copyright, IP & openSUSE

English Open Chat
#1

I believe that the USA is in the process of passing a law that would allow sites that aid the infringing of copyright & IP to be filtered out by search engines, ISPs, DNS, etc. I believe that it also includes a provision to ban financial transactions with such sites. While in theory the law would apply in the USA, the USA could unilaterally apply it world wide.

While I think that the main target it multimedia piracy, ip protection seems to be included.

Ignoring the possibility trolls claiming bizarre patents such as displaying lizards during boot, what would be the likely affect on openSUSE of the US applying the US law world wide? While I believe that users can purchase licensed applications to process a lot of multimedia, I do not know what other applications may be affected. I assume that the core openSUSE is not affected as it has been US based and it seems to have been careful about licensing.

#2

Since being taken over by Novell, SUSE has always complied with US law. However, there are no financial transactions involved in distributing openSUSE and openSUSE formally abandoned licensing in the conventional sense some years ago; so it is difficult to envisage that openSUSE’s current operations would be significantly affected.

#3

On 05/28/2011 10:06 AM, john hudson wrote:
>
> it is difficult to envisage that openSUSE’s
> current operations would be significantly affected.

anyway, despite their belief otherwise the USA neither owns nor controls
The Internet beyond their political borders…

–
dd CAVEAT: http://is.gd/bpoMD
[NNTP via openSUSE 11.4 [2.6.37.6-0.5] + KDE 4.6.0 + Thunderbird 3.1.10]
Dual booting with Sluggish Loser7 on Acer Aspire One D255

#4

vindevienne wrote:
> While in theory
> the law would apply in the USA, the USA could unilaterally apply it
> world wide.
>
That is completely ridiculous, there is neither a technical nor a legal
possibility to do this.

–
PC: oS 11.3 64 bit | Intel Core2 Quad Q8300@2.50GHz | KDE 4.6.3 | GeForce
9600 GT | 4GB Ram
Eee PC 1201n: oS 11.4 64 bit | Intel Atom 330@1.60GHz | KDE 4.6.0 | nVidia
ION | 3GB Ram

#5

This view is too simple, one may say: it is wrong. In fact,

  • most important firms w. r. t. internet (Google, Microsoft, … one may even include the FSF here) have their location in the USA and are thus under the control of this government.
  • most non-US firms worldwide in this field have some part of their business also in the USA and do not want to lose it. Why did even SuSE before 2004 follow the US laws so strictly although it was a German company. (Why was it impossible to have a da** mp3 encoder in the repository?)
  • the USA have control over the top level of the world’s DNS servers. This is the most direct control over the world-wide internet in US hand.

So, in a strict sense you are right (e. g. the internet is theoretically usable without DNS), practically you are wrong.

With best wishes
Tronar

P.S. However, as long as vindevienne only “believes” something like this to happen, we should not be worried too much. :wink:

#6

On 2011-05-28 13:16, DenverD wrote:

> anyway, despite their belief otherwise the USA neither owns nor controls
> The Internet beyond their political borders…

They would force google to comply (the search engine), and that could be
damaging.

–
Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 11.2 x86_64 “Emerald” at Telcontar)

#7

Tronar wrote:

>
> martin_helm;2345912 Wrote:
>> That is completely ridiculous, there is neither a technical nor a legal
>> possibility to do this.This view is too simple, one may say: it is wrong.
>> In fact,
> - most important firms w. r. t. internet (Google, Microsoft, … one
> may even include the FSF here) have their location in the USA and are
> thus under the control of this government.
Wrong, all this companies are under the control of EVERY government in
whichs area they want to make money, even Microsoft has to comply to
european regulations (whenever they did not they were forced to and followed
the rules after paying a lot of money).

> - most non-US firms worldwide in this field have some part of their
> business also in the USA and do not want to lose it. Why did even SuSE
> before 2004 follow the US laws so strictly although it was a German
> company. (Why was it impossible to have a da** mp3 encoder in the
> repository?)
And vice versa every US company wanting to make money in any area outside
the USA has strictly to comply to the rules of the area in question, be it
europe or anything else, otherwise they are out of business.

> - the USA have control over the top level of the world’s DNS servers.
> This is the most direct control over the world-wide internet in US
> hand.
Which is historical, since if they abuse that fact, the top level DNS will
be at other places or do you think that is a monopoly it is just a question
of money to quickly set some up.

>
> So, in a strict sense you are right (e. g. the internet is
> theoretically usable without DNS), practically you are wrong.
>
That is also just FUD, because DNS does not disappear just because the US
controls some servers which can easily replaced elsewhere.

–
PC: oS 11.3 64 bit | Intel Core2 Quad Q8300@2.50GHz | KDE 4.6.3 | GeForce
9600 GT | 4GB Ram
Eee PC 1201n: oS 11.4 64 bit | Intel Atom 330@1.60GHz | KDE 4.6.0 | nVidia
ION | 3GB Ram

#8

On 05/28/2011 03:33 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

> They would force google to comply (the search engine), and that could be
> damaging.

afaik google has server centers all over earth…

and i think the USA has no means to control or direct how any of those
are operated…instead, they must follow local laws…

–
dd CAVEAT: http://is.gd/bpoMD
[NNTP via openSUSE 11.4 [2.6.37.6-0.5] + KDE 4.6.0 + Thunderbird 3.1.10]
Dual booting with Sluggish Loser7 on Acer Aspire One D255

#9

On 2011-05-28 16:50, DenverD wrote:
> On 05/28/2011 03:33 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> They would force google to comply (the search engine), and that could be
>> damaging.
>
> afaik google has server centers all over earth…
>
> and i think the USA has no means to control or direct how any of those are
> operated…instead, they must follow local laws…

There is hope, then :slight_smile:

–
Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 11.2 x86_64 “Emerald” at Telcontar)

#10

I believe that if a global bank operates in the US then it must in certain cases apply US law globally or stop trading in the US. As a result I believe that european citizens in european counties have had their bank accounts closed by global but non-US banks for activities outside US that are not illegal for anyone but US citizens and businesses. This is because the bank itself is not allowed by the US law to service that type of transaction. Stopping access to paypal, visa, mastercard, bank accounts could be done if banning financial transactions became law. Also I suspect that filtering out IP addresses in the US would have a significant affect. How many hosting organizations would risk having no visibility in the US just to support a site that infringed some possibly dubious US patent. It is possible that the EU and separately within it the UK, are also looking at similar copyright/patent web filtering

There is the great firewall of China and other countries have similar systems. It will not be long before western countries have their own great firewalls. In the UK there is currently a clash between the courts banning the publication of things and the same things being splashed all over twitter. Repeated challenges to the legal system will result in changes to how the internet is controlled.

#11

On 06/02/2011 01:36 AM, vindevienne wrote:
>
> I believe that if a global bank operates in the US then it must in
> certain cases apply US law globally or stop trading in the US.

you may be correct, but i’m not aware of laws in the USA which penalize
an international banking institution for following the laws of other
lands when operating in other lands…

if you are aware of such i invite you to offer URL cites to
same…otherwise your ‘belief’ holds no weight in this discussion…

> As a
> result I believe that european citizens in european counties have had
> their bank accounts closed by global but non-US banks for activities
> outside US that are not illegal for anyone but US citizens and
> businesses.

really? can you provide news reports or factual cites to support those
claims?

are you speaking of banking activities which support ‘terrorist’, money
laundering or the hiding of taxable income–or other illegal activity
(illegal in both the EU and the USA)?

> This is because the bank itself is not allowed by the US law
> to service that type of transaction.

again, factual sources please…

> Stopping access to paypal, visa,
> mastercard, bank accounts could be done if banning financial
> transactions became law.

sounds like FUD to me…

> Also I suspect that filtering out IP addresses
> in the US would have a significant affect. How many hosting
> organizations would risk having no visibility in the US just to support
> a site that infringed some possibly dubious US patent. It is possible
> that the EU and separately within it the UK, are also looking at similar
> copyright/patent web filtering

so, you think the distribution of copyright/patented materials without
just and legal compensation to the copyright/patent holder should be
allowed and the country and international laws not upheld??

> There is the great firewall of China and other countries have similar
> systems. It will not be long before western countries have their own
> great firewalls.

as far as i know all countries have the right to defend their borders
from physical, economic and virtual attack! would you want your country
to not?

> In the UK there is currently a clash between the courts
> banning the publication of things and the same things being splashed all
> over twitter.

“things” what kinds of “things”…

> Repeated challenges to the legal system will result in
> changes to how the internet is controlled.

controlling the internet is kinda like herding cats or teaching pigs to
sing.

–
dd CAVEAT: http://is.gd/bpoMD
[NNTP via openSUSE 11.4 [2.6.37.6-0.5] + KDE 4.6.0 + Thunderbird 3.1.10]
Dual booting with Sluggish Loser7 on Acer Aspire One D255

#12

@Denverd

You could always try searching the internet

see http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/category/foreign-countermeasures

Nothing to do with things illegal other than in the US. There are more but I can’t be bothered to find them.

I agree that copyright and patent holders should be paid, however in a forum like this can you be sure that there are no references to sites that may infringe copyrights or patents. If there are then this site may end up being blocked.

Firewalls constructed by counties are usually put up to stop people getting out not in. Try searching the internet for china and firewall.

Try searching for twitter and superinjunction

#13

On 06/02/2011 05:36 PM, vindevienne wrote:
>
> @Denverd
>
> You could always try searching the internet
>
> see http://tinyurl.com/3m2utf9

interesting…but, i can’t see how past Lloyds bank fraudulent
activities can somehow lead to the USA shutting down PayPal world wide…

> Nothing to do with things illegal other than in the US. There are more
> but I can’t be bothered to find them.

and so i should just believe everything you say is factual because you
can’t bothered to back up your claims?

>
> I agree that copyright and patent holders should be paid, however in a
> forum like this can you be sure that there are no references to sites
> that may infringe copyrights or patents. If there are then this site may
> end up being blocked.

by who?

> Firewalls constructed by counties are usually put up to stop people
> getting out not in. Try searching the internet for china and firewall.

no, most are set up to block non-state approved news from coming in.
i’m pretty certain that is the case for the Great Firewall of China.

> Try searching for twitter and superinjunction

ok, 4,340,000 hits…i read those thoroughly and get back to you in
about 40 years…

-=ploink=-

–
dd CAVEAT: http://is.gd/bpoMD
[NNTP via openSUSE 11.4 [2.6.37.6-0.5] + KDE 4.6.0 + Thunderbird 3.1.10]
Dual booting with Sluggish Loser7 on Acer Aspire One D255

#14

re:

> In the UK there is currently a clash between the courts
> banning the publication of things and the same things being splashed all
> over twitter.

“things” what kinds of “things”…

Does the above refer to the publication of Manchester United footballer Ryan Giggs alleged affair ? Apparently, Mr. Giggs (or his solicitor) obtained a “superinjunction” barring release of his identity in a civil matter. An MP, under parliamentary privelige, released his name, and it was subsequently tweeted. This raised the question of the scope of said “superinjuction” as it applies to a global messaging service.

This page six materiel pales in comparison to trans-border information restrictions upon copyrighted property.

As to the “Great Firewall of China”, the restrictive control(s) seem to work both ways: access to sites and information deemed “unacceptable” (outbound) is blocked, as is unsolicited reciept (inbound) of such information. Should the Peoples Republic desire to market this effective technology, there is a ripe international market in interest.

#15

On 06/02/2011 02:17 PM, DenverD wrote:
> On 06/02/2011 01:36 AM, vindevienne wrote:

> if you are aware of such i invite you to offer URL cites to
> same…otherwise your ‘belief’ holds no weight in this discussion…

Spain does business with Cuba. Hotels, for example. Those bussiness are
banned in the US as a result. That’s a fact, we had that in the TV news,
but I don’t have links. If I remember correctly, some businessmen were
imprisoned in the US as well.

–
Saludos/Cheers
Carlos E.R.

(testing 11-4 Celadon on Lilliput)

#16

On 05/28/2011 04:11 PM, martin_helm wrote:
> And vice versa every US company wanting to make money in any area outside
> the USA has strictly to comply to the rules of the area in question, be it
> europe or anything else, otherwise they are out of business.

There is a difference between having to follow european rules while
doing business in Europe, and having to follow those rules whiles
outside Europe, too.

–
Saludos/Cheers
Carlos E.R.

(testing 11-4 Celadon on Lilliput)

#17

On 06/02/2011 10:55 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> Spain does business with Cuba. Hotels, for example. Those bussiness are
> banned in the US as a result. That’s a fact, we had that in the TV news,
> but I don’t have links. If I remember correctly, some businessmen were
> imprisoned in the US as well.

i didn’t know that…

but i’m not sure how that might cause a person in Spain to not be able
to use PayPal or any search engine…(which i think is the OP’s fear)

but, for the sake of discussion lets say the USA had laws saying if
PayPal dealt with Spanish citizens then it would longer be able to
operate inside the USA–what would happen?

i’d guess PayPal might silently find a business partner in Madrid et al,
and set up a PagarAmigo to move money between entities…so what?

as said, despite their belief otherwise (especially inside Congress) the
USA neither owns nor controls The Internet beyond their political
borders…neither do any other countries (ask Egypt, Lybia, Syria how
trying to control the net worked out for them)…

controlling the internet is like trying to herd snakes…

maybe someday i cry, but today i expect i can get done what i want over
the net, despite the best intention of all the governments and their
actions…

now, if what i wanna do breaks the laws of the land where i sit, or
the laws where i’m doing business (even if only via the net), then i
have a legal problem…breaking the law from afar is still breaking the
law…that has always been the case, even if it was done by hand
written letter in 1850 and delivered by a slow boat…

the sky is not falling.

if it is, it is not simply because the USA can unilaterally (as the OP
suggests) reach out and control the actions of banks, world wide…

–
dd CAVEAT: http://is.gd/bpoMD
[NNTP via openSUSE 11.4 [2.6.37.6-0.5] + KDE 4.6.0 + Thunderbird 3.1.10]
Dual booting with Sluggish Loser7 on Acer Aspire One D255

#18

SeanMc98 wrote:
> Does the above refer to the publication of Manchester United footballer
> Ryan Giggs alleged affair ? Apparently, Mr. Giggs (or his solicitor)
> obtained a “superinjunction” barring release of his identity in a civil
> matter. An MP, under parliamentary privelige, released his name, and it
> was subsequently tweeted. This raised the question of the scope of said
> “superinjuction” as it applies to a global messaging service.

The order of events in that explanation are wrong. A better explanation
is at
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_British_privacy_injunctions_controversy>

#19

Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 05/28/2011 04:11 PM, martin_helm wrote:
>> And vice versa every US company wanting to make money in any area outside
>> the USA has strictly to comply to the rules of the area in question,
>> be it europe or anything else, otherwise they are out of business.
>
> There is a difference between having to follow european rules while
> doing business in Europe, and having to follow those rules whiles
> outside Europe, too.

I find it interesting that the EU is considering whether to block the
takeover of two Japanese disk companies by two American disk companies.

#20

Dave Howorth wrote:
> I find it interesting that the EU is considering whether to block the
> takeover of two Japanese disk companies by two American disk companies.

Oops, one Japanese, one Korean. Sorry.