Comments for TechnoLlama

Comment on Darth Google by Andres

Andres — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:52:43 +0000

I had seen it, but it’s always nice to be reminded of Onion News

Comment on Darth Google by WH

WH — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:24:46 +0000

Thanks for this, it highlights the issues nicely.

Did you see the Onion “Google Opt out” spoof video? I blogged it at http://blog.tech-and-law.com/2010/02/google-privacy-opt-out.html

Comment on Copyright infringement is not theft by uberVU - social comments

uberVU - social comments — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:12:01 +0000

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by technollama: New blog post: Copyright infringement is not theft – http://tinyurl.com/ycajypf...

Comment on What’s up with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement? by What’s up with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement? « Descent Into Darkness

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:57:45 +0000

[...] So, if you are an intermediary, you have to make sure that all of your processes are automated, that you do not exercise any editorial and selection process whatsoever, and you make your best effort not to know anything that happens with your providers. Otherwise you might be liable. – TechnoLlama [...]

Comment on Encouraging open source could land you in trouble by Frederico Camara

Frederico Camara — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:35:48 +0000

This phrasing does not imply open source companies as illegitimate. But it does establish that companies developing closed source software are denied access to the government market, which is wrong. They can choose to participate (a) developing free software software as well as the other companies or (b) licencing software they develop as a free software.

The phrasing also establishes erroneously that the policy “does not give due consideration to the value to intellectual creations”. Erroneously, because value can be measured in many different ways one of which is monetary value. FOSS companies can develop software the way the government need, but probably won’t work for the government at no cost, so the policy does encourages a mindset that “give due consideration to the value to intellectual creations”.

As for “intellectual property rights” part, the phrasing is confusing and wrong. It says that because the policy induces “a mindset that does not give due consideration to the value to intellectual creations”, “it fails to build respect for intellectual property rights”. “Value to intellectual creations” is independent of “respect for intellectual property rights”, so how come they establish a cause/effect relation?

Ignoring the falacies, the recommendation text can be plainly understood: some software companies that comercializes software in a way that some countries are trying to rule unacceptable, are trying to impose general trading restrictions to these countries. In other words: the model of software comercialization in which by using the software you are obliged to the will of the software developer, cannot be substituted by another model in which you aren’t, and if you try it you may face trading restrictions.

Comment on Encouraging open source could land you in trouble by US Corporations to India: “Don’t dare use Free Software!” | Expressions - Bhagwad Jal Park

Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:51:07 +0000

[...] Alarmed by this, the companies with money have been encouraging the US government to place these countries on a blacklist for “failing to build respect for intellectual property [...]

Comment on Encouraging open source could land you in trouble by The Progressive Mind » When using open source makes you an enemy of the state | Technology | guardian.co.uk

Sun, 07 Mar 2010 04:24:05 +0000

[...] has done some digging and discovered that an influential lobby group is asking the US government to basically consider [...]

Comment on Encouraging open source could land you in trouble by Time to name and shame the anti-open source extremists | Quick Software Review

Sat, 06 Mar 2010 10:42:20 +0000

[...] learned the group is now also going after open source, urging that countries go on the watch list if they merely encourage the [...]

Comment on Libraries cost book industry billions by Links 5/3/2010: Elive Stable 2.0 Topaz, Canonical CEO Speaks | Boycott Novell

Fri, 05 Mar 2010 22:44:31 +0000

[...] Libraries cost book industry billions Apologies for the sensationalist title, but that is precisely what came to mind when I read an article about how the book industry has lost billions of dollars because of book downloading. Attributor is a company that produces anti-piracy solutions, and they have conducted a study that claims illegal downloading of books has cost American publishers $3 billion USD. I will resist the temptation to comment on the fact that one should not take seriously a report undertaken by a company that has a commercial interest on the result of said study making the case for their products. [...]

Comment on Encouraging open source could land you in trouble by Andres

Andres — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 20:47:11 +0000

Dear Anders,

I agree with you that perhaps the term “specific technical solution” is not the best way to describe open source, it can be a philosophy; a developing strategy; a licensing scheme; a business model, but it is not necessarily a technical solution.

By the way, on a shallow note, it must be nice to be called Timothy B. Lee