Skip to comments.Don't let the Copyright Office REQUIRE IE.
Posted on 08/11/2005 7:16:48 PM PDT by thebaron512
In accordance with the Artists' Rights and Theft Prevention Act of 2005 (the ART Act), Title I of the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act, Pub. L. No. 109-9, 119 Stat. 218, the Copyright Office recently proposed implementing regulations for preregistration of eligible copyright claims. 70 FR 42286 (July 22, 2005). To be eligible for preregistration, a work must be unpublished, in the process of being prepared for commercial distribution, and in a class of works that the Register of Copyrights determines has had a history of copyright infringement.
Section 104 of the ART Act directs that preregistration procedures must be in place by October 24, 2005. 17 U.S.C. 408(f)(1). To comply with this time frame and to facilitate efficient processing of preregistration claims, inter alia, the proposed rule calls for filing such claims by electronic means only. At this point in the process of
developing the Copyright Office's system for online preregistration, it is not entirely clear whether the system will be compatible with web browsers other than Microsoft Internet Explorer versions 5.1 and higher. Filers of preregistration applications will be able to employ these Internet Explorer browsers successfully. Support for Netscape 7.2, Firefox 1.0.3, and Mozilla 1.7.7 is planned but will not be available when preregistration goes into effect. Present users of these browsers may experience problems when filing claims.
In order to ensure that preregistration can be implemented in a smoothly functioning and timely manner, the Office now seeks comments that will assist it in determining whether any eligible parties will be prevented from preregistering a claim due to browser requirements of the preregistration system. Therefore, this notice seeks information whether any potential preregistration filers would have difficulties using Internet Explorer (version 5.1 or higher) to file preregistration claims, and if so, why.
(Excerpt) Read more at copyright.gov ...
Not often I agree with a left-lending source, but checking out the enemy is sometimes helpful....
Requiring IE is both foolish and dangerous. Anyone who is anyone in the computing world has migrated to the ease, features and relative safety of Firefox. ActiveX is just an open door to hackers.
The tab feature alone makes my slow dialup connection tolerable!
I routinely pass over sites that won't open with Firefox, figuring that if they don't need the business of the entire web, then they don't need mine.
I will send those letters, in the hope that the Copyright Office will come to their senses!
Who cares? IE is the browser standard.
"Who cares? IE is the browser standard."
It is also the hacker's standard! Use at your own peril.
And IE does not have the really cool features of Firefox, at least until MS copies them, as usual (The Microsoft Credo: imitate vs. innovate).
Spoken like a true anti-MS-bot. Thanks for that.
IE is only a standard on Windows. Try installing IE on a Linux box.
A good reason: "because we use Linux" or "because we use a Mac"
One test for Firefox. Go to http://www.drudgereport.com
You WILL get a pop-up ad. I have an ad blocker and it works fine with I.E. but not with Firefox.
I'll buy that reason, just not his "foolish and dangerous" reason.
I use Avant Browser and I don't get the popup on drudge, but then again, it uses IE at its core. So I get the compatibility of IE with all the features of Firefox.
Not me. Drudge is one of my Firefox startup pages, and I never, ever get popups there. I use Firefox's popup blocker, plus Adblock and Proximitron. I am starting to see some new popunders, though, on other sites - they must be evading the current-gen blockers.
"Spoken like a true anti-MS-bot. Thanks for that."
Spoken like a person that doesn't know what he/she is talking about. The way you elucidated your point is telling. Thanks for that.
I guess your remark makes you an "MS-bot?" Why is it so important to you that IE be the sole mechanism for the Copyright Office? Have some stock in MS? Why do I have to use IE to view copyright office material if I prefer another browser?
I have used Windows since Windows/286, but I have also used Linux, OS/2, Macintosh, Lindows, and find each has its strengths and weaknesses. I currently use XP, 2000 (laptop) and Mandriva Linux. Oooo! Makes you want to say "CRUSH. KILL. DESTROY." Microsoft, doesn't it! LOL!
If you object to the "imitate vs. innovate" remark, it was mostly tongue in cheek, but I can give you a long list of programs whose owners went out of business because MS thought that incorporating the same features (after the fact, not before it, by the way) was a good idea. Yeah, it is great for MS, and even great for me, as I don't have to bother buying multiple products to do the things I want. But it is bad for innovation. Maybe I am wrong, and MS's buyout of some program writers is great for competition. Maybe not.
My point is that if Microsoft were as all powerful and wonderful as you apparently suggest, then they would have come out with these products first, not play catch up on features, then give it away for "free." Netscape practically invented the popular web browser. MS copies it feature for feature. Netscape effectively goew away. Newcomer Firefox comes along with all the power of IE, with really new features, and an honest effort to thwart popups which have bedeviled IE. IE's ActiveX controls give it a means to rise above the fray, but it is also its greatest weakness. It is being constantly patched, but I still don't have tabbed browsing!!! When MS fixes the problems, and "innovates" the tab feature, I will look at it again (is this the sign of a true anti-MS zealot?) Until then, I use Firefox. Maybe I will go back to Netscape. Whoever, including MS, comes up with the best browser, will get my business.
I also prefer AMD chips. Wanna complain about that? Then complain about how AMD's presence has driven up chip power and driven down chip prices. Then complain about how Intel has adopted the MS practice of behind the scenes bundling/ad etc. deals with certain computer manufacturers, and found ways to "punish" manufacturers that won't "play ball."
Easy pardner!! ;-) I am not trying to turn this into a pissing contest, simply noting what I have observed over the years. So keep your resume in the drawer! As stated, I use XP and 2K most of the time. If you like IE, by all means, use it! I tried it recently, and felt crippled without tabs. It is like using a single button Mac mouse! But if you don't use it, you don't miss it.
MS did it's best to kill OS/2, but IBM dug its own grave in large measure on that front. OS/2 was powerful, but as unfriendly as hell. Wasn't part of the reason that IBM didn't simply make OS/2 open source because MS had code and agreements that prevented that?
Remember DR-DOS, and MS's little tricks to kill it on installation under Windows 3.1 (I think this was the Win version; it has been a while)? Bitstream and TypeManager, Stacker (shortlived anyway, partly due to HD advances), Norton Desktop and HP NewWave? All eaten up when the features were incorporated into Windows.
But is it a problem (for Firefox or whateve) when MS creates a proprietary control, and then finds ways to use it to keep other programs off the radar? Firefox isn't doing that, but MS is. I am truly surprised that MS hasn't incorporated the feature, to be honest. What advantage does it give a business to limit the customers it can reach? If a page doesn't open, most casual users think it is broken, not ActiveX dependent. If I use IE, I can't use the browser I like and am comfortable with in say, Linux. To be honest though, I haven't come across many sites that are so myopic that they can't accomodate all browsers in some capacity, so the point is fairly moot. The article that started this thread said that they would develop for other browsers, but to me, it would seem more logical to develope a site accessible to all, particularly as it is a government site, then develope special features that the IE crowd could access if it chose.
You have to ask why many computing editorial staffs and radio programs (at least around here) always, yes, always, recommend Firefox vs. IE for the very reasons I noted. They are more experienced than I. Ask them for the reasons they do so. MaximumPC is one mag that does this, and Computer Talk with Tab is a local (western MA) radio show that does likewise.
I guess the bottom line, for me anyway, is that MS has enormous resources that should be used for innovating rather than directly crushing competitors. Innovation will do that for them. Hire the people with talent to make better products before they go out and do it themselves. It appeared to me that ActiveX introduced more problems than pluses, and is still a source of problems for MS, if the number of recent patches is any indication. At least they are staying on top of it.
As you note, AMD and Intel are playing leapfrog with the technology, and that has paid off for all of us, no matter which chips you use. That is what I keep hoping Linux will do with Windows: push MS to scrap buggy code and incorporate new and great features into the OS. But now that AMD is really keeping ahead of Intel for the majority of the time, at least recently, Intel has been doing some less than noteworthy under the table dealings. Forget that crap: make a better mousetrap!
Anyway, I have screwed off enought on this! Good talking with you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.