Posted on 11/08/2001 1:29:30 PM PST by Orbiting_Rosie's_Head
What does the banning of Linux mean to Linux advocates? What does it mean to Windows users? What does it mean to America?
How could a free country like America ban an operating system? Republicans pride themselves in minimal government intervention in business. How could the Republicans allow a law that would tell every business in America what operating systems that business could and could not use? Republican Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska is a co-developer of SSSCA.
Democrats pride themselves in being pro-consumer and anti-monopoly. How could the Democrats permit passage of a law that would eliminate Microsoft's last competitor? Democratic Senator Fritz Hollings of South Carolina is the other SSSCA co-developer.
And guess who is helping these two senators write the legislation? None other than Disney corporation -- those champions of diversity. Disney's love of diversity extends to all races, religions, and sexual preferences. But it stops short of users of operating systems. Consenting adults MAY NOT use Linux.
What will your life be like when Windows is the only major legal operating system? If you choose to try to stop this law before it becomes law, what can you do? And what will become of Americans who violate SSSCA and continue to run Linux?
How can Microsoft, Disney, the RIAA, and other SSSCA supporters show their face after such shameful behavior? What is their excuse, and does it hold water?
This issue of Troubleshooting Professional Magazine discusses the law that will reach right into your office or living room and determine what operating system you can use. At this point of the Editors Desk column I usually mention that if you're a Troubleshooter, this is your magazine. This time it's a little different:
If you want to live free, this is your magazine.
Read the bill for yourself at this location:
Basically, SSSCA requires all software to include approved copy protection. Linux is freely copyable, so that pretty well kills Linux in the US. The bill is worded in such a way that you don't have to sell the software for the law to apply, just distribution is enough.
I will not go back to closed source software. Neither will the world. They can't arrest us all.
/john
As do I. If you follow the URL to the articles, it provides links to petitions against this onerous bill. If you haven't already, I suggest signing them.
ORH
They can have my Linux when they pry it from my cold, dead compiler. This will be unenforceable. "The internet sees censorship as any other network disruption, and routes around it."
/john
/john
This bill also sets the horrible precedent of giving one industry, the entertaiment industry, the power to dictate hardware and software design to another industry (computer hardware, digital reproduction). This spells huge amounts of trouble for many industries such as makers of cd recordable drives for PC's and MP3 players, etc. As other, more populated, countries such as India continue to emerge as markets, makers of inexpensive drives, etc, will begin to abandon the US and its ever-increasing number of stupid laws that are being written for the benefit copywrite holders.
Besides, I will always and forever run kernel version 2.2.13. Regardless of what the real version is, uname -a will return 2.2.13. GRIN!.
This law does need to be defeated, though.
/john
/john
And like I said before, it would be political suicide for Bush or any other politician to support this bill for three very good reasons
First it would instantly turn over half to population of this country into outlaws. Thus pissing off the population of this country. Not a good idea considering everyone is right under boiling point as it is because of 9/11/2001.
In this current political climate, if this bill became law, it could start a revolution against the Government.
Second is that this bill would tank the economy. This is would what killed Bush Sr.'s ended political curreer. I'm sure Bush Jr. knows this. Or at the very least should know this.
Third this bill could be struck by the courts under either First Amendment ground, of anti-monopoly laws. Already, a few weeks ago the previous anti-copyright softlaw was struck down by a Federal Judge, but the law is still being appealed. But because of that Federal Judge ruling (dealing with DVD encryption), I would say the is still hope for us on this issue.
And like I said before, it would be political suicide for Bush or any other politician to support this bill for three very good reasons
First it would instantly turn over half the population of this country into outlaws. Thus pissing off half the population of this country. Not a good idea considering everyone is right under boiling point as it is because of 9/11/2001.
In this current political climate, if this bill became law, it could start a revolution against the Government.
Second is that this bill would tank the economy. This is would what killed Bush Sr.'s ended political curreer. I'm sure Bush Jr. knows this. Or at the very least he should know this.
Third this bill could be struck by the courts under either First Amendment ground, or anti-monopoly laws. Already, a few weeks ago the previous anti-copyright softlaw was struck down by a Federal Judge, but the law is still being appealed. But because of that Federal Judge ruling (dealing with DVD encryption), I would say there is still hope for us on this issue.
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.