Miscellaneous > Intellectual Property & Law
What's in a name? Not Palladium
Refalm:
quote:chaosforages: please change you agianst tcpa to something agianst DRM and whatever microsoft is calling their "inovation"
--- End quote ---
Uh... why? Isn't the TCPA an "innovation" led by Microsoft and Intel to crush competition?
AlexMax:
Actually, there is a part of this that is actually beneficial, if I'm following everything right.
From what I hear, ANYONE can sign software, not just M$. This means that you would be able to use LILO as your bootloader. However, there might be something built into Windows that would prevent LILO from botting Windows since there isn't a 'trusted' connection between the two. But that would be simple to solve, move to Linux.
I am, of course, speaking of what I have been able to gather. If I'm wrong, please let me know, but I think it's a little more realistic than some "MICROSOFT IS TRYING TO RULE THE WORLD with DMCA, TCPA, DRM, EIEIO, AND OTHER EVIL SOUNNDING ACRYNIMS" kinda thing. Not that they aren't, but that's another subject.
[ January 27, 2003: Message edited by: AlexMax ]
jtpenrod:
quote: Microsoft has dropped the code name of its controversial security technology, Palladium, in favor of this buzzword-bloated tongue twister: "next-generation secure computing base."
On Friday, the company said that the name Palladium had become tarnished by controversy surrounding some elements of Microsoft's security push. In additional, it faced a potential legal battle with a small firm over the Palladium name.
--- End quote ---
Whatever. Once again, it's form over substance in the Land of Redmond. Rather than answer the "controversy" by clearly explaining what this "Palladium" really is, what it does, and by opening the source code so that everyone can see exactly what it's all about (now that would be "trusted computing"! ) they change the name. They really do seem to believe that they can make the controversy go away with a simple name change. :eek:
Also, the mighty Microsoft is worried about a legal challenge from a "small firm"? :confused: Since when have they ever been afraid of "small firms", which they eat for breakfast like they've been doing for the past 20 years? Do they really expect anyone to buy that?
Just more MS BS. Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad
_____________________________________
Live Free or Die: Linux
Their fundamental design flaws are completely concealed by their superficial design flaws.
sporkpimp:
quote:Originally posted by Linux User #5225982375:
So does that mean I can run Linux on Palladium hardware? Not that I'd want to, anyway.
--- End quote ---
Who ever said you can't? In the TCPA FAQ, it's pretty much summed up perfectly under section 18:
"18. Ugh. What else?
TCPA will undermine the General Public License (GPL), under which many free and open source software products are distributed. The GPL is designed to prevent the fruits of communal voluntary labour being hijacked by private companies for profit. Anyone can use and modify software distributed under this licence, but if you distribute a modified copy, you must make it available to the world, together with the source code so that other people can make subsequent modifications of their own.
At least two companies have started work on a TCPA-enhanced version of GNU/linux. This will involve tidying up the code and removing a number of features. To get a certificate from the TCPA corsortium, the sponsor will then have to submit the pruned code to an evaluation lab, together with a mass of documentation showing why various known attacks on the code don't work. (The evaluation is at level E3 - expensive enough to keep out the free software community, yet lax enough for most commercial software vendors to have a chance to get their lousy code through.) Although the modified program will be covered by the GPL, and the source code will be free to everyone, it will not make full use of the TCPA features unless you have a certificate for it that is specific to the Fritz chip on your own machine. That is what will cost you money (if not at first, then eventually).
You will still be free to make modifications to the modified code, but you won't be able to get a certificate that gets you into the TCPA system. Something similar happens with the linux supplied by Sony for the Playstation 2; the console's copy protection mechanisms prevent you from running an altered binary, and from using a number of the hardware features. Even if a philanthropist does a not-for-profit secure GNU/linux, the resulting product would not really be a GPL version of a TCPA operating system, but a proprietary operating system that the philanthropist could give away free. (There is still the question of who would pay for the user certificates.)
People believed that the GPL made it impossible for a company to come along and steal code that was the result of community effort. This helped make people willing to give up their spare time to write free software for the communal benefit. But TCPA changes that. Once the majority of PCs on the market are TCPA-enabled, the GPL won't work as intended. The benefit for Microsoft is not that this will destroy free software directly. The point is this: once people realise that even GPL'led software can be hijacked for commercial purposes, idealistic young programmers will be much less motivated to write free software. "
***
I wouldn't mind if it was just the Open Source Initiative getting screwed, but this hurts GNU too! (shakes fist)
-SporkPimp
Tattooed:
Would TCPA and Palladium not be break anti trust laws? Check this out
http://www.research.ibm.com/gsal/tcpa/tcpa_rebuttal.pdf
I hope nobody buy TCPA or Palladium- remember what happend with the P3 serial numbers-nobody wanted that-so why should anyone what this crap.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version