmpeg worked for all the divx files.
-
So it still isn\'t legal.
I should add, that\'s not really the end of the story either. Because they still have to catch you decrypting your own legally owned DVD on your own computer (yeah right). And decide it\'s worth their while to prosecute. And then, supposing that happened, then you could always try a defence called \"jury nullification\". That\'s basically, when you convince a jury that the law is so unfair, or confusing, that you don\'t deserve to be convicted, even though you are guilty.
So bottom line is, it\'s a good academic legal debate, but even though it\'s technically illegal, I just wouldn\'t worry too much.
-
jurors are always allowed to vote their conscience...
Scott
-
For Tony Olsen...
Per your original post...it *is* legal to hire someone to rip your DVDs for you...
A company already does this legally for the iPod. They will rip your entire CD collection and copy it to your iPod for a fee: http://www.loadpod.com/ (http://www.loadpod.com/)
Thus, by the law of transitivity, I assume hiring someone or a company to rip DVDs to DIVX for viewing on \"other\" devices is completely legal as well.
Perhaps a new business venture for you? You can probably charge a nice fee...like $8-$10 per DVD due to the tremendous time it takes to rip a reasonably good copy.
-
Per your original post...it *is* legal to hire someone to rip your DVDs for you...
Nope. CDs are legal precisely because they aren\'t encrypted, so the DMCA doesn\'t apply.
-
Nope. CDs are legal precisely because they aren\'t encrypted, so the DMCA doesn\'t apply.
Wrong again. please view the links I responded to you above.
The act of circumventing copy control devices is not prohibited. This distinction was intended to preserve the public’s ability to make fair use of copyrighted works.
Aiding someone to create a copy for thier own library who already own a copy of the DVD has a right under fair use to make the copy is completely legal. Read the DMCA...its very clear on this issue. The \"illegality\" of the DMCA is distribution or manufacturing of a device that aids in circumvention of a protection.
-
So it still isn\'t legal.
Who nuked my message before this one? I was quoting myself, and the original post disappeared! The one where I responded to javab0y\'s DMCA quotation and the Sony vs. Betamax case? Grrr....
I\'m not going to rewrite the whole post but the summary of what I said was that the DMCA trumps the Sony vs Betamax case, and the passage of the DMCA you quoted applies to a \"copy control\" device, but the CSS encryption is also considered an \"access control\" device, to which the exemption doesn\'t apply, and that also, I\'ve discussed this issue with an IP lawyer who believes the matter is quite clear.
Finally, you DO have the right to backup a DVD (as per Sony vs Universal), but you do NOT have the right to decrypt it. The 1st right is useless without the 2nd.
-
1201 © gives you the right to decrypt it...its clearly written in US code...and paves the way for the Sony vs. Universal application of case law.
I\'ve discussed this issue with an IP lawyer who believes the matter is quite clear.
I am in law school and am emphasizing in IP/Cyber law. I also have discussed this at great length with professors...USC 17 1201 © will likely land any attack from a corporation on a DVD owner into summary judgement .
-
I am in law school and am emphasizing in IP/Cyber law.
Well, why didn\'t you say so. The law has so many nuances that it\'s dangerous to believe someone who doesn\'t have the training.
Can you explain to me why the opinion of the judge in the Corley case won\'t be used as a precedent in determining that 1201© doesn\'t permit DVD decryption? I realize the case as a whole was about trafficking, but it seems like that part of the opinion generalizes to personal use.
-
I think the bottom line is, that even if you turn out to be right, and a court eventually declares that DVD decrypting/copying for personal use is legal, you\'d better have a large tolerance (and budget) for legal risk before doing something high profile activity like starting a business, because you WILL be sued.
-
Can you explain to me why the opinion of the judge in the Corley case won\'t be used as a precedent in determining that 1201© doesn\'t permit DVD decryption? I realize the case as a whole was about trafficking, but it seems like that part of the opinion generalizes to personal use.
I would be happy to...
The reason I posted the link above about the Corley case was it clearly showed that the issue at hand were the links to a tool or \"device\", which does indeed violate the DMCA (as crappy of a law as it is). The focus wasn\'t truely fair use (although it was attempted as a defense), but that the 2600 and other Connecticut based website were indirectly distributing or \"trafficking\" (sounds like they were dealing drugs...eh?) in a tool or device whose primary use was to aid in circumventing protection of a copyrighted work.
This can be evinced by the judge\'s statement:
Defendants, however, are not here sued for copyright infringement. They are sued for offering and providing technology designed to circumvent technological measures that control access to copyrighted works and otherwise violating Section 1201(a)(2) of the Act.
Again, unfortunately, US code clearly states that one cannot distribute/traffic in a tool or device whose primary use is to circumvent protections. Therefore they had a tough battle...as Fair Use did not apply here.
However, what I think is truely chilling, is that the website owners claimed a defense based on the 1st amendment (or freedom of speech), where they had a right to post links to information on DeCSS. The judge struck this down as a defense. This is where I thought they would have had the greatest defense... Perhaps they would have been more successful under the 9th circuit (a much more liberal district).
Its scary where our country is heading.
-
Its scary where our country is heading.
I\'ll second that...
you\'d think that a difference of opinion and being able to express it in a civilized way
would be one of the most precious and valuable components of our society -- but just
try to say something bad about bush now -- the SS will be kicking down your door.
can I have an intolerance for intolerance?
Scott
-
Add 500 more lawsuits, weeee:
http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,...tw=wn_tophead_4 (http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,63579,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_4)
I\'m telling you, we\'ll all be listening to NPR by the time the RIAA is done.
-
Perhaps a new business venture for you? You can probably charge a nice fee...like $8-$10 per DVD due to the tremendous time it takes to rip a reasonably good copy.
Nah... I would just do it for free. It gets sticky as soon as money becomes involved. I want to make sure that I never do anything even close to this for any fee... even if it is legal to charge money, it puts me in a whole different playing field.
Nope. CDs are legal precisely because they aren\'t encrypted, so the DMCA doesn\'t apply.
How about VCDs? Encryption is nothing more than a layer of abstraction in a (vain) attempt to detere copying. I don\'t understand why whether the deterant is \"encryption\" or not should matter for the lawmakers. It wouldn\'t be hard for them to pervert that law and say that VCDs are \"encrypted\" since they\'re \"encoded\". In fact, almost everything in computers is encrypted to one layer or another. I can\'t play my RealVideo and Quicktime videos on my Zaurus because my Zaurus doesn\'t yet have the \"decryption\" to \"decrypt\" the code into a series of plain bitmaps for the screen to use. Now, \"encryption\" is not the purpose of a codec... it is only a side-effect.
When I worked at RealNetworks, I created a temporary TCPIP Network Proxy for their multicast video streams. I learned about the headers of the video files and the handshaking that goes on inbetween the player and the server before the video gets streamed. One of the things the server asks for from the player in a secret key to verify the player is authentic. This key was just a simple static string, but the video wasn\'t available without it. Does this qualify as encryption? In short I believe that any compression, or anything that requires a layer of code to translate the data back into a form that is usable, is a form of encryption. That then bleeds into almost any file format out there... whether it compresses or not. My Word documents require a program that can \"decrypt\" the Word format. Otherwise the data is useless to me.
\"Encyption\", as we use it, changes from year to year. I\'m sure people would have considered Microsoft Word formats \"encrypted\" when they first came out, because if you transmitted the data, noone could read it or make sense of it unless they had the needed program to \"decrypt\" it. We don\'t general consider Word documents \"encrypted files\" because our standards for what is \"encryption\" have gone up. Now it isn\'t considered \"encrypted\" unless there are secret keys involved (like a Word program that changes on the fly for different formats depending on the key that is given). I imagine that in the future, when an even better encryption is invented, that people will look back at 128-bit encryption and not think of it as \"true\" encryption.
In fact... if you look at the DVD encryption, I wouldn\'t even call it \"encryption\" anymore when based on today\'s standards. It isn\'t a variable decryption key... it\'s only a single static (never changing) key that all DVD players have hardcoded into their program... similar to the RealPlayer \"hand shaking\" key from many years ago?
So... what is encryption?
Is it wise to make a law based on such a loose term? Either it won\'t be held up in court very well or else the RIAA might try to \"bleed\" it into other areas to increase their power? Would they make Open-Office illegal becasue it \"cracks\" the \"Microsoft Word\" encryption?
Finally, you DO have the right to backup a DVD (as per Sony vs Universal), but you do NOT have the right to decrypt it. The 1st right is useless without the 2nd.
Everytime I play a DVD using a DVD player, I\'m \"decrypting\" it on the fly. So.. it\'s okay to \"decrypt\" it.. just not to save that data anywhere? It\'s okay for the \"decrypted\" data to be in memory, but not on the harddrive? Most players today read ahead in the file and decrypt parts of the video a few seconds before they are actually used. With swap files, how do you know that that information never touches the harddrive?... expecially if I rewind from my current position, and the data decrypted never actually gets used. Windows will see that that memory space hasn\'t been used for a while and will automatically put it on the harddrive in the swap file.
Saying that we can\'t decrypt files is as ridiculous as saying that we can\'t download pictures from a website. By simply viewing a site, the site\'s pictures are already stored on your computer in your cache directory (even the Zaurus has one)... so how can they say that downloading pictures is illegal without making going to a website illegal? Likewise, how can they make decrypting a file illegal without making the playing of an encrypted file illegal?
All this does it strengthen the point that laws against copyright infringement are not sound. They aren\'t logical. The whole premise of the copyright with today\'s technology is an oxymoron. It conflicts with common sense. The old copyright should go away and a new one should replace it. The new one would provide for the artists (perhaps not the record label, though... :twisted: ) to get paid, while also allowing the technology to work as designed and let the information flow freely.
a tool or device whose primary use was to aid in circumventing protection of a copyrighted work.
A toast to all of those circumventing protection software!
However, what I think is truely chilling, is that the website owners claimed a defense based on the 1st amendment (or freedom of speech), where they had a right to post links to information on DeCSS. The judge struck this down as a defense. This is where I thought they would have had the greatest defense... Perhaps they would have been more successful under the 9th circuit (a much more liberal district).
Its scary where our country is heading.
Yes, that\'s very scary. 1st ammendment is, I think, exactly what all of this is all about. Note this it is the \"First Ammendment\", and NOT the 2nd, 3rd, or 9th ammendment... It was the most important thing our forefathers could think of as a law. The freedom of information, verbal, visual, written or otherwise. The modern copyright in its very nature wishes to constrict the 1st ammendment. The fact that the 1st ammendment wasn\'t upheld in court here only shows how the corporate world (especially the RIAA) has de-emphasized it, in favor of corporate greed. Our rights are sliping away as corporations find more \"legal\" ways to steal our money.
The original concept of copyright (as corrupt as it was) DIDN\'T infringe the 1st ammendment as much as today. It was ONLY directed at businesses and selling. Free exchange was honored, as it should be today.
\"Fair Use\"... why does it need to be spelled out? Isn\'t is clear as a basic freedom? ...or have people been \"brainwashed\" by the RIAA for too long. It cracks me up to hear people calling \"copyright infingement\" stealing, especially when nothing is missing. \"Yes, officer, I was robbed. They took everything in my house. .. *pause* ... well, yes, I know that you can still see everything here, but you have to believe me that they STOLE everything in my house\". I think some people are confusing \"Cut-And-Paste\" with \"Copy-And-Paste\". Wake up from your slumber... realize the aweful state our laws are in. REalize the corruption that is growing all around us... we need to be more consious of this and make our elected officials more consious of this. They need to do a better job of representing the people.
In Iraq some people were scared to speak publically against the regime for fear of torture and death (or decapitation). Speaking to americans: We \"think\" we are free, but we are under a similar tyranical rule in our homeland. It is just as devious and sneaky. Some people here are scared to make certain information public (like the bits that comprise the DIVX video of a movie) for fear of the RIAA regime and what they can do to us. Thankfully they can\'t kill us... but I do see a lot of torture out there.
Do any other nations want to volunteer to invade the USA, destroy the greedy corporate regimes (especially the RIAA) and leave us with as truly \"free\" nation?
-
Hi Tony, have you got your DVD\'s ] DIVX ] Zaurus yet? I give a short guide in one of the other forums using flaskmpeg
-
pervert that law and say that VCDs are \"encrypted\" since they\'re \"encoded\"
Quoting from the DMCA, it gives legal protection to a \"technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title\". So far, that\'s been interpreted as a matter of intent by the courts. Basically, anything that is intended as an access control device has been treated as applicable to the DMCA, regardless of how stupid or easily broken it is. I don\'t think that interpretation could be streched to apply to a standard encoding. But who knows what those lawyers will try.
One of the things the server asks for from the player in a secret key to verify the player is authentic. This key was just a simple static string, but the video wasn\'t available without it. Does this qualify as encryption?
The (dumb) Judge said it did qualify when they sued that Streambox VCR company. They also said the dumbass \"copy bit\" was protected by the DMCA. Grrr...
Is it wise to make a law based on such a loose term?
Most technically knowledgable people think the answer is no... But the people charged with enforcing it are either NOT knowledgable about such matters, or have a vested interested in making copyright protection as strong as possible. It certainly has been held up in court up until now, althought there have been a few recent exceptions (such as the garage door opener case) which might indicate the tide is changing.
Everytime I play a DVD using a DVD player, I\'m \"decrypting\" it on the fly.
The theory here is that YOU are not decrypting, but rather the DVD player , which has licensed the decryption code, is doing the decrypting. See the difference? YOU have no rights to the data at all. Under this interpretation, even non-licenced DVD players (which don\'t make copies) are illegal.
(note: I\'m not saying Javab0y is wrong, he seems to know what he\'s talking about, but this is certainly the theory that Hollywood will put forth if the matter comes to court again.)
With swap files, how do you know that that information never touches the harddrive?
Yup, you\'ve hit the nail on the head. The law takes a very layman\'s common sense view of technology that invariably misses many of the nuances of the way things really work. It\'s a problem that\'s going to become more and more pronounced as our society becomes increasingly technological. The good news is that the layman\'s view of technology invariably becomes more sophisticated as people\'s understanding catches up. It\'s just a VERY slow process, because people don\'t want to learn any more than they have to, but eventually they do have to.
The original concept of copyright (as corrupt as it was) DIDN\'T infringe the 1st ammendment as much as today. It was ONLY directed at businesses and selling. Free exchange was honored, as it should be today.
Fortunately, there are well regarded people like Larry Lessig on the other side of the debate. Things may actually get better in our lifetimes. Copyright was never such a contentious point to the average person until computers brought the cost of copying down the point where anyone could do it trivially and routinely. The entertainment industry got a big headstart in this war because they were busy fretting and lobbying before anyone on the other side really realized how important this legal battle would turn out. Now that copyright has started to enter the public\'s awareness, things could start changing. The law is just struggling to catch up with the new reality.
-
Hi Tony, have you got your DVD\'s ] DIVX ] Zaurus yet? I give a short guide in one of the other forums using flaskmpeg
-
Hi Tony, have you got your DVD\'s ] DIVX ] Zaurus yet? I give a short guide in one of the other forums using flaskmpeg
Yes, I got the WMV option (using Windows Media Encoder) working. In your post you mentioned that I could use Divx 5.3. I have Dr. Divx and tried it, but when I played it (using TkcPlayer) some frames skipped and the audio and video quickly came out of allignment.
Does MPlayer do a better job at this? Also, can I assume the MPlayer and MediaPlayer are 2 separate apps?
Thanks.
-
The theory here is that YOU are not decrypting, but rather the DVD player , which has licensed the decryption code, is doing the decrypting. See the difference? YOU have no rights to the data at all. Under this interpretation, even non-licenced DVD players (which don\'t make copies) are illegal.
But in truth \"I\" NEVER decrypt the data... it is ALWAYS the software. DecSS (spelling?) is the same thing... If I run it I don\'t decrypt it anymore than the player decrypts it. I don\'t understand how that distinction can be upheld.
It\'s a problem that\'s going to become more and more pronounced as our society becomes increasingly technological. The good news is that the layman\'s view of technology invariably becomes more sophisticated as people\'s understanding catches up. It\'s just a VERY slow process, because people don\'t want to learn any more than they have to, but eventually they do have to.
So... the hope here is that the copyright laws, and RIAA\'s evil reign, will eventually come to a close... depending on how fast the general public becomes educated. Why is it that the people in power often end up being the most corrupt and/or unintellegent of the population? (Note, I like what Bush is doing, but many in congress, etc, fall under this).
The law is just struggling to catch up with the new reality.
Cheers to this new \"Reality\"!
-
But in truth \"I\" NEVER decrypt the data... it is ALWAYS the software. DecSS (spelling?) is the same thing... If I run it I don\'t decrypt it anymore than the player decrypts it. I don\'t understand how that distinction can be upheld.
The distinction is between you using an \"authorized\" decryption device, vs an unauthorized one. As a matter of common sense, the distinction between plopping a DVD into computer and starting up Cyberlink vs. running DVD Decrypter is quite obvious. One is authorized, the other isn\'t. Now, the distinction between Cyberlink and something like Mplayer or Xine isn\'t quite as obvious (in a Joe Sixpack sitting on the jury kind of way), but Hollywood\'s lawyer will inform them that those too are unauthorized. And Joe Sixpack may squirm a little bit (if he\'s paying attention) and wonder why this \"authorization\" is do darn important when you just want to watch your own DVD on your own computer. But I\'m digressing...
So... the hope here is that the copyright laws, and RIAA\'s evil reign, will eventually come to a close... depending on how fast the general public becomes educated. Why is it that the people in power often end up being the most corrupt and/or unintellegent of the population? (Note, I like what Bush is doing, but many in congress, etc, fall under this).
Most people don\'t care about most things. There\'s only so many hours of the day, and most of them are spent making money, eating, drinking beer, and sleeping, and a few other pleasurable activities. That doesn\'t leave much time for political activism. But politicians definately care about things that the people care about. It\'s when the public\'s back is turned that they get away with all kinds of crap.
Fortunately, p2p networks have already gotten hundreds of millions of people to care about copyright issues. Kazaa sucks, but lets thank them anyway for this.
Cheers to this new \"Reality\"!
I\'ll drink to that!
-
One of my friends used to work at a Japanese manufacturing plant in the US. They would have a need for a number of machine of a certain type. If they needed 50 machines, they would buy 5 and then they would dismantle them, figure out how they were made, and then build the rest themselves. What they did was perfectly legal and the law couldn\'t touch them... as long as they never sold those machines. Copying = Legal. And yet, ironically, only the information industry seems to not understand this.
Another hypothetical example. Pretend we had replicators like in Star Trek... is it legal for me to replicate a part manufactured by another company? Yes... as long as I don\'t sell it, or sell a product which uses it. We may laugh at this example now, but I\'m sure people 30 years ago didn\'t think that we could \"Copy\" entire movies with the ease that we do today, and send them to our friends in foreign countries. Let\'s learn from this terrbile example and teach our children, so that the next generation won\'t make the mistakes we made and we\'ll fight against bad laws before they become ingrained in our society and even our very culture.
Patents mean that you can\'t make and sell something someone else invented... but there\'s nothing wrong/illegal with making it... only with selling it without permission. Copyrights and Patents are business-based laws. They don\'t apply to areas where there isn\'t any money exchanged, and therefor no business. If I make McDonalds Big Macs for my kids at home... and we eat them each week... can McDonalds throw us in prison?.. Me for making a BigMac, or my children for eating it? How about if I started making BigMacs for everyone in the world? I would use my transporter technology to zap it to any location that wanted it? How about if I opened a restaraunt where I didn\'t charge any money (everything was free) and I made BigMacs?
Where money isn\'t involved, the coprights and patents don\'t apply. Hence... P2P isn\'t illegal.
Oh... and the secret \"special sauce\" in a big mac is only \"thousand island dressing\". Don\'t mind me... I\'m just exercising my rights under the 1st ammendment to freedom of exchange of information.
-
The distinction is between you using an \"authorized\" decryption device, vs an unauthorized one. As a matter of common sense, the distinction between plopping a DVD into computer and starting up Cyberlink vs. running DVD Decrypter is quite obvious. One is authorized, the other isn\'t. Now, the distinction between Cyberlink and something like Mplayer or Xine isn\'t quite as obvious (in a Joe Sixpack sitting on the jury kind of way), but Hollywood\'s lawyer will inform them that those too are unauthorized. And Joe Sixpack may squirm a little bit (if he\'s paying attention) and wonder why this \"authorization\" is do darn important when you just want to watch your own DVD on your own computer. But I\'m digressing...
Great point!
-
Question: When when the RIAA sues someone is there anyway for that person (assuming he is like most people and can\'t afford the lawyers needed to stand up against the masses of RIAA lawyers) to get the court to appoint an appropriate (knowledgeable) lawyer for that person\'s defense?... and not have that person have to pay for the mess?
Or... is there a way to have the court force the RIAA to pay a certain fraction of what they are paying for the defendant to hire a lawyer (or lawyers) to defend himself?
Is there anyway to protect yourself from corporate musseling and bullying? ...or are we typical poor americans going to be at the mercy of those who can hire dozens of layers to harrass us? Does the court system offer anything to balance this out?
If not... then why not? Is there anything in the works to change this?
Also... how much do you think the RIAA has to pay for each lawsuit? Are they making a profit off of this, or is it just a public exhibition to scare the populace into submission?
-
Another hypothetical example. Pretend we had replicators like in Star Trek... is it legal for me to replicate a part manufactured by another company? Yes... as long as I don\'t sell it, or sell a product which uses it.
No. You are half right. Under the DMCA, you are legally allowed to re-engineer technology to understand how it works. However, you may not A) distribute the technology either commercially or non-commercially to the public. You may not disclose its \"secrets\" to the public. However, there is a loophole. If you can somehow legally get yourself to be classified as a library or educational facility, you can then have additional \"freedoms\" to istibute information.
Question: When when the RIAA sues someone is there anyway for that person (assuming he is like most people and can\'t afford the lawyers needed to stand up against the masses of RIAA lawyers) to get the court to appoint an appropriate (knowledgeable) lawyer for that person\'s defense?... and not have that person have to pay for the mess?
No...you are only appointed legal counsel under the government\'s tab if you meet the following criteria:
A) It is a criminal case (i.e. USA vs. YOU - this is not a good place to be).
AND
You clearly cannot afford a lawyer. The government will get its bean counters to get an analysis of your financial situation (house/car/bank accounts) and assess your ability to pay for legal counsel. They may, at thier discretion pay for the entire bill, pay a portion of the bill, or hit you with a judgement for the legal costs at the end of your trial.
Is there anyway to protect yourself from corporate musseling and bullying? ...or are we typical poor americans going to be at the mercy of those who can hire dozens of layers to harrass us? Does the court system offer anything to balance this out?
Yes But you ned to be proactive rather than reactive. The key that they look at is how many assets do you have and is it worthwhile to sue and get a judgement on you. Step 1) Go into business for yourself (if you are in computers...consult....the money is better). If they attach a judgement against you, they will go to your employer to garnish your wages. Now since YOU are your employer...you can fire yourself and rehire yourself as a vounteer. Then hire your wife/Mom/Dad/Kids and give them the paycheck. BAM...you have all of a sudden become a poor person with no income...and no ability to garnish your wages...because you do not make anything. Having a wife is best because she becomes the employee and the income kind of flows right back into your pocket without any tax ramifications. Second...any assets you have you want to get rid of. You need to do this while the waters are calm...ie. no current legal issues or even threat of someone coming after you, otherwise a judge can state \"fraudulent conveyence\" and open a direct path to your assets.. You bury your assets in something called a Family Limited Partnership or FLIP. This includes your house, stocks, bonds, cash, etc. When a creditor comes after you, they can get something called a charging order against your portion of a FLIP. But since you are a partner, you do not need to release the asset for distribution (you can continue using the assets in the good name of the partnership). Creditors don\'t normally like this because if they get a charging order, they have to pay the property taxes and other fees for the portion they \"own\". Its a losing proposition for them...so they usually walk away when your assets are buried. In addition, I believe there is a Federal law that says there is a 20 year statute of limitations for a charging order to collect payment. After 20 years, its all yours again The downside is the collection agency will likely bug the heck out of you...so read up on the Federal Debt Collection Act and read how to make the collectors leave you alone.
Hey...I never said it was going to be easy...but its definately doable
If not... then why not? Is there anything in the works to change this?
Unfortunately there is nothing in the works to change this just yet. However, with DirecTV, the MPAA, and the RIAA carpet bombing the world, I suspect someone in congress will put the brakes on this. It needs more public outcry. The key is we have a f**ed up legal system here. Anyone can sue anyone else with no recourse and for no reason. In certain european countries (like France I believe), if you sue someone and you lose, you have to pay for all of thier legal fees and costs. It kind of makes people think twice before suing someone and ensures that the case is a slam dunk. We need this kind of a system in America, but it will be a long time before that happens since lobbyists will continue to pump $$ into politicians pockets to prevent this type of legislation.
Also... how much do you think the RIAA has to pay for each lawsuit? Are they making a profit off of this, or is it just a public exhibition to scare the populace into submission?
From what I recall, its between 100.00-150.00 to file. They try to lump as many people in a single suit to keep the filing costs down. Yes I suspect they are making a profit off of this. I believe it was documented that DirecTV was making a mint off of thier legal initiatives. I do believe that on the RIAA its not done from a profit motive, but a controlling motive (public exhibition). They are trying to flex thier muscle and show who is in charge. I think if most folks do not settle and fight back (malicious litigation etc), the US court system will begin showing little tolerance for these methods of intimidation. If you read up on DirectV, you will find that several judges just started throwing out cases left and right with stinging biradements toward DirecTV.
-
The distinction is between you using an \"authorized\" decryption device, vs an unauthorized one. As a matter of common sense, the distinction between plopping a DVD into computer and starting up Cyberlink vs. running DVD Decrypter is quite obvious. One is authorized, the other isn\'t. Now, the distinction between Cyberlink and something like Mplayer or Xine isn\'t quite as obvious (in a Joe Sixpack sitting on the jury kind of way), but Hollywood\'s lawyer will inform them that those too are unauthorized. And Joe Sixpack may squirm a little bit (if he\'s paying attention) and wonder why this \"authorization\" is do darn important when you just want to watch your own DVD on your own computer. But I\'m digressing...
Oh yes...this is a good point. Although you may pass muster under the DMCA and claim fair use...they may attempt to come back at you with some of the \"fraudulent or unauthorized devices\" statutes. They can claim wiretap violations, posession of an un-authorized access device, etc. Yes its a HUGE stretch, but its been done before. It comes down to how aggressive a US Attorney wants to be, how stupid the judge is in technology, and how stupid the probation office is for accepting \"high damages\" (like 150K per downloaded song or movie) which could put you in prison for a long time under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, all for downloading \"Finding Nemo\" or the new Brittney Spears song.
Hehe I can see it now...
Bubba: \"I\'m in for rape and carrying 100 lbs of smack accross the border. I got 8 years. Hey...what you in for?\"
You: \"I\'m in for 10 years. I downloaded Snow White through Kaazaa.\"
-
Ok, this might be a long reply once I\'m finished (alot to discuss), but I\'ll take it slowly with quotes.
Again, unfortunately, US code clearly states that one cannot distribute/traffic in a tool or device whose primary use is to circumvent protections. Therefore they had a tough battle...as Fair Use did not apply here.
Interesting, I don\'t think alot of countries have these sort of restrictions. I guess that\'s why Debian has a non-US branch. Keep all the \"illegal\" stuff over there. Up here (Canada), We don\'t have to worry about US legal code, the DMCA or the RIAA. Yes, we can LEGALLY share music. But thats a different argument.
Under the DMCA, you are legally allowed to re-engineer technology to understand how it works. However, you may not A) distribute the technology either commercially or non-commercially to the public. You may not disclose its \"secrets\" to the public. However, there is a loophole. If you can somehow legally get yourself to be classified as a library or educational facility, you can then have additional \"freedoms\" to istibute information.
Interesting idea, do you have any ideas as to how one can be classified as an \"educational institute\"? Maybe make the decryption/re-engineering a school project (for those of us in high school/university). Anyone have any other ideas?
Hey...I never said it was going to be easy...but its definately doable
Simpler solution: move somewhere without all these laws. Canada is less restrictive, but is not behind the US technology-wise. Or maybe Australia, or somewhere in Europe. You\'d get less strict laws, and just as good a living condidtions. Of course moving isn\'t an option for everyone.
Also... how much do you think the RIAA has to pay for each lawsuit? Are they making a profit off of this, or is it just a public exhibition to scare the populace into submission?
Chances are it\'s as simple as this: it\'s profitable, so they keep on doing it. If they got no profit, do you really think they\'d do it with so much... Vigor?
One of my friends used to work at a Japanese manufacturing plant in the US. They would have a need for a number of machine of a certain type. If they needed 50 machines, they would buy 5 and then they would dismantle them, figure out how they were made, and then build the rest themselves. What they did was perfectly legal and the law couldn\'t touch them... as long as they never sold those machines. Copying = Legal. And yet, ironically, only the information industry seems to not understand this.
It\'s a good point, but somewhat invalid in the current topic of decryption software, etc. The point is, tearing something apart you physically own, is completly different from simply having a license to use it. The other flaw... They were seeing how to build them, copying them, however, what decryption technology is often used to do is to tear something apart, only to rebuild it slightly differently (a different fomat), not a direct copy, it\'s a little different.
Oh... and the secret \"special sauce\" in a big mac is only \"thousand island dressing\". Don\'t mind me... I\'m just exercising my rights under the 1st ammendment to freedom of exchange of information.
*Files away under misc. company secrets* And yes, you are free to distribute that, since technically you didn\'t decrypt a Big Mac and study the sauce to see what it was, it was just simple deduction/tasting. I\'m not sure, but there may be a difference between tearing something apart to see how it works, and making something new, matching the old thing (i.e. decryption libraries that are from trial-and-error, rather than reverse engineering).
Now, the distinction between Cyberlink and something like Mplayer or Xine isn\'t quite as obvious (in a Joe Sixpack sitting on the jury kind of way), but Hollywood\'s lawyer will inform them that those too are unauthorized.
Because, to put it simply, they aren\'t. How many DVD players do you know of that are free? Excluding the ones that use libcss, libdvdcss or DeCSS, there are not any, because they have to pay for a licence to use the decryption software in their software
ut in truth \"I\" NEVER decrypt the data... it is ALWAYS the software. DecSS (spelling?) is the same thing... If I run it I don\'t decrypt it anymore than the player decrypts it. I don\'t understand how that distinction can be upheld.
I don\'t think it\'s as simple as just an \"I-didn\'t-do-it,-DeCSS-did\". I think it\'s more of a problem of you controlling it. You TOLD it to decrypt that DVD, the same way you TOLD your DVD player to decrypt it. The problem is, the DVD player is legal, and cost you (indirectly) for a license to decrypt those DVDs. Unfortunatly, DeCSS cost you nothing and is not legal.
I\'ll stop there, it\'s getting late and I should get some sleep tonight.
Unfortunatly, in the eyes of the law, DMCA and RIAA (in the US at least ), all these tools are illegal and can land you with fines and *maybe* jail time. But of course, the question is, how do they know you did it? They can\'t just do random hard drive checks (as that\'s either cracking (illegal), or break-and-enter (also illegal)), so as long as you don\'t advertise the fact you do this sort of thing (i.e. re-encoding movies over the internet for Z users), you shouldn\'t land in trouble.
-
Tony, i used Mplayer to play back the divx stuff on my Z using Kino2 as the frontend. Yes, to my knowledge the mediaplayer and mplayer are seperate. I think mediaplayer is OPIE?
-
nteresting, I don\'t think alot of countries have these sort of restrictions. I guess that\'s why Debian has a non-US branch. Keep all the \"illegal\" stuff over there. Up here (Canada), We don\'t have to worry about US legal code, the DMCA or the RIAA. Yes, we can LEGALLY share music. But thats a different argument.
Yes...legal in Canada...but you are not exempt from the DMCA or other title 17 violations. God forbid an American downloads your music (such as an undercover FBI or SS agent)...then you are in deep doo-doo. You won\'t be traveling to the USA anymore unless you are looking to get locked up. The long arm of Ashcroft\'s arm appears to extend accross our borders.
See here: http://www.cybercrime.gov/griffithsIndict.htm (http://www.cybercrime.gov/griffithsIndict.htm)
-
yup.
just get a stream ripper... rip from the streams all you want.
Ya, they\'re *just* figuring this one out... but remember, they\'re going after people
who *publish* without a license -- not people who download. If you\'re listening to
the radio -- you can record to tape, etc... if you\'re listening to a stream, you can
rip to a file.
be safe... until the insanity is outed for what it is.
Scott
-
In certain european countries (like France I believe), if you sue someone and you lose, you have to pay for all of thier legal fees and costs. It kind of makes people think twice before suing someone and ensures that the case is a slam dunk. We need this kind of a system in America
Yes!! That\'s exactly it! There needs to be some form of retribution for falsely accusing. That would also make the RIAA, and others, think twice before \"blanket bombing\" the nation with lawsuits.
Hehe I can see it now...
Bubba: \"I\'m in for rape and carrying 100 lbs of smack accross the border. I got 8 years. Hey...what you in for?\"
You: \"I\'m in for 10 years. I downloaded Snow White through Kaazaa.\"
he he he... I\'m only laughing because I don\'t want to cry. Why is it that some people can\'t see this? If they think it\'s wrong, fine... but does the punishment fit the crime?
Up here (Canada), We don\'t have to worry about US legal code, the DMCA or the RIAA. Yes, we can LEGALLY share music. But thats a different argument.
Hm... maybe I\'m in the wrong country. My father is canadian... maybe I need to think about revisiting my roots! Then I would haul whopass on the KaZaA network by sharing anything and everything! Cheap harddrives are now at around 250 GB!... Let me see, that would be every movie Disney ever made. Oh... and all of Britney Spears stuff (not because I like her music, but jsut to really tick off the RIAA).
...but seriously... are Canadians completely free from this? Can they still get sued? Are Canadians 100% safe here? Completely?
Yes...legal in Canada...but you are not exempt from the DMCA or other title 17 violations. God forbid an American downloads your music (such as an undercover FBI or SS agent)...then you are in deep doo-doo. You won\'t be traveling to the USA anymore unless you are looking to get locked up. The long arm of Ashcroft\'s arm appears to extend accross our borders.
See here: http://www.cybercrime.gov/griffithsIndict.htm (http://www.cybercrime.gov/griffithsIndict.htm)
So, as long as you don\'t enter the US they can\'t touch you? Can the RIAA still sue you?
Are there any KaZaA \"farms\" in Canada?
The Department of Justice also announced that it intends to seek his extradition in the coming weeks.
So... the US can simply reach out to any country and pull out anyone they want... for copyright infringement? Is there any protection from the US strongarm?
Interesting idea, do you have any ideas as to how one can be classified as an \"educational institute\"? Maybe make the decryption/re-engineering a school project (for those of us in high school/university). Anyone have any other ideas?
Don\'t I, as a father, count as an educational institution?
TonyOlsen wrote:
ut in truth \"I\" NEVER decrypt the data... it is ALWAYS the software. DecSS (spelling?) is the same thing... If I run it I don\'t decrypt it anymore than the player decrypts it. I don\'t understand how that distinction can be upheld.
I don\'t think it\'s as simple as just an \"I-didn\'t-do-it,-DeCSS-did\". I think it\'s more of a problem of you controlling it. You TOLD it to decrypt that DVD, the same way you TOLD your DVD player to decrypt it. The problem is, the DVD player is legal, and cost you (indirectly) for a license to decrypt those DVDs. Unfortunatly, DeCSS cost you nothing and is not legal.
The statement I was responding to was that the claim is that when a DVD Player decrypts the file, \"You\" aren\'t. And I was pointing out why should the DVD Player get to claim that the user isn\'t telling it to do stuff, and yet the DVD Decryptor is? Either the user is responsible or not... it shouldn\'t matter whether the software is a DVD Player or decryptor... or whether it is licensed or not. I hate the industry talking out of both sides of their mouths... either something is one way or it isn\'t, but they can\'t claim immunity from their own laws (or their own \"medicine\"). If they cna\'t live by their own laws then they should see the idiocy of having those laws to begin with.
So... everyone who ever plays a DVD using a DVD Player is \"decrypting\" the DVD... they jsut aren\'t saving the resulting file (knowingly... since Decrypted DVD Files get saved by DVD Players... just not longterm). Decrypting can\'t be illegal without making DVD Players illegal. *Gag* The whole RIAA argument is flawed from so many angles... it sickens me!
Any why does the industry get to fork in \"licensing fees\", and why should I have to conform to whether the player I\'m using paid their licenses or not? Why should millions of americans be held guilty because \"DVD Decryption\" isn\'t licensed? I don\'t understand why the users have to care whether the company that made their software was licensed or not... I think the notion is ridiculous.
so as long as you don\'t advertise the fact you do this sort of thing (i.e. re-encoding movies over the internet for Z users), you shouldn\'t land in trouble.
Then how do legal video streaming companies do it? They decrypt the DVDs using this \"illegal software\"? I though tI had to right to decrypt my own DVDs for my own use... so I have the right to decrypt my own DVDs... I just cna\'t use any of the Decryption software to do it? It sounds like using the \"banned\" Decyption software isn\'t illegal, since copying your own DVDs to your computer IS legal.
-
So, as long as you don\'t enter the US they can\'t touch you? Can the RIAA still sue you?
In the case I quoted (Operation Buccaneer), the USA tried to extradite. It went in front of an Australian judge. The judge said they won\'t accept the extradition since the gentleman never stepped foot in the USA, therefore they have no obligation to send him back (http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0...6-15318,00.html (http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,9071448%5E15331%5E%5Enbv%5E15306-15318,00.html)). Rest assured, however, if he ever comes to our \"great\" country, he will likely be cuffed and thrown in a federal holding cell to face his indictment. If this fellow has any brains, he will never step foot in a US territory.
As for \"can the RIAA still sue you\"...why yes...they can. Look at DirecTV...they are currently in several civil suits with Canadians who distributed hacked access cards from the great white north (of which was legal in Canda at one point). The Candian courts have sided with DirecTV on a number of these suits and also have supported US judgements and applied them in Canada. So you definately are not exempt from getting sued for copyright violations in Canada from a civil perspective. It may (or may not - I don\'t know much Canadian law) be legal to infringe on copyrights in Canada, but from a civil perspective, if the RIAA can show severe damages due to infringement, they likely would win restitution.
In addition, there are 2 or 3 outstanding indictments for the distribution of DirecTV access cards in Canada. Again, these are folks who probably will not be traveling to the good ol\' U S of A anytime soon, including, but not limited to, connecting flights to other countries. See http://www.skyreport.com/viewskyreport.cfm...?ReleaseID=1013 (http://www.skyreport.com/viewskyreport.cfm?ReleaseID=1013)
-
So... what countries can the RIAA NOT sue? Russia? Poland?
-
Tony- I\'d this point, I\'d have to direct my guesses more along the lines of \"Pluto? Saturn?\"
-
The RIAA can sue you in any country. But they have to get your government to cooperate to enforce anything. Many countries are happy to do so, for political reasons (doing business with the US is popular)
WRT the \"authorization\" issue think of it this way: You have permissio to use an authorized device to decrypt a DVD. That\'s it. The streaming movie companies have their own businness arrangements with the copyright owners. You too could decrypt a DVD legally, if you first negotiated a license to do so. (har de har har)
-
Yes...legal in Canada...but you are not exempt from the DMCA or other title 17 violations. God forbid an American downloads your music (such as an undercover FBI or SS agent)...then you are in deep doo-doo. You won\'t be traveling to the USA anymore unless you are looking to get locked up. The long arm of Ashcroft\'s arm appears to extend accross our borders.
I never really wanted to visit the USA in the virst place. Nope, just not the place I want to spend my vacation. Canada is good enough for me. Still haven\'t been to the Territories or Newfoundland.
Hm... maybe I\'m in the wrong country. My father is canadian... maybe I need to think about revisiting my roots! Then I would haul whopass on the KaZaA network by sharing anything and everything! Cheap harddrives are now at around 250 GB!... Let me see, that would be every movie Disney ever made. Oh... and all of Britney Spears stuff (not because I like her music, but jsut to really tick off the RIAA).
...but seriously... are Canadians completely free from this? Can they still get sued? Are Canadians 100% safe here? Completely?
Canada is a nice place, and if you ever get a chance to come up here, please do.
But sadly we are not allowed to share movies, as that is against the law. I believe we are allowed to store them on our harddrives if we decoded them, but not share them.
But music is 100% allowed, as long as the music downloaded is used ONLY for personal use, no commercial gain, and I assume this means you cannot use it publicly, i.e. at some sort of pubilc gathering (although a private one (friends) is ok).
So, as long as you don\'t enter the US they can\'t touch you? Can the RIAA still sue you?
They could sue you a while ago, but the law\'s been changed recently, and none of the lawsuits succeeded up here. They all were just thrown away, and it\'s legal now. Just music though.
So... the US can simply reach out to any country and pull out anyone they want... for copyright infringement? Is there any protection from the US strongarm?
I believe if you are a citizen of another country, they cannot take you from there without getting in a big problem. Unfortunatly it would probably take the rest of the world\'s military combined to stop the US from attacking anyone. And that war would be a costly one.
Don\'t I, as a father, count as an educational institution?
Maybe.... But what about those of us who aren\'t married? Any ideas for the rest of us?
*Gag* The whole RIAA argument is flawed from so many angles... it sickens me!
It\'s the RIAA... Did you expect it to make sense?
Then how do legal video streaming companies do it? They decrypt the DVDs using this \"illegal software\"? I though tI had to right to decrypt my own DVDs for my own use... so I have the right to decrypt my own DVDs... I just cna\'t use any of the Decryption software to do it? It sounds like using the \"banned\" Decyption software isn\'t illegal, since copying your own DVDs to your computer IS legal.
I assume video streaming companies use authorized software, with a very hefty price tag attached.
And I never said it was legal, I just said as long as you don\'t tell anyone you do it, don\'t share it, then they probably won\'t even know.
Did you ever think how inciminating this thread may be in the eyes of the RIAA/DMCA/etc? Well I\'ll just say this: I\'m not acknowledging that I do anything of the sort, and this is all a hypothetical discussion.
-
I bet the \"Pirate Act\" will really make your blood boil...
(http://news.com.com/\'Pirate+Act\'+raises+civil+rights+concerns/2100-1027_3-5220480.html?tag=nefd.lede)A proposal that the Senate may vote on as early as next week would let federal prosecutors file civil lawsuits against suspected copyright infringers, with fines reaching tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.
\"Tens of thousands of continuing civil enforcement actions might be needed to generate the necessary deterrence,\" Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said when announcing his support for the bill. \"I doubt that any nongovernmental organization has the resources or moral authority to pursue such a campaign.\"
Great idea... lets use taxpayer dollars to sue 80 million taxpayers. Because the \"poor\" RIAA just can\'t afford it.
For copyright holders, there\'s an additional bonus. Unlike when the RIAA files its own lawsuits ... the Justice Department likely would be able to seek wiretaps to collect evidence about P2P infringement.
-
I hate the RIAA... they can quote me on that. I don\'t agree with their actions and I will take all legal measures to stop them. I have not done anything illegal, but I do hope I\'ve ruffled their feathers a little in this thread. I hope to be the means of many sleepless nights for the evil warmongers at the head of the RIAA. I hope they shake in their boots that conversations like this one all over the world are educating the people to the evil that is being done by the RIAA until the congress will have to conceed, pass new laws, and the RIAA will die a slow and painful death.
Also, I look for the day when the artists are freed from the evil reign of the RIAA... they themselves would then join us in our march against the RIAA. The claim that the RIAA does what they do \"for the artists\" is a lie. None of the artists get a penny from what the RIAA is doing here. In fact, I know of many artists, who are less popular, and poor, who the RIAA doesn\'t pay royalties to for the use of their music. The RIAA does this because they know that those poor artists don\'t have the financial backing to take on a mega-giant like the RIAA for copyright infringement on the RIAA\'s part. (Do a search on Google for this for details) The RIAA are nothing but lyers. May they rot in their own feeces.
We\'ve freed the Iraqies from Saddam. Someone should free the artists from the RIAA.
bwahahaha!! :twisted:
-
I hate the RIAA... they can quote me on that. I don\'t agree with their actions and I will take all legal measures to stop them. I have not done anything illegal, but I do hope I\'ve ruffled their feathers a little in this thread. :D I hope to be the means of many sleepless nights for the evil warmongers at the head of the RIAA. I hope they shake in their boots that conversations like this one all over the world are educating the people to the evil that is being done by the RIAA until the congress will have to conceed, pass new laws, and the RIAA will die a slow and painful death.
I\'ll drink to that.
Also, I look for the day when the artists are freed from the evil reign of the RIAA... they themselves would then join us in our march against the RIAA. The claim that the RIAA does what they do \"for the artists\" is a lie. None of the artists get a penny from what the RIAA is doing here. In fact, I know of many artists, who are less popular, and poor, who the RIAA doesn\'t pay royalties to for the use of their music. The RIAA does this because they know that those poor artists don\'t have the financial backing to take on a mega-giant like the RIAA for copyright infringement on the RIAA\'s part. (Do a search on Google for this for details) The RIAA are nothing but lyers. May they rot in their own feeces.
Although we all don\'t like most of the pop music of today, I still do feel sorry for them for getting so little money from (1) the sales of their CDs, and (2) no money from the lawsuits involving their music. So my belief is that the RIAA is a bunch of greedy... Erm, anyone have a noun to describe them? ...Who deserve to be shipped out to the next galaxy (men and women separatly: we don\'t want them to reproduce, they\'re supposed to die).
We\'ve freed the Iraqies from Saddam. Someone should free the artists from the RIAA.
bwahahaha!! :twisted:
Of course this is a different argument, but some can argue that the US occupying Iraq is just as bad, and that they never really did go in to actually help the people of Iraq, but instead went for Bush\'s \"crusade\" against them, or purely for the oil (which has actully gone up in price, by a fair amount -] it\'s almost $1 (Canadian) for the low quality gas).
But yes, free the artists from the RIAA.
-
So my belief is that the RIAA is a bunch of greedy... Erm, anyone have a noun to describe them? ...Who deserve to be shipped out to the next galaxy (men and women separatly: we don\'t want them to reproduce, they\'re supposed to die).
lol! I think we found the perfect subject for \"Flame Wars - Episode 2\"
-
lol! I think we found the perfect subject for \"Flame Wars - Episode 2\"
You\'re at least 2 episodes late!
-
TonyOlsen wrote:
lol! I think we found the perfect subject for \"Flame Wars - Episode 2\"
You\'re at least 2 episodes late!
lol! Maybe it can be the prequel of the prequel? ...the place where all evil started: RIAA?
-
I will take all legal measures to stop them.
For a technically skilled person, I think one of the best ways to do that is to contribute to the next generation of P2P software with strong security features. So far, software development is still legal...
-
For a technically skilled person, I think one of the best ways to do that is to contribute to the next generation of P2P software with strong security features. So far, software development is still legal...
Hehe...not quite!!! Don\'t speak too soon!!!
Read this: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/techno...logy/33774.html (http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/technology/33774.html)
A Japanese software developer was arrested for writing a \"secure\" P2P software client/server...for...you guessed it...COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT!!!
-
For a technically skilled person, I think one of the best ways to do that is to contribute to the next generation of P2P software with strong security features. So far, software development is still legal...
Hehe...not quite!!! Don\'t speak too soon!!!
Read this: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/techno...logy/33774.html (http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/technology/33774.html)
A Japanese software developer was arrested for writing a \"secure\" P2P software client/server...for...you guessed it...COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT!!!
The Author was not arrested for writing the p2p software - he was originally arrested for copyright infringement on software he had copied using winny and then posted on a publically available BBS and advertising the pirated software on another wiki.
This lead to his arrest NOT the development of winny. From my poor Japanese it seems that he is being charged with stealing software not for writing software that could be used to steal software - the charge of writing software that could be used to pirate software was added later and it\'s still not sure whether it will be pressed. I\'ll try and track down online Japanese versions of this story and post the details back if people are interested.
Being Japan he will probably plead guilty to all counts anyway - to get a lighter sentence - and this will set back the p2p software development in Japan for a while
Stu
-
the charge of writing software that could be used to pirate software was added later and it\'s still not sure whether it will be pressed.
See this from ABC News, its pretty clear:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1105174.htm (http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1105174.htm)
Typically, an arrest is originally made via other charges. Where I quoted you above is the chilling aspect. The fact they even added this to trump up charges is NOT good. If this sticks, prosectutors then push the line in the next cases to do this again and again. Soon it becomes standard operating procedure (just like \"conspiracy\" which is applied in nearly every charge to add that extra \"humph\" to the case). This charge is to set a precident. Lets hope it \"falls off\".
-
I was just thinking... since the RIAA doesn\'t put a penny of these lawsuits back into the pockets of the Artisits, can the person being sued appeal to the court that the RIAA is not a fitting representative of the artists in this case and therefor cannot sue this individual in the name of the artists? Would that be enough to throw out the case?
A Japanese software developer was arrested for writing a \"secure\" P2P software client/server...for...you guessed it...COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT!!!
The US courts shouldn\'t take this too seriously since Japan is built upon very different laws than we are. Why would this Japanese case be a precident for US courts cases? What does everyone else think?
So... about \"Winny\". Is it a good encryption solution? What are the pros and cons? Should it be used instead of KaZaA? Why? Does it build upon existing P2P networks?
I thouhgt I remember hearing that Winny conceals your identity well as long as you don\'t use the messaging features (which aren\'t encrypted). I\'m assuming it doesn\'t hide your IP address... only what you are sharing and transfering.
Would Winny provide a good solution until other development can be done?
Whether you are transfering copyrighted materials or just seeking legal privacy from the eyes of Imperialists... an encrypted P2P network may give the honest legal citizens of our country the peace and rest they are seeking.
-
appeal to the court that the RIAA is not a fitting representative of the artists in this case
Nope, it doesn\'t work that way. The RIAA isn\'t representing anyone except themselves, they (or rather, their member studios) own the copyright to \"their\" artists\' work. The standard RIAA contract with the artists creates a \"work-for-hire\" legal relationship. The artists are pretty much in the same position, legally, as the guy who writes the manual for your Microwave...
Would Winny provide a good solution until other development can be done?
I think Mute is the most promising approach at present.
-
From the first article linked above:
\"From a criminal penalty standpoint, this is overkill in my view,\" James Muraff of law firm Wallenstein Wagner & Rockey told TechNewsWorld. \"It\'s pretty stiff compared to U.S. law.\"
He explained that in the United States, there are no criminal penalties for authoring software that may be used for copyright infringement. Such authors, however, could become targets of civil actions for contributing to copyright infringement.
So... it IS legal to develop P2P, and other software, in the US.
Another quote:
Police quoted Kaneko as saying: \"I am doubtful about the current ways businesses control digital content. It\'s wrong that big business uses the police to crack down on violations and maintain the status quo. The only way to destroy that system is to continue to spread ways to violate copyright laws.\"
...
\"These guys have so much money and they\'re spending so much money in lobbying that it\'s difficult to protect anybody\'s rights,\" Wayne Rosso, CEO of P2P software maker Optisoft of Madrid, Spain, told TechNewsWorld.
I talked with some friends the day before yesterday over this subject during lunch. The US businesses are built up on the concept of building limitations of the normal, easy, way to do things in order to pressure (or force) the general public into buying their goods or using their services. As time moves on more and more laws are passed to create additional income flow for big businesses at the expense of the individuals. ...but most people don\'t notice this because the change is generally slow. For example, the \"Copyright Law\" in itself is not a natural law... it isn\'t mentioned in the Bible. In fact, if anything, Christ said \"and the truth shall make you free\"... Information and truth longs to be free. The only reason it often times isn\'t isn\'t because of the laws big bussiness has put in place to controll the flow of information in order to get additional dollars from the individual.
(Some will say that \"Thou shall not Steal\" applies, but you have to remove something to steal it. Copying something isn\'t stealing, since the original is still in its place untouched. And those who think it IS stealing should wake up from the brain washing they\'ve been subjected to for their whole life, and realized they\'ve been lied to. If I could copy an entire building to a location accross town, could the people who own the original building charge me with \"stealing\" their building? Don\'t be ridiculous!)
You realize, of course, that if we ever were to get close to developing a device that could \"copy\" matter (using an inflow of energy), then these same kinds of people (and businesses) would stand in the way its development and would stop us from eventually creating \"replicators\" like those on Star Trek. They would likely call the use of those devices \"stealing\" and they would start immediately to brainwash our children into thinking that using a \"Replicator\" is \"stealing\"... and then those children would grow up calling it \"stealing\" and would stand AGAINST their own brethren when the resistance fights against this idiotic way of thinking.
Don\'t these layers of control sound familiar? Isn\'t that what tyrranical goverments do to their citizens? Those governments place controll on the flow of information in order to maintain their power.... since most people don\'t realize the power they have to change society.
Well... I\'ve realized, and I will march with my brethren as we change our society and let information become free again.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winny (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winny)
The police tracked the users via Winny\'s transfer,since the cipher for anonymity was decoded.
So, I guess Winny was cracked and is no longer a safe haven.
Is there a better solution available?
-
Is there a better solution available?
Yes..a proxy. See http://www.openproxies.com/ (http://www.openproxies.com/)
Pick your proxy and you are then undetectable.
-
No thanks, I know a friend in real life who has a script that works on his PC.... and a raid array of half a Terra-byte in size...
-
Pick your proxy and you are then undetectable.
Yeah, until they subpoena the proxy owner. Or until the PIRATE act passes and they insall a wiretap.
A proxy may be better than nothing, or it may be worse because they could use it as evidence of willfulness.
-
The best solution... fight the laws. Let your voice be heard.
The PIRATE Act (S.2237) is yet another attempt to make taxpayers fund
the misguided war on file sharing, and it\'s moving fast. The bill
would allow the government to file civil copyright lawsuits in
addition to criminal prosecutions, dramatically lowering the burden
of proof and adding to the thousands of suits already filed by
record companies. It would also force the American public to pay
the legal bills of foreign record companies like Bertelsmann,
Vivendi Universal, EMI, and Sony. Meanwhile, not a penny from
the lawsuits goes to the artists.
Don\'t let the record industry use your hard-earned dollars to pursue
this fruitless war; tell Congress to sink the PIRATE Act!
Click here to take action!
http://action.eff.org/action/index.asp?ste...tep=2&item=2906 (http://action.eff.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=2906)
-
No thanks, I know a friend in real life who has a script that works on his PC
Tell us about that script and how it works...
-
No thanks, I know a friend in real life who has a script that works on his PC
Tell us about that script and how it works...
Well...he joined the ZUG recently...so really he\'s the one who should tell you about it....Moose?...
-
Oops... before I said that the default MoviePlayer on the SL-C860 only plays Windows Media Video with MP3 audio... but I was wrong. The videos are made using the Microsoft Media Encoder... but we don\'t actually use the Windows Media Video codec. Instead we use the ISO compatible MPEG-4 Video codec... which is different from the Windows Media 9 video codec.
I found this out the hard way when I encoded some of my videos using the Windows Media 9 Video Codec. Those videos didn\'t play, but the ISA compatible MPEG-4 videos DO.
That means that there may be other video encoders for Windows that might work (if they output to ISO MPEG-4 video and MP3 audio).
...Just thought I should correct myself...
...I will submit myself to lashings later.
-
This question will probably expose my ignorance, but how is it that this software for Palm OS devices (TealMovie) can playback high quality video with synchronized sound at up to 60 frames per second on inferior hardware to the Zaurus?
Link to site --] http://www.tealpoint.com/softmovi.htm (http://www.tealpoint.com/softmovi.htm)
What am I missing? Is the overall quality less than what we are attempting on the Z? Is it the conversion to TealMovie format that doesn\'t require the resources of other codecs?
I\'m obviously not understanding something about this battle to get smooth playback of video on the Zaurus.
-
This Palm software only runs a proprietary video format, which I would guess would be something primitive like MPEG-1. My old 100 MHz Pentium could play MPEG-1, so it isn\'t much to brag about. The Zaurus can play much high compressions (which requires much higher CPU power).
This software is deliberately vague, which implies to me that the remaining facts aren\'t too impressive.
I play video on my Zaurus without choppiness and I have no doubt that my Zaurus can do movies better than Palm.
-
Hey I have a guide for encoding for zaurus. Specifically for mplayer.
its a very basic step by step walkthrough
http://www.zaurususergroup.com/index.php?n...iewtopic&t=5085 (https://www.oesf.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=5085)
hope it is helpful
-
I have a tutorial for good quality movies (using .ogm files) for Kino2 at my website, www.dylanpowell.net/zaurus (http://www.dylanpowell.net/zaurus). I've found a more efficient way using VirtualDubMod, which eliminates the separate steps required for the Ogg Vorbis processing. I have no problems running 320x240 video fullscreen with sound and full framerate from an SD card. Take a look and tell me what you think.
-
these templates work very well:
http://www.pockettv.com/template/ (http://www.pockettv.com/template/)
requires http://www.tmpgenc.net/ (http://www.tmpgenc.net/), which is free.
this site is good for that sort of thing in general:
http://www.videohelp.com/ (http://www.videohelp.com/)
and here is a guide to using the templates:
http://digital-forums.com/archive/index.php/t-177403 (http://digital-forums.com/archive/index.php/t-177403)
i've found that these re-sized mpeg videos play much better on my 5600. plus i don't have the problem i had with divx, xvid, etc. where you can't fast-forward or rewind the clip or the audio and video go out of sync.
-
another guide to encoding video on the zaurus:
http://www.zeb.uklinux.net/encoding.html (http://www.zeb.uklinux.net/encoding.html)
-
First draft of DVD to AVI is done, however, downloads files are not mirrored yet.
All the programs/files needed are in the public domain and can be gotten simply by googling.
URL:
http://www.zaurususergroup.com/modules.php...0Cx00%20only%29 (http://www.zaurususergroup.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=phpWiki&file=index&pagename=Step%20by%20Step%20DVD%20to%20AVI%20%28for%205x00%20and%20Cx00%29%20as%20well%20as%20AVI%20to%20WMV%20%28for%20Cx00%20only%29)
(All can be done using Windows)