The idea of the publisher In Pictures is to provide basic computer litterature with plenty of pictures. Their primary audience is the beginner in the area.
They have now released 22 computer books under a Creative Commons Att-NC-ND 2.5 license.
The library includes books on software such as Windows XP, Mac OS X Tiger, Microsoft office, Openoffice.org, Dreamweaver 8 and Photoshop. In addition to programming basics such as MySQL, PHP and PERL.
What is The Pirate Bay (TPB) supposed to have done?
TPB is the site of a BitTorrent tracker. In other words it helps users to locate BitTorrent files. BitTorrent is a variant (some would say development) of the Peer-to-Peer networks. It (the BitTorrent protocol) is a method for advertising and sharing files over a network.
Basically users looking for files (this can be films, music, texts, software etc) go to the search engine (TPB) and conduct a search. If they find what they are looking for they can download a â??.torrentâ?? file. This is not the actual end file they are looking for. It is a file which contains meta data about the file which they are looking for.
This data contains two sections. One that specifies the URL of the tracker and the other that contains the filename, fragment size, key length and a pass. The torrent file can contain information about many end files.
By activating the torrent file one begins the download of the end file or files. These are downloaded from several computers where the file is stored. As soon as part of the file is downloaded the downloader also becomes a source where others may download this part of the file. Once the download is complete the downloader may decide to keep this file available to others or remove it from the swarm.
Torrents are used to coordinate file sharing of copyrighted material both with and without the copyright holders consent. The technology cannot define whether the actions are legal or illegal. At present I have two complete files which I have been sharing for some time via BitTorrent. Since I am sharing complete files I am called a Seeder.
I have the most recent version of UBUNTU which is a Linux operating system licensed under the GPL license where sharing (and more) it is allowed. I have a film called Elephants Dream which is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License and it is therefore permissible to share. In both these cases I am providing a service and helping the legal distribution of material.
OK â?? so that was the technical side. What does TPB do?
TPB is a search engine which helps people find the small tracker (.torrent) files. In other words the small files which contain information about where the end files are within the network. These tracker (.torrent) files are possibly not even capable of being copyrightable. If they are protected by copyright then they are the property of the author â?? in other words their creator. Not the creator of the end files that they track.
TPB case is going to be exciting to watch because the people in control of TPB are well aware of their legal position and of what they are doing. They will not have made the newbie mistake of having copyrighted material on their servers without permission.
Is it illegal to do what TPB does? If I tell you that you can buy a Gucci wallet knockoff at a well known marketplace am I guilty of the crime of â??facilitating copyright infringementâ??? Better still if I tell you how to make your own Gucci wallet am I still innocent? If I could sow and I create a copy of a fashionable suit for my own use is this copyright violation? If I instruct someone else is this â??facilitating copyright infringementâ???
If TPB are â??facilitating copyright infringementâ?? then what about Google? or Flickr? Google helps me find images and texts of masses of copyrighted material. Flickr not only helps me find it but also helps me store it?
What about the local library? They help me find and copy the material I needed to write this postâ?¦
The next step is obviously the question of the police action. The police have removed property from TPB. Removing property is a serious step and the question is whether the alleged crime motivates such action. In the case of computer equipment the question of surplus information must also be taken into consideration. In other words have the police taken too much?
TPB website today states that even servers containing material from organisations not connected with TPB were taken â?? in this case this amounts to a serious violation of an organisations ability to communicate. Can this amount of force justified â?? is the police action proportional to the alleged crime? Especially when other non-accused organisations are affected by police action.
The blurb on the back of the book is important since it has to interest the reader and at the same time be a factual discription – without being too long, complex or explanatory… So after a period of thought and procrastination this is what I have:
This work is on the democratic effects of attempts to regulate disruptive technology. By looking at the phenomenon of online civil disobedience, viruses, spyware, online games, software standards and Internet censorship this work shows the effects of regulation upon the core democratic values of Participation, Communication, Integrity, Property, Access and Autonomy.
Social interaction and organisation are, in part, shaped by the technology used. The social differences between the technology of snail-mail and the technology of e-mail are defined by features that the technology allows, and the limitations that constrain, the user modes of interaction. Therefore technological innovation and development over time affects the ways in which social interaction and communication are carried out. Certain forms of gradual technological innovation and development may be easily assimilated while other forms are more disruptive. This disruption can be seen in the way which new technologies affect the organisation of social interaction and are called, in this work: disruptive technology.
This work studies regulation as an attempt to come to terms with the disruptive effects of technology upon social interaction. This is done by focusing on the attempts to regulate the disruptive effects of Internet technology and the consequences of these regulatory attempts on the IT-based participatory democracy. In conclusion, this work will show that the regulation of technology is the regulation of democracy.
Would you read this book? If so you can download it here.
On the 22nd & 23rd June its the 3rd International GPLv3 Conference which will be held in Barcelona.
The focus will be on the GPLv3 – this is from the press release
The goal of the GPL is to ensure that recipients of GPL covered software are free to examine it, to modify it, to pass on copies, and to distribute modifications. Version two of the GPL was released fifteen years ago, in 1991. The new version is being drafted to account for changes in the legal and technical environment in which software licences operate.
The main changes in version three are to minimise the harm of software patents, to prevent Digital Restrictions Management from being used against software users, and to make the licence compatible with certain classes of other Free Software licences.
Speakers will include, amongst others, Richard Stallman and Eben Moglen.
At present the state-of-the-art Creative Commons licenses are at version 2.5 and now we begin the public process of making the transition to version 3. There are four main reasons for this move:
(a) Incorporate MIT negotiated amendments to all licenses (incl. Sampling) to enable MIT to switch over to using a standard CC BY-NC-SA license.
(b) Incorporate Debian negotiated amendments in the hope that they will declare some of our licenses (those without the NonCommercial and NoDerivatives license elements) â??freeâ?? according to the Debian Free Software Guidelines.
(c) Spin off the current â??genericâ?? license to be the US license & (hopefully) create a real generic license.
(d) For those jurisdictions that protect the moral right of integrity, (i) incorporate an icon signifying the retention of this important right in the Commons Deed and, (ii) to ensure that the Legal Code for all of these jurisdictions expressly retains the right of integrity.
These are all important reasons but I am particularly interested in the moral rights (d) issue (maybe becuase I am from a jurisdiction which has moral rights) and the chance of being recognised as “free” according to the Debian Free Software Guidelines (b) because it is important to interact with the Free Software movement in a deeper way. The Free Software movement not only predates CC it remains the most stringent among the movements which most people carelessly lump together as Open Source. For a longer discussion on this and the meaning of free software look here.
Do you want to participate in the process? Here is how…
It’s that fun time again when we start contemplating versioning up the licenses. An outline of why we’re thinking about doing this and how CC proposes to do this has just been posted to the cc-licenses list. Please participate in the discussions on the cc-licenses list – you can sign up here.
Submitted by Mia Garlick on 2006-05-17 04:07 PM.
Is it a cat? Or maybe its a rabbit. Childrens chalk drawings outdoors always interest me. In part its the excitement of drawing outdoors. In part its the sheer size of the drawing material. And then its the wonderful part that the drawing is only there fore a short moment. If you dont look now – it gone.
Yesterday at the seminar in Stockholm Lars Ilshammar spoke about information protectionism and the dangers of trusting storage devices. Microfilm has a life expectancy of less than 100 years (and is cost intesive). Most paper we use today will crumble to dust within 80 years due to the residual chemicals. Digital storage devices have a life expectancy of about 25 years (but probably much less). In addition to this digital storage devices require that we save and maintain both hardware and software and the means with which to maintain both.
As Lars put it – its a major problem and also a business opportunity for the company who manages to save everyones digital photo albums…
When I travel I am sometimes forced to use public terminals to communicate. While doing this I often consider how insecure this method is. It does not stop me from using public terminals but it does concern me.
Now a great little application has been developed to help in situations such as these. It is a combination between Tor routing and the portable Firefox browser called TorPark.
Installation is easy: All you do is download the software. Expand it. Drag and drop the folder onto your memory stick.
Then when you have to use Internet on a public terminal simply insert the memory stick, start the TorPark which then connects to the Tor network and launches the portable Firefox browser.
Tor is about anonymous Internet use and it makes you virtually untraceable online. In addition it also protects you from local snooping as well (more documentation here). TorPark allows you to do this on public machines.
The downside is that it slows down browsing and that it only works under Windows.
(Via Suburbia)
Like bad tasting medicine editing is an aweful process which is only done because of its obvious benefits. Its terrifying the amount of errors that can be spotted at this late stage. Today I even found an incomplete sentence… it simply tapered off like someone losing a chain of thought.
This is the begining up until the research question. Not sure about it though…
This work begins with the thesis that there is a strong relationship between the regulation of technology and the Internet based participatory democracy. In other words, the attempts to regulate technology have an impact upon the citizenâ??s participation in democracy. This work will show what this relationship is and its effect on democratic participation.
Taking its starting points from the recent theoretical developments in regulation, disruptive technology and role of ICT in participatory democracy, this work is the application of three theoretical discussions. These theoretical discussions are used in the empirical exploration of six areas: virus writing and dissemination, civil disobedience in online environments, privacy and the role of spyware, the re-interpretation of property in online environments, software as infrastructure and finally state censorship of online information. The purpose of these studies is to explore the effects of these socio-technical innovations upon the core democratic values of Participation, Communication, Integrity, Property, Access and Autonomy. The overall research question for this thesis is therefore:
What are the effects of technology regulation on the Internet-based participatory democracy?
To connect to an earlier ongoing discussion about the text: The book is now 257 pages long and 99 479 words long. Do you think that word can handle going over 100 000 words or will it simply melt…
A proposed ammendment in German copyright will remove the small scale copying for private home consumption. If this proposal is accepted all copying of copyrighted material (in Germany) will be illegal. (via Suburbia)
The French Parliament supported a stricter implementation of copyright (nicknamed the Vivendi-Universal Amendment). The change sets the fine for each downloader/filesharer at 38 euro per download and 150 euro per upload. Spreading software “obviously” intended for illegal file sharing can be punishable by three years imprisonment and up to 300 000 euros in fines. (via Free the Mind)
Not a good week for the file sharers…
Henrik & jag gästbloggade på centerpartisten Johan Linander med rubriken Disney, upphovsrätt & dig.
Här är texten:
Disneys framgång bygger, i grunden, på en uråldrig tradition. Man tar en berättelse som de flesta har hört talas om, man omvandlar den (i Disneys fall till tecknad film) och sprider den till andra. Se bara på Askungen, Robin Hood, Törnrosa och Peter Pan. Genom deras återberättande har Disneys ikoner blivit en del av oss.
När en okänd svensk tecknare, Charlie Christenssen, ville göra detsamma tog han Disneys ikon och förvandlade honom till Arne Anka. Christenssen tolkade, bearbetade och spred en ny anka. Disney agerade snabbt och brutalt för att försvara deras Anka. Hade Christenssen inte orkat så hade Arne försvunnit som så många andra före honom. För att veta hur Christenssen lyckades rekommenderar vi att ni köper samlingsvolymen om Arne Anka, alternativt kan ni höra av er till oss, så berättar vi.
SÃ¥dana problem har länge varit nÃ¥gon annans problem. Större delen av befolkningen har inte möjlighet att skapa nÃ¥got som kan reta storföretag som Disney. Men som alla ni som läser detta vet â?? tekniken förändrar och skapar möjligheter. Vi och vÃ¥ra barn har nu möjlighet att ta det som finns omkring oss, tolka det och sprida det till en ringa kostnad. Vi kan som aldrig förr vara delaktiga i att tolka vÃ¥r egen samtid. Men nu när vi har möjligt att vara med rent tekniskt och ekonomiskt â?? har vi det rent juridiskt? Christenssen â??besegradeâ?? Disney, men kommer du att orka ta risken, ta striden?
Disney visar oss mycket. De lär våra barn och underhåller oss. Men bakom allt detta finns ett stort problem med vår upphovsrätt. Det handlar om att det inte finns någon möjlighet för den som vill ta en del av sin samtid och kommentera den. I striden mellan Kalle & Arne stod rätten att teckna en anka. Tack vare teknologi finns fler människor som kan skapa och sprida.
Borde inte lagen omfatta möjligheter för alla att kommentera sin egen samtid?
Mathias Klang är bitr. forskare på Göteborgs Universitet samt
projektledare för Creative Commons Sverige.Henrik Sandklef är programmerare samt styrelsemedlem för Free Software Foundation Europe.