To whom it may concern,
I was reading your paper "Is Open Source Software a threat to Future Intellectual Property Rights," and was quite shocked to find the following error. In the paper you claim:

"As unlikely as this might seem to the skeptic, the National Security Agency (NSA), that coordinates, directs, and performs highly specialized activities to protect U.S. information systems and produce foreign intelligence information, made the folly of developing GPL-licensed code to improve the Linux operating system. After reading the terms of the Linux GPL, the NSA realized they needed to post this enhancement to the Internet in source code form for the world to see."

First of all there no such thing as the "Linux GPL." There is the GNU GPL, which many distributions of Linux are published under. This seems a rather large mistake for a PAC specializing in IP to make. Furthermore, the claim that the GPL in some way requires you to post publicly any modifications to GPL-code is completely false. In fact, a specific section of the Frequently Asked Questions of the GPL addresses this issue. From the GNU GPL FAQ: (available at:http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html)

"The GPL does not require you to release your modified version. You are free to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them. This applies to organizations (including companies), too; an organization can make a modified version and use it internally without ever releasing it outside the organization. But if you release the modified version to the public in some way, the GPL requires you to make the modified source code available to the program's users, under the GPL. Thus, the GPL gives permission to release the modified program in certain ways, and not in other ways; but the decision of whether to release it is up to you."

How could you make such a a blatant mistake? How do you conduct research at your organization? Even a cursory glance at the license would have shown this. Do you have such little faith in our Government agencies to imagine that they wouldn't have a horde of lawyers examine a license before using it? And yet, you, a organization who claims to protect my property rights didn't a) already know this, or b) do the trivial amount of research to learn it?

I utterly offended by your complete lack of fundamental research in this paper. To make the baseless claim that the GPL or Linux are some kind of evil things that have weakened National Security and manipulated our government is completely absurd. I am extremely interested how this gross mistake was missed by your editors and fact-finders, and made it into publication. I eagerly await your reply.

angus wrote:
] I love the Beastie Boys but I hope this is not true and/or
] they didn't know about it. Basically the story relates that
] the new BB's CD and some rumored copy protection that is
] really is more like malware. "Check, check, check it out!"

What I'm eagerly watching is all the malware/spyware laws about to be passed, which prohibits any piece of software from being installed without my expressed permission. Seeing as how most CD copy protection software works is by installing some DLLs when you insert it in a machine, the RIAA could be getting cornered.

I wonder if the Velvet Revolver CD has some licensing agreement on the wrapper to the effect of "By opening this package you agree to have XYZ software installed on your machine." It begs to question, what can't you put in a licensing agreement?

Malware laws -vs- RIAA

] After reading the terms of the Linux GPL, the NSA
] realized they needed to post this enhancement to the
] Internet in source code form for the world to see.
] Unbelievably, any person with a PC and an Internet
] connection can now logon to the NSA%u2019s website and
] print out the blueprint for NSA s Security Enhanced Linux
] software.

As I said in my last meme, I've been doing alot of FOSS license research. Its amazes me how few people understand the GPL. The above statement is totally false. There is nothing in the GPL which forces you to release any changes you make to GPL software. From the GPL FAQ:

The GPL does not require you to release your modified version. You are free to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them. This applies to organizations (including companies), too; an organization can make a modified version and use it internally without ever releasing it outside the organization.

But if you release the modified version to the public in some way, the GPL requires you to make the modified source code available to the program's users, under the GPL.

The NSA chose to do what it did. Don't try and say the GPL has reduced our National Security. You can find the GNU GPL FAQ here:

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html

No one seems to get the GPL

I'm planning on taking a few projects I've been working on and registering them as FOSS projects on Sourceforge. I've been reading a lot about the different licenses of late. Does anyone have any advice or tips about bring an FOSS project up. User -vs- delevoper Documentation, writing for multiple platforms, defining milestones/stable releases, etc?

] On Friday, July 9th our keynote will be renowned hacker,
] fugitive, author, radio host, and subject of our
] documentary ("Freedom Downtime") Kevin Mitnick.
]
] On Saturday, July 10th we're pleased as punch that Steve
] Wozniak (of Apple fame) will be giving the keynote
] address.

] We wrap things up on Sunday, July 11th with another
] keynote by Jello Biafra (musician, activist, media
] hacker)
]
] But the keynotes are just one part of the speaker
] program. We have nearly 70 talks, panels, and workshops
] scheduled. Our list of scheduled talks is as follows.

The Fifth HOPE - Speaker Schedule Up

] Mary: Why would God make us so different if he wanted us
] to be the same?

Go see this movie. Now.

Saved! (2004)

Normally I'd brush this "MS is reforming the IE team to make a new IE before Longhorn" as vaporware. At this point I think MS has kept its head in the sand so long about quality OSS that could hurt it (not Linux, but rather Mozilla, OOo), that they might actually write some software so people don't move to Firefox.

Improving IE

] Alien Hand Syndrome is an unusual mental disorder in
] which one of the sufferer's hands seems to take on a life
] of its own.

hehehe... "Mein Fuhrer I can walk" indeed

Alien Hand Syndrome

] To use the "Wiki It!" bookmarklet, simply highlight the
] word or words you wish to look up, and click the
] bookmarklet. A separate, minimalist window will open with
] the Wikipedia entry for it.
]
] Just drag the Wiki It! link onto your personal toolbar.
] It has been tested on Mozilla 1.5 on Linux and Windows
] systems, as well as Firefox 0.7, and Internet Explorer 6.

Most Significant Bit :: Wikipedia Bookmarklet

Lay beside me.
Tell me what I've done
The Door is closed, so are your eyes
But now I see the Sun
Now I see the Sun
Yes, Now I see it.

-Metallica The Unforgiven II