On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 18:01, Anthony Towns wrote:
I don't know what (a)'s about. Could be important, could be trivial.
End of any remaining sovreignty.
(b)'s disappointing, but I don't think it affects Linux or Open
Source at all.
They can clamp your FOSS project with essentially no evidence.
(c)'s disappointing at first glance, although the "public interest
exception" could be interesting.
DMCA.au
(d)'s disappointing, but is negligibly different to just retaining
the current term, which is effectively infinite anyway.
We need it to go the other way in order to be reasonable. Any trend in
an upward direction is bad unless it's so ridiculous that it somehow
causes a revolt.
(e) seems a bit gratuitous, but doesn't seem particularly important
either.
It gives you a bit of insight into what the rest is really about. Our
protection schemes suck, so we're going to nuke the problems and if
you're both lucky and good we might let you into a very small shelter
first.
It's not a business-as-usual, it's another notch on the stove dial
that's cooking our collective frogs.
Cheers; Leon