good idea. Do you think it's legal?
May that'd be an excellent idea if Microsoft refuses to refund
the cost of unused OS (as Linux advocates did on 2/14)
I am not a lawyer. I do have a copy of USAC 17. My lay opinion is that it very much IS legal under the fair use doctrine. No money changes hands and no crime is committed.
Microsoft has indeed refused refunds on 2/15. It is my understanding that they are in violation of their own EULA worded as to address the previous consent decree. Microsoft is the party in violation of the law.
Below is a slightly edited rant from earlier today posted on the Linux thread regarding software, music, the changing value of intellectual property, and advancing proactive, community level measures against information monopoly choke points.
-JCJ
------- Tribal Drumming -------
It looks to me that it is a certainty that music retail is about to have it's greedy head handed to it on a platinum platter by the Internet, and the ongoing liberation of information. The music industry probably wishes that it never ventured out of vinyl, but the cat is out of the bag. MP3 will put enough of a dent in the music business as to cause total carnage in the current distribution structure.
The thing that I keep boggling on is how the very nature of music
consumerism is likely changing, and how that relates to Eric
Raymond's 'Cathedral and Bazaar' thesis. There may not be a better 'Cathedral' model than music. It has a very rich 'Cathedral' history that has had a good 500 year run, the last 50 of which has
been driven by the Oz magic of radio and pop culture mass merchandising. We have been conditioned to consume packaged music.
The software industry has to now, piggybacked on this model.
Breaking into a 'Bazaar' music model, music will not suffer,
musicians will not suffer. On the contrary, music will expand
exponentially and musicians will be much better employed.
Suffering occurs at the monopoly choke points, which in music is
the major labels.
The same can be said about software. The Cathedral model of music
and software are about to suffer a similar fate of decommoditization. Copyright protection is quickly becoming decreasingly relevant as the monetary value of that which it is protecting declines. Services and branding then becomes dominant in place of product royalties.
Intellectual property values are sinking. The mandate will simply
not exist to prop those values up through vigorous copyright
enforcement. There is no basis constitutionally or in common law
to do so. It is already an artificial legal construct that the music and software industries are insisting that the U.S. government
vigorously enforce worldwide on their behalf.
The intellectual property lobbyists ironically; both Microsoft and
the major record labels, employ business models that use 'plagiarism' as an ENGINE for their corporate success.
Upload Microsoft*. Download MCA**. Break the choke points.
Promote the Bazaar. Decommoditize the 'product'. Collaborate, create and release.
-JC Jaros
(open content)
* If one has paid for a software license and does not use it, it would seem that fair use allows for availing it to someone who might actually want it. Uploading does not constitute broadcasting.
** Think about how many music licenses you have paid for. You probably already have the license (or currency of a duplicate license) for the music you seek in downloadable format. |
