[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: power uses of XML vs. simple uses of XML
No lack of respect is intended. I am enabling you to "adjust your thinking" based on copyright law which is violated by a very large number of Napster users. The problem is the model makes that difficult to stop these violations. What does XML have to offer as a remedy? To determine that, we first have to admit a problem exists. (This same kind of thread emerged during the pre-PICS days, BTW.) A spy vs spy argument is a reference to the MAD magazine cartoon in which both black and white spies equated to the same action and neither had a moral imperative; just more of the same in a continuous unending struggle for dominance. The color of the suit was irrelevant; they wer the same thing. It alludes to some dark netherworld out there trying to disenfranchise or otherwise restrict developments through nefarious means. The music industry is protecting the rights of its members but note that lawsuits are being initiated by the artists. If the distribution network enables and the culture rewards violation of copyright laws, then it is open season on the software industry, the book publishing industry, and any product which can be distributed digitally over the Internet. If the content providers have to war on each other (play Spy vs Spy) to ensure the same moral imperative or lack of it, the WWW is a doomed enterprise. In fact, that will not happen. The probable result will be more restrictive legislation and prosecution. So we get Spy vs Spy or Fearless Leader. Ugly. The alternative is to divise a means to limit the life or quality of the copies. Spy Vs Spy: In this case, you assert this is "what the music industy would have some believe". That is irrelevant. Violation of copyright law is at issue. That is why Napster had to remove 300,000 users. That is why further litigation is pending. The argument you present that since you have purchased a copy you also have purchased the right to make unlimited copies is legally bunk. It is precisely the right to make unlimited copies that is reserved to the copyright holder. XML is an interesting means to implement a Napster model. Using it without a means to enforce the copyright is enabling piracy. Given two decades of the software industy trying to stop illegal copying, why at this time should we espouse that the X in XML come to mean a skull and crossbones? If we do, then we should expect a Queen Elizabeth I approach to taxation on the high seas. Len http://fly.hiwaay.net/~cbullard/lensongs.ram Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Dave Winer [mailto:dave@u...] I don't know what you mean by a Spy vs Spy argument, and I don't like the way you're addressing me, and the rest of this list. I didn't read past "It's bunk" if you want me to listen to you, show more respect. Thanks. Dave *************************************************************************** This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers. To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@x...&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ ***************************************************************************
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|