(Kinda O.T.) Digital Millennium Copyright Act used to censor hardware specifications

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

(Kinda O.T.) Digital Millennium Copyright Act used to censor hardware specifications

Brett Mahar-2
Hi misc,

While looking up motherboard connections on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peripheral_Component_Interconnect I found this ominous notice:

===
Pursuant to a rights owner notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), the Wikimedia Foundation acted under the law and took down and restricted the content in question. A copy of the received notice can be found here: DMCA takedown notice. For more information, including websites discussing how to file a counter-notice, please see Wikipedia: Office actions and the article's talk page. Do not remove this template from the article until the restrictions are withdrawn.
See the protection policy and protection log for more details. If you can edit this page, please discuss all changes and additions on the talk page first. Do not remove protection from this page unless you are authorized by the Wikimedia Foundation to do so.
===

Reverse engineering necessary to have open source in the brave new world?

Brett.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: (Kinda O.T.) Digital Millennium Copyright Act used to censor hardware specifications

Ted Unangst-6
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:11, Brett wrote:

> Pursuant to a rights owner notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright
> Act (DMCA), the Wikimedia Foundation acted under the law and took down and
> restricted the content in question. A copy of the received notice can be

> Reverse engineering necessary to have open source in the brave new world?

PCI spec docs (and many others) are copyrighted.  Maybe they should be,
maybe they shouldn't, but they are.

As far as I know, the actual specs cannot be copyrighted (or it's
murky), but knowing wikipedia, somebody probably copied an entire
table from the doc and dropped it into the article.  that's a no-no,
and not something I'd find nearly as alarming as "censorship".

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: (Kinda O.T.) Digital Millennium Copyright Act used to censor hardware specifications

Tim van der Molen-3
On Thu, 31 May 2012 17:12:58 +0200, Ted Unangst wrote:

> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:11, Brett wrote:
>
> > Pursuant to a rights owner notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright
> > Act (DMCA), the Wikimedia Foundation acted under the law and took down and
> > restricted the content in question. A copy of the received notice can be
>
> > Reverse engineering necessary to have open source in the brave new world?
>
> PCI spec docs (and many others) are copyrighted.  Maybe they should be,
> maybe they shouldn't, but they are.
>
> As far as I know, the actual specs cannot be copyrighted (or it's
> murky), but knowing wikipedia, somebody probably copied an entire
> table from the doc and dropped it into the article.  that's a no-no,
> and not something I'd find nearly as alarming as "censorship".

Actually, the crime consisted in linking to a few PDFs located
elsewhere. The last revision of the article to contain the links is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Conventional_PCI&oldid=405114605

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: (Kinda O.T.) Digital Millennium Copyright Act used to censor hardware specifications

Theo de Raadt
Shame on you.

Don't you know that linking to links that link to links that have DCMA'd
is a crime?

Enjoy the bars.

> On Thu, 31 May 2012 17:12:58 +0200, Ted Unangst wrote:
> > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:11, Brett wrote:
> >
> > > Pursuant to a rights owner notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright
> > > Act (DMCA), the Wikimedia Foundation acted under the law and took down and
> > > restricted the content in question. A copy of the received notice can be
> >
> > > Reverse engineering necessary to have open source in the brave new world?
> >
> > PCI spec docs (and many others) are copyrighted.  Maybe they should be,
> > maybe they shouldn't, but they are.
> >
> > As far as I know, the actual specs cannot be copyrighted (or it's
> > murky), but knowing wikipedia, somebody probably copied an entire
> > table from the doc and dropped it into the article.  that's a no-no,
> > and not something I'd find nearly as alarming as "censorship".
>
> Actually, the crime consisted in linking to a few PDFs located
> elsewhere. The last revision of the article to contain the links is:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Conventional_PCI&oldid=405114605

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: (Kinda O.T.) Digital Millennium Copyright Act used to censor hardware specifications

Tim van der Molen-3
On Thu, 31 May 2012 18:25:14 +0200, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Shame on you.
>
> Don't you know that linking to links that link to links that have DCMA'd
> is a crime?
>
> Enjoy the bars.

I'm sure quoting mails that link to links that link to DCMA'd links is a
felony, too.

Perhaps we'll be sharing a cell.

> > On Thu, 31 May 2012 17:12:58 +0200, Ted Unangst wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:11, Brett wrote:
> > >
> > > > Pursuant to a rights owner notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright
> > > > Act (DMCA), the Wikimedia Foundation acted under the law and took down and
> > > > restricted the content in question. A copy of the received notice can be
> > >
> > > > Reverse engineering necessary to have open source in the brave new world?
> > >
> > > PCI spec docs (and many others) are copyrighted.  Maybe they should be,
> > > maybe they shouldn't, but they are.
> > >
> > > As far as I know, the actual specs cannot be copyrighted (or it's
> > > murky), but knowing wikipedia, somebody probably copied an entire
> > > table from the doc and dropped it into the article.  that's a no-no,
> > > and not something I'd find nearly as alarming as "censorship".
> >
> > Actually, the crime consisted in linking to a few PDFs located
> > elsewhere. The last revision of the article to contain the links is:
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Conventional_PCI&oldid=405114605

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: (Kinda O.T.) Digital Millennium Copyright Act used to censor hardware specifications

Peter Laufenberg
In reply to this post by Ted Unangst-6
>On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:11, Brett wrote:
>
>> Pursuant to a rights owner notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright
>> Act (DMCA), the Wikimedia Foundation acted under the law and took down and
>> restricted the content in question. A copy of the received notice can be
>
>> Reverse engineering necessary to have open source in the brave new world?
>
>PCI spec docs (and many others) are copyrighted.  Maybe they should be,
>maybe they shouldn't, but they are.
>
>As far as I know, the actual specs cannot be copyrighted (or it's
>murky), but knowing wikipedia, somebody probably copied an entire
>table from the doc and dropped it into the article.  that's a no-no,
>and not something I'd find nearly as alarming as "censorship".

A DCMA notice is an improvement over the furious clean-up happening behind the scenes.

For example: search for "CIPSO", a NetLabel protocol with an IETF RFC, the word appears 1263 times in Linux kernel 3.3. No Wikipedia entry but Linux_Security_Modules links to an ex-entry... without deletion log. Try the "Multi ADM" link on the same page: dead again, no deletion log. Hmm, the page was last edited yesterday. Date of its most recent reference? June 2010. Second most recent? 2006.

If you're lucky you can come across "time travel" pages: a days-old edit using future tense to refer to events years in the past.

Entrusting the very definition of reality to a bunch of LSD-dropping hippies is JUST NOT RESPONSIBLE :)

-- p

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: (Kinda O.T.) Digital Millennium Copyright Act used to censor hardware specifications

Theo de Raadt
In reply to this post by Tim van der Molen-3
> On Thu, 31 May 2012 18:25:14 +0200, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > Shame on you.
> >
> > Don't you know that linking to links that link to links that have DCMA'd
> > is a crime?
> >
> > Enjoy the bars.
>
> I'm sure quoting mails that link to links that link to DCMA'd links is a
> felony, too.
>
> Perhaps we'll be sharing a cell.

Probably.  But you'll be serving two terms, and I only one.

> > > On Thu, 31 May 2012 17:12:58 +0200, Ted Unangst wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:11, Brett wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Pursuant to a rights owner notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright
> > > > > Act (DMCA), the Wikimedia Foundation acted under the law and took down and
> > > > > restricted the content in question. A copy of the received notice can be
> > > >
> > > > > Reverse engineering necessary to have open source in the brave new world?
> > > >
> > > > PCI spec docs (and many others) are copyrighted.  Maybe they should be,
> > > > maybe they shouldn't, but they are.
> > > >
> > > > As far as I know, the actual specs cannot be copyrighted (or it's
> > > > murky), but knowing wikipedia, somebody probably copied an entire
> > > > table from the doc and dropped it into the article.  that's a no-no,
> > > > and not something I'd find nearly as alarming as "censorship".
> > >
> > > Actually, the crime consisted in linking to a few PDFs located
> > > elsewhere. The last revision of the article to contain the links is:
> > >
> > > [LINK DELETED]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: (Kinda O.T.) Digital Millennium Copyright Act used to censor hardware specifications

Tim van der Molen-3
On Thu, 31 May 2012 21:19:23 +0200, Theo de Raadt wrote:

> > On Thu, 31 May 2012 18:25:14 +0200, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > Shame on you.
> > >
> > > Don't you know that linking to links that link to links that have DCMA'd
> > > is a crime?
> > >
> > > Enjoy the bars.
> >
> > I'm sure quoting mails that link to links that link to DCMA'd links is a
> > felony, too.
> >
> > Perhaps we'll be sharing a cell.
>
> Probably.  But you'll be serving two terms, and I only one.

Very clever. But those who give up their right to link to DCMA'd links
for a little more liberty deserve neither. Or something very close to
that.

> > > > On Thu, 31 May 2012 17:12:58 +0200, Ted Unangst wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:11, Brett wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Pursuant to a rights owner notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright
> > > > > > Act (DMCA), the Wikimedia Foundation acted under the law and took down and
> > > > > > restricted the content in question. A copy of the received notice can be
> > > > >
> > > > > > Reverse engineering necessary to have open source in the brave new world?
> > > > >
> > > > > PCI spec docs (and many others) are copyrighted.  Maybe they should be,
> > > > > maybe they shouldn't, but they are.
> > > > >
> > > > > As far as I know, the actual specs cannot be copyrighted (or it's
> > > > > murky), but knowing wikipedia, somebody probably copied an entire
> > > > > table from the doc and dropped it into the article.  that's a no-no,
> > > > > and not something I'd find nearly as alarming as "censorship".
> > > >
> > > > Actually, the crime consisted in linking to a few PDFs located
> > > > elsewhere. The last revision of the article to contain the links is:
> > > >
> > > > [LINK DELETED]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: (Kinda O.T.) Digital Millennium Copyright Act used to censor hardware specifications

Theo de Raadt
> Very clever. But those who give up their right to link to DCMA'd links
> for a little more liberty deserve neither. Or something very close to
> that.

Most of those falling into that trap are Americans, so they don't
know where you are coming from.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: (Kinda O.T.) Digital Millennium Copyright Act used to censor hardware specifications

Steven Shockley
In reply to this post by Theo de Raadt
On 5/31/2012 12:25 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Shame on you.
>
> Don't you know that linking to links that link to links that have DCMA'd
> is a crime?
>
> Enjoy the bars.

We Americans have to enjoy the bars, there's not much left to do besides
drink.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: (Kinda O.T.) Digital Millennium Copyright Act used to censor hardware specifications

Chris Cappuccio
Steve Shockley [[hidden email]] wrote:
>
> We Americans have to enjoy the bars, there's not much left to do
> besides drink.

There's always "bath salts" and eating off homeless people's faces.