Jump to content

What happened to win2osx.net?

opieum

By opieum,
in Thunderdome (Random Stuff)

 Share
82 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

sigxcpu
sigxcpu
Posted
Posted

win2osx.net today =>

 

There seems to have been a problem with the database.

Please try again by clicking the Refresh button in your web browser.

 

An E-Mail has been dispatched to our Technical Staff, whom you can also contact if the problem persists.

 

We apologise for any inconvenience.

 

 

So, maybe the forum will get back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sHARD>>
sHARD>>
Posted
Posted

As ignorantcow has stated, I've noted that win2osx.net is soon to return! But a word to the wise who may soon return there: the new server is in the US and covered by the DMCA! Have a look. So just don't go off saying anything you want, we don't want to see anyone hauled off in chains!

 

Otherwise, welcome back guys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
39thRonin
39thRonin
Posted
Posted

As ignorantcow has stated, I've noted that win2osx.net is soon to return! But a word to the wise who may soon return there: the new server is in the US and covered by the DMCA! Have a

look. So just don't go off saying anything you want, we don't want to see anyone hauled off in chains!

 

Otherwise, welcome back guys!

 

Man, that is a serious bummer! Given the US ISP and DMCA I doubt Maxxuss will be hanging out at Osx2Win any time soon...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bofors
bofors
Posted
Posted (edited)
Man, that is a serious bummer! Given the US ISP and DMCA I doubt Maxxuss will be hanging out at Osx2Win any time soon...

 

I do not the believe that international law allows the United States (or any country) to apply it's laws to people clearly acting (here, typing on a computer) outside of it's territory. Unless Maxxuss actually resides in the USA, the DMCA does not directly apply to him. Likewise, Simon lives in New Zealand. However, it certainly would be much better if BOTH of these sites found hosting in another jurisdiction.

 

Seriously, though, you can still run a great forum and be compliant with DMCA. :)

With respect to this site, I think things might be getting a little too lose. In particular, I am concerned about the talk of "patching" and the open discussions of "patches": where to find them and how to use them. This includes some of my own statements.

 

To the extent that "patching" also deals with explicitly technical subject matter such as SSE3 and tuning, and not exclusively TPM related matters, it is a legal "grey" area and should pass any reasonable interpretation of the DMCA. Unfortunately, we have no guarantee that the DMCA wil be reaonsable interpreted and moreover I would strongly reccomend maintaining a policy that provides a very safe distance from any possibility of legal proceedings.

 

But I think it is clear that Apple would have already taken legal action against this site, if it was planning to. Now that booting Windows on EFI-Macs has become part of "research" here, this site's legal status is imporved significantly. Likewise, some "patches" for OS X may be necessary to boot Windows on EFI-Macs and etc.

 

EDIT: I have not looked at the DMCA since last summer when this business got started and have just briefly revisted it. I see essentially two provisions with respect to circumvention: "production" and "dissemination". Clearly, there is no "production" here, that potential problem was taken care of last summer. Now, the question is "dissemination". As long as this site is not itself hosting "patches", I do not think it is itself "disseminating" them just because information on where to find "patches" may be found here. Nonetheless, if I was responsible for this site, I would enforce an explicit policy against posting links to "patchs" to make compliance with the "dissemination" clause of the DMCA explicitly clear.

 

For example, this thread might imply a "dissemination" clause violation of the DMCA:

 

http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=7621&hl=

 

Here, I just edited my own possible "dissemination" DMCA violations:

 

http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=7653

Edited by bofors
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sHARD>>
sHARD>>
Posted
Posted
I do not the belive that international law allows the United States (or any country) to apply it's laws to people clearly acting (here, typing on a computer) outside of it's territory. Unless Maxxuss actually resides in the USA, the DMCA does not directly apply to him. Likewise, Simon lives in New Zealand. However, it certainly would be much better if BOTH of these sites found hosting in another jurisdiction.

 

Just to temporarily ignore all your other points (sorry, Mashugly will probably address them for you):

 

The location of the data is a large factor here. It's like a drug dealer stashing drugs in the United States even though he lives in Germany (note: horrid example, put here for effect). Because he has violated US law with his property stored in a US law domain, he can still get in trouble. That's not perfectly correct, but you get the idea. The same applies for copyright, especially with nations who may not honor DMCA, but are willing to allow the US to apply DMCA to materials stored by their citizens in the United States (read: quite a few).

 

So, I'm tired and I've written that horribly, so that it's probably sorta half-correct and hard to understand, but hopefully you get the idea. But anyhow, this is all hypothetical and doesn't have that much to do with the topic at hand :)

 

EDIT: Screw the mumbo jumbo above, bottom line, is "does not directly apply".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bofors
bofors
Posted
Posted (edited)
EDIT: Screw the mumbo jumbo above, bottom line, is "does not directly apply".

 

Well, actually it might not matter where the data is either.

 

Consider the "Sklyarov" DMCA case: http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/US_v_Elcomsoft/

 

US v. Sklyarov - Directory of information on U.S. v. Sklyarov, a.k.a. US v. Elcomsoft. The FBI arrested, in Las Vegas, Nevada, and the U.S. Department of Justice (United States Attorney's Office, Northern District of California) has filed, in a Federal District Court, a criminal complaint against Dmitry Sklyarov. Sklyarov is accused of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) "anticircuvention" provisions, for making and releasing software that can decode the weak encryption on Adobe Acrobat eBook files. Sklyarov, a Russian citizen visiting the US, wrote the software (Advanced eBook Processor or AEBPR) in his native country, but allegedly distributed some copies at a computer conference in Las Vegas, where he was arrested. Sklyarov states that his software enables fair use (e.g. by enabling the blind to use his software's text-to-speech feature, which Adobe's own commercial eBook softare can't do), and is not a piracy tool. The case also names Sklyarov's employer, the Russian software company Elcomsoft.

 

Here again, the "dissemination" clause is key:

 

"Sklyarov, a Russian citizen visiting the US, wrote the software (Advanced eBook Processor or AEBPR) in his native country, but allegedly distributed some copies at a computer conference in Las Vegas, where he was arrested."

 

Sklyarov was charged with a serious criminal DMCA violation (that subsequently was dropped on petition by Adobe) for "acts" he _might_ have exclusively done in Russia. It is obvious to me that Sklyarov was not arrested for merely "distribut[ing] some copies at a computer conference in Las Vegas".

 

That was merely legal pretext (aka {censored}). The Feds found out he was coming to the USA and planned to arrest him, to avoid the jurisdictional problem, they fabricated or set-up (entrapment, like undercover FBI agents asked him for a copy) a token "dissmenation" case against Sklyarov

Edited by bofors
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bofors
bofors
Posted
Posted (edited)

Hmm... I still am getting the same "Website not yet configured" message. I wonder if there is a DNS problem or something.

 

Is anyone else having a problem?

 

EDIT: This makes me wonder if my ISP is caching something.

 

http://www.whois.sc/win2osx.net

 

EDIT 2: I am now pretty sure that since win2osx.net has changed hosts that my ISP's DNS cache still has the old one. It may take a day or so before that is reset to the new IP address.

Edited by bofors
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Swad
Swad
Posted
Posted (edited)

ignorantcow-

 

Well, on the free speech point (copied from another thread in which I talked about this)...

 

Free speech is legal speech - constitutional law states that there are many types of speech which aren't "free." (Such as shouting Fire in a crowded building) We want this site to remain a place where people can come and chat about the x86 version of the OS they love. The purpose of this forum has never been to create an underground site for stealing from Apple.

 

So, free speech totally exists here, and it's unfortunate that some people equate warez=free speech.

 

Secondly, though, I think sHARD's point was just to say that simon needs to be very careful since he's hosted in the US now. That means that regardless of where he is, US law applies (however crappy the US law - in this case the DMCA - may be).

 

BTW, we are glad that you're back up. We like your forum too. :)

 

Bofors-

We still try to take out threads that are bad or illegal. Patches are that kind of grey area, but you're right, we should probably be a little more strict. I'll look around and see if I see anything that looks too shady (keep in mind, I've still been doing this on a daily basis as I read the forum).

Edited by Mashugly
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ignorantcow
ignorantcow
Posted
Posted

I do not want to start an arguement with you, but..

 

The purpose of this forum has never been to create an underground site for stealing from Apple.

Then why are you still allowing these so obviously "underground" information to remain?

 

So, free speech totally exists here, and it's unfortunate that some people equate warez=free speech.

Well, maybe I used the term "free speech", wrongly. I meant in every way- "warez, illegal talk".

 

Secondly, though, I think sHARD's point was just to say that simon needs to be very careful since he's hosted in the US now. That means that regardless of where he is, US law applies (however crappy the US law - in this case the DMCA - may be).

Yes, I fully understand that- but we have not seen any legal action/threats from apple, the release of the macintels have come and gone- before you know it- a year- two years- osx 2.0. Maybe Apple thinks bringing us- lowly hackers- down is a waste of time, resources and money. Wherever win2osx gets hosted next, be it in NZ, US, some europe country, I don't think Simon will change his policies.

 

BTW, we are glad that you're back up. We like your forum too. :)
We still try to take out threads that are bad or illegal. Patches are that kind of grey area, but you're right, we should probably be a little more strict. I'll look around and see if I see anything that looks too shady (keep in mind, I've still been doing this on a daily basis as I read the forum).

I'm not so sure about that :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Swad
Swad
Posted
Posted

Nah, no argument here. Where there is an argument, THERE IS USUALLY FLAMING!!! :)

 

Then why are you still allowing these so obviously "underground" information to remain?

 

Because we do believe in "free speech" and the fact that a ton of people are interested in talking about this stuff. There is nothing legally or ethically wrong with giving people a place to speak their mind on these issues.

 

Well, maybe I used the term "free speech", wrongly. I meant in every way- "warez, illegal talk".

 

:) That's ok, there is certainly a place for those sites too. :)

 

Yes, I fully understand that- but we have not seen any legal action/threats from apple, the release of the macintels have come and gone- before you know it- a year- two years- osx 2.0. Maybe Apple thinks bringing us- lowly hackers- down is a waste of time, resources and money. Wherever win2osx gets hosted next, be it in NZ, US, some europe country, I don't think Simon will change his policies.

 

True, but we also haven't seen 10.4.4/.5 cracked yet. I have the feeling that while Apple might have thought it was a minor problem before, they could easily think that prolonged use of hacked OSs is something they need to deal with. All I'm saying is be careful. :)

 

We care about you guys. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...