Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] The Open Music Resource Library, a few questions
From: Darren Landrum (consul_AT_studioconsul.net)
Date: Mon Dec 23 2002 - 01:10:17 EET
Okay, I feel like I should apologize to the list for this diatribe. I
am sorry if I offended anyone or broke any rules.
I just want to make it clear that the Open Music Resource Library is
not a napster for Acid loops. That's all. (You know, I should change
the topic to reflect the new name of the library.) (... And done.) :)
Also, I would like to thank everyone for your input, feedback, and
offers for help. I feel that this library site will be built, and will
be successful, and it will be because of the community, and all of us
here.
And with that, I need to go back to prepping my new house for painting.
I'll be back on later tonight.
Regards,
Darren Landrum
On Sunday, December 22, 2002, at 03:39 PM, Darren Landrum wrote:
> Yes, it is regrettable. It is regrettable that there are people out
> there that are not to be trusted. It is regrettable that many of those
> self-same people would stoop to such actions as uploading a loop or a
> sample set that they have no rights to *because* they want to damage
> such open initiatives.
>
> I very highly doubt that anyone I've talked to on this list would ever
> be the cause of such problems.
>
> And yet, there are people out there who are malicious because they
> like to cause trouble, or sometimes even because someone is paying
> them. Then all it takes is a pack of attack lawyers. It's happened
> before, and it can happen to us.
>
> I do not want to implement any DRM measures. I simply want to catch
> people trying to do such things as I described above and be able to
> deal with them, quietly if possible.
>
> Personally, I think a web of trust is the best way to go. If we make
> accounts difficult to get, and to spoof, then users uploading illegal
> materials will (hopefully, anyway) leave behind an audit trail that
> can lead us to them.
>
> Remember, we aren't just talking about audio loops and samples, here.
> You could gzip up some illicit jpegs featuring some activities that
> would make your stomach turn, not to mention attract the authorities
> to the ones running the system. Unfortunately, file shares like this
> one are ripe for that kind of abuse if proper steps aren't taken. (As
> a side note, we had already figured out a way to deal with this kind
> of activity, but I leave it here as an example.)
>
> Sorry if I rambled on my soapbox a little too long, but this is a sore
> point of mine. You just can't automatically trust everyone. You need
> some checks and balances in the system.
>
> Regards,
> Darren Landrum
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Dec 23 2002 - 01:10:09 EET