Slashdot Log In
Red Hat Helps Fund EFF
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Sun May 21, 2000 03:54 PM
from the cool-move-guys dept.
from the cool-move-guys dept.
DAldredge sent us linkage to a ZD Net article that talks about Red Hat announcing that it would be sending the EFF [?]
$70k to help with the defense in fair use and reverse engineering cases, specifically like the recent DeCSS hoopla. Update: 05/22 12:30 by CT : Marc Ewing wrote in to tell us that this $ actually came from the Red Hat Center, started by him and Bob Young.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Re:That's nice, but $70,000 is nothing... (Score:2)
Re:That's nice, but $70,000 is nothing... (Score:1)
plenty of other companies (and not only Linux distros) and individuals who should be involved in financial
support.
If every company would give 0.002% of their worth it should be sufficient.
So what? (Score:2)
Maybe companies selling DVD titles should put a disclaimer in at the bottom of their checkout pages saying "Warning: If you do not live in the United States, please import a DVD player from there, otherwise you will not be able to legally view it."
Why they hell should I have to buy another DVD player to view the DVDs I PAID for just because I happen to live outside the region? RedHat's actions should be commended as may draw some very necessary attention to this issue and the stupid laws regarding it.
In related news: Andover are doing their bit too! (Score:4)
C'mon, guys, surely this is a story!
Notice the article! (Score:3)
I'm not sure how influential this ZD's investor site is, but this is definately very good press that goes towards people with money.
-- iCEBaLM
Why more companies don't donate (Score:1)
Re:Good (Score:3)
when's microsoft going to donate money
I believe that Microsoft does have a financial interest in opposing the DMCA. In fact, many corporations are adversely affected by the DMCA and should support challenges to it.
For example, the zdnet story [zdnet.com] on the DMCA hearings at Stanford said this: "In January, Streambox found itself on the pointy end of the legal stick when a federal judge granted RealNetworks Inc. a preliminary injunction blocking Streambox's distribution of software used to capture and save RealAudio and RealVideo streams." [i.e., StreamboxVCR]
Microsoft is a big investor in Streambox. Streambox allows users to convert from Real format to Windows Media format. The DMCA stands in the way of both user freedom and Microsoft's freedom to license its format and compatible programs.
Microsoft or anyone else can join or donate to EFF through mailto:membership@eff.org [mailto].
Enlightned self interest (Score:3)
Anyone who thinks Red Hat could become another Microsoft does not understand much about Microsoft. The mindset that got them where they are today did not evolve from benevolence. It was there from day one. Red Hat at least started as a group of people trying to do good things. Even if they are eventually seduced by the dark side, the fact that they started their jouney in the light will help keep them from ultimate darkness (to mix a few literary metaphors).
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Re:This isn't "just" philanthropy (Score:2)
Read this [nytimes.com] NYT article. The system of relentless profiteering and patent monopolies by drug companies, to the great demise of people in 3rd world countries, is a system in dire need of change. It is no less important, and in my mind, far more important than RedHat giving 50k to the EFF.
Andover's lawyers are defending others (Score:2)
Check out Super Pimp Soft [superpimp.org]'s fight with the RIAA over their right to include a binary attachment decoder in their news software.
The EFF turned down SuperPimpSoft, but Andover's attorneys came and saved the day.
========================
63,000 bugs in the code, 63,000 bugs,
ya get 1 whacked with a service pack,
Re:Criticism (Score:1)
Good press for DeCSS (Score:2)
Re:Freedom supporting freedom... (Score:2)
Speaking as a co-founder of Censorware Project (now retired) and a professional programmer:
Heck, all I ever wanted was enough public and legal support so that I didn't lose my career and life's savings to a censorware lawsuit (and a little respect). Couldn't get it.
Censorware Project doesn't take donations. But if anyone wants to start giving me 70K chunks of money to start another anti-censorware organization (and lawyers, don't forget the lawyers, lots of lawyers), let's talk :-).
Re:Andover's lawyers are defending others (Score:2)
I'd really like some confirmation on this...
Re:In related news: Andover are doing their bit to (Score:2)
If the RIAA really is suing SuperPimp can someone confirm it and post the news here?
Re:It's about time... (Score:2)
You're a couple years late...they already got their hand slapped for being in the cookie jar [ftc.gov]. Click the
"The FTC estimates that U.S. consumers may have paid as much as $480 million more than they should have for CDs and other music because of these policies over the last three years. These
settlements will eliminate these policies and should help restore much-needed competition to the retail music market, consisting of $15 billion in annual sales. Today's news should be sweet music to the ears of all CD purchasers," said Chairman Robert Pitofsky."
That's not sweet music to my ears, that smells like bullshit to my nose.
But that's o.k. they are listening..
"These agreements will be subject to public comment for 30 days, until June 9, after which the Commission will decide whether to make them final. Comments should be addressed to the FTC, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580."
--
Re:It's about time... (Score:2)
That said, you should join EFF if you can, the T-Shirt is nice, but an EFF membership goes a lot farther.
Chris DiBona
VA Linux Systems
--
Grant Chair, Linux Int.
Pres, SVLUG
Re:That's nice, but $70,000 is nothing... (Score:5)
Look at how many copies of RedHat Deluxe they have to sell to get $70,000 (not accounting for packaging expenses) to get a better handle on their generosity.
Besides, no one said it was the last gift and no one should expect RedHat to fund it all. Other companies whose business revolves around"free software" should be chipping in as well.
I say, "Bravo Redhat."
Re:Red Hat is NOT a moral agent (Score:2)
Should they? (Score:2)
That being said, I do commend companies such as Red Hat which are smart enough to know that while funding such projects may seem like good PR in the short run, they will also benefit from the efforts of these individuals as well in the long run.
Re:Redhat the next Micro$haft ? (Score:2)
No, it is necessary! The law is too complex for developers to understand. You guys are smart, I won't try to take that away from you, but I admit I don't know how to program, so why can't you admit that you don't know the first damn thing about law practice?
What you need to understand is that the average Slashdot reader thinks that he is Really Smart(tm), because he knows how to install Linux, write a PERL script, etc. Most of the readers tend to believe that they have crude computer skills which are better than some of the population, that they know more than EVERYBODY about EVERYTHING. The whole DeCSS/Napster fiascos are a perfect example, where the typical Slashdotter - despite having absolutely no understanding whatsoever of the entertainment industry - thinks fit to gauge the entire future of the how media should be consumed for all time. The readers believe because they understand the technical workings of a system, they somehow have the right to dictate how it will be used. This is somewhat akin to someone believing that we should bomb Sierra Leone, because he understands how a nuclear reaction works.
I've always wondered if other professions were similarly elitist. Do doctors sit around and talk about how stupid the non-doctors are, and how people are so stupid that they can't even figure out how to cure cancer, so they have to pay big bucks to doctors? Or is this pheonomenon unique among computer people?
Re:In related news: Andover are doing their bit to (Score:2)
Seems like the standard, were going after you because you can't stand up for your self so we're sure you'll just roll over when our lawyer sends you a nasty letter. It doesn't matter if we're right or wrong, lets see who's left standing after our Mack truck rolls over your tricycle.
Re:It's about time... (Score:2)
I think it would be cool for these linux companies which have gotten rich through Free Software to establish a dedicated Free Software legal defense fund, or something like that. This fund would be used to fight legal battles that threaten the Free Software community. In addition to being a good ethical thing to do, it would get them buttloads of good PR and could actually help them take care of their own selfish business interests.
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
It's a joke (Score:2)
Red Hat don't have to be a moral agent (Score:2)
Re:USENIX Donations (Score:2)
The bus came by and I got on
That's when it all began
There was cowboy Neal
At the wheel
Of a bus to never-ever land
Thumbs up for RedHat (Score:2)
Nope (Score:2)
They don't have legal standing to go after any GPL violation, unless they own the copyright.
Re:It's about time... (Score:2)
Then again how often do you see an piece or mention of the EFF in the mainstream media? Collusion between industry and the press in the Land of the Free? Nawww.
Re:Good (Score:4)
Credit where it is due (Score:2)
"Patience is a virtue, afforded those with nothing better to do." - I don't remember
It's about time... (Score:4)
I contributed to the DeCSS cause by buying a T-Shirt [copyleft.net] with the decss_descramble code on it. It's nice to see someone with deeper pockets helping out too.
Who am I?
Why am here?
Where is the chocolate?
Copyright Cartels (Score:4)
On another note, Red Hat has been pretty quiet about the MPAA/RIAA/napster/wrapster brouhaha lately. It's good to see them weigh in!
--
"Give him head?"
"One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft Ad
correction: $50k to eff, $20k to probono.net (Score:3)
Freedom supporting freedom... (Score:2)
I'm very happy to read that Red Hat, a company which produces an easy-to-use Linux distribution (Open-Sourced, of course), is helping to preserve our freedoms and rights online by helping to fund the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). This is certainly a positive development in the fight against online censorship.
The free-speech-online movement needs all the financial support it can get. Conservative groups who threaten to censor the 'net are lavishly funded (like the Christian Coalition) and thus have more lobbying power than the EFF does. Red Hat, a well-recognized Linux company, is definitely doing the right thing by supporting the Foundation.
If more companies like Red Hat would contribute more money to organizations like the EFF and the Censorware Project, those orgs. could help spread the word and inform people about Internet censorship. Knowledge may be power, but a little money doesn't hurt either...
awkwardone
USENIX Donations (Score:5)
This isn't "just" philanthropy (Score:3)
While 50K is a relativly trivial amount, it is not the money that is the important thing. Bill Gates can give 1 Gig $ to fund foreign immunizations (and nuff respect to him for doing so), but the thing is, that money is "cute" and non-controversial. It is a hand out that doesn't make any statements about changing the system.
Red Hat throwing their support behind the EFF makes a statement that they aren't about just business as usual. They are willing to throw money behind something controversial, and to say that a major company believes that the right to free speech is still important.
Although I still think if some of these companies could fight for something like a living wage and the end of the police state, rather then just the right to rip DVD's, but it's a start.
A good thing but... (Score:3)
Reverse engineering is one side of the story, but there are others too. Pursuing violations of your copyleft for example. As a small developer, whom do you turn to for your legal assistance? I don't think most developers can afford to pay lawyers if they see their licenses violated.
If you use a GNU license, you can theoretically call the FSF for support. Theoretically that is, because things tend to get complicated if you didn't sign over your copyright, which is what most people do.
And if you use another sort of free license, you're totally in your own...
It would be nice to have some kind of organistion, funded by companies like Red Hat, to turn to.
Would it be feasible? I don't know.
--
GCP
Corperations are not composed of robots (Score:3)
that don't directly support them. Certainly, there
may or may not be other motives (e.g. gaining
mindshare, or similar), but presenting things as
if companies are only capable of evil or neutral
acts is highly inaccurate.
Re:Red Hat's only way to stay alive (Score:2)
there are other laws ensuring the legality of reverse engineering.
Re:Redhat the next Micro$haft ? (Score:2)
I've done a lot of work in the medical industry... believe it or not, Doctors are way worse than programmers when it comes to believing they are smarter than everyone (they usually are) and more knowledgeable about everything than everyone (they usually aren't).
If I had a nickle for everytime a doctor offered to help me design "the ultimate medical system" that only he knew how to design -- for only a small cut of the company -- I would be richer than Gates.
--
Re:Freedom supporting freedom... (Score:2)
I appreciate the mention, but we don't take donations from any one, we are entirely self-funded. And we don't even have T-shirts.
Then again, if Red Hat were to force $70K on us .... ;-)
Re:Good (Score:2)
EFF - DVD (DeCSS, DVDCCA, MPAA) (Score:2)
Red Hat's only way to stay alive (Score:5)
Until now we've been able to reverse engineer file systems and protocols, products like SAMBA are examples of what "we" have done with this.
But if the UCITA and DMCA are used to prevent reverse engineering, products like that won't just be impossible to write, but if we did, they'd be illegal. The only hope of any other OS vendor is to squash those laws before they become too broadly applied.
All MS needs to do under the DMCA is put a routine in the networking to check for valid serial numbers, then it becomes copy protection and even if we were able to get around UCITA restrictions (by doing it out of the USA) on reverse engineering, a compatible network protocol would break their copy protection and thus be illegal similar to DeCSS. (Or what the MPAA says about DeCSS.)
It's good to see RedHat join the fight.
Good (Score:4)
A beautiful bunch of crack you've been smoking. (Score:3)
No big surprise here, as their gnunix procuct contains so many reverse-engineered drivers and utilities.
And the point is? Until recently, the notion of reverse engineering being "wrong" was considered abhorrent.
If hardware manufacturers want RedHat to have drivers, then they would write drivers for Linux.
Why? Writing drivers is a loss for hardware companies. Each programmer they pay to write drivers is $50-$100K per year they lose, just so people can use their hardware.
Reverse engineering deprives manufacturers of revenue for innovation.
How?
Many standard features of RedHat and other gnunix distributions are reverse-engineered unix(tm) utilities or MIcrosoft Windows(R) interfaces.
So? There's also a smattering of Plan 9 and several other systems as well as a few unique ideas.
For example, Gnome and Kde desktops ripoffs of the Windows interface.
And Windows ripped off the Macintosh interface. BeOS' GUI is virtually identical to most other GUIs. I'm not quite sure what your point is.
Software piracy and reverse engineering are illegal.
Software piracy is. Reverse engineering hasn't been until the DMCA, and most people feel that the DMCA should be considered "unconstitutional" and that it's a violation of basic rights.
Manufacters have a right to protect their intellectual property rights with features which thwart attempts to reverse engineer or to copy without authorization.
Yep. And others have the right to attempt to thwart procedures that prevent their ability to reverse engineer or make legally allowed personal copies for backup.
The money is almost irrelevant... (Score:2)
...though I am should it will help.
By throwing their weight behind DeCSS, Red Hat are providing much needed credibility to the fight against the MPAA.
As a profitable public company, generally well respected in the industry, their name behind the donation is probably more beneficial than the money itself.
M@T
Re:It's about time... (Score:2)
My feeling is suse does quite alot too, paying kernel developers (aa, andi kleen), sponsoring reiser fs, working on xfree (Dirk Hondel is a vice-president of suse IIRC), helping with pppoe (they were the first incorporating the pppox kernel patches in their dist).
I hope they will also fund the legal side of open source.
Don't know about the others, though.
That's nice, but $70,000 is nothing... (Score:2)
As of Friday's close, RHAT had a valuation of almost $3,000,000,000. What fraction of Red Hat's worth is threatened by the possibility of media cartels like the RIAA and MPAA locking free software out of content? How about the possibility of making reverse engineering illegal (no more SAMBA)?
How much? 50%? 5%? 1%? 0.1%? Try 0.002% -- that's apparently Red Hat's estimate. Pretty generous, wouldn't you say?
But for that 0.002% of their company, in return they get a gushy Slashdot article and lots of praise and "gosh, I'm so glad they're giving back to the community, I wish those other Linux companies would". There's a PR coup for you. Most companies would *jump* at the chance to have such an utterly positive article in Slashdot for a mere $70K.