Happy happy joy joy.

After Dolby, after KM, after the recording industry and after On2, the latest legal threat against yours trule comes from the widely hated source code stealers Maui X-Stream.

I got this email:


And replied accordingly:



Shucks. My collection keeps growing and growing. One day I will print and frame these legal threats, pretty much like the fine guys at ThePirateBay do.

You've amassed quite a few of those over the years now I've always had fun reading all of them.

If you seriously ever frame them take a picture of it

Always love your reply's Roberto.

Criticism from the wrong guys are actually compliments :-)

I'm curious about the reactions when i finish the two philosophical books which i'm writing. If i get bashed by the church, industry, ethic-freaks or possibly even politically involved ones....... then, i will know that i succeeded in doing a good job! :-P

Well, this one is not really a legal threat, isn't it?

Not yet

Although inded it seems this guy only wants to waste my time:



to which I replied:



sweet

Vorbis is a BSD license, and LAME is GPL? Am I correct?

LAME is actually LGPL, but yes, Vorbis is modified BSD.

This is becoming just too good:

This is great!

P.S: I'm feeling kinda mad that I missed the boat with the DVD-A tools you had to take off Rarewares.
I guess I'll just go P2P / Bittorent with my fingers crossed.

Wow! This is getting very strange...

btw, this is really a blind argument:

quoting the "guy"


....as he is "so smart" and "intro"-lectual( ) ... ....why he don't send the "analysis" and the link to the pope? (papa)

regards.

Cult : Noun

* S: (n) cult (adherents of an exclusive system of religious beliefs and practices)
* S: (n) fad, craze, furor, furore, cult, rage (an interest followed with exaggerated zeal) "he always follows the latest fads"; "it was all the rage that season"
* S: (n) cult, cultus, religious cult (a system of religious beliefs and rituals) "devoted to the cultus of the Blessed Virgin"

Every religion is a cult. I believe what he meant was, "Catholicism is not a sect." Now nowhere does it say that, even though it may be true as well :


So much for english-speakers.

OH NOES! Another threat is surely coming Roberto's way:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=880475#post880475

Just joined the forum (I'm the guy MXS is smeaing for the 2nd time now, Ryan Thoryk) - found this discussion while googling up my name, since really weird stuff usually shows up (like this haha).

First off MXS is psychotic, and they're dead wrong about their assumptions about me. They've gotten to the level before of telling me what I'm supposed to be believing according to their viewpoint lol. After I read this, I added something to that "cult checklist" (which I didn't write unlike their claims; I just added a couple colums back in 2002):
"Also note - I (Ryan Thoryk, not the original author) only believe that a few of these are "cults", and others are general religions (such as catholicism, etc). This is for comparative study."

I can't believe that they're still going at it though. I was the main person behind the analysis on the Drunkenblog site, and MXS went completely nuts from it (even though there was so much proof that they were guilty, it was insane - this was originally on their CherryOS software, and then the whole VX30 suite).

If you want to have a ton of laughs, read their previous defamation that someone got from them via email, posted it in a forum online, and after I got freaked out reading it (since they couldn't prove themselves, they were digging up my whole personal life), I wrote up a big response to their insanity:
MXS Defamation

My favorite part in there is where they somehow thought that a website I was hosting for a girl was actually some sort of shrine-like thing devoted to a fictional sci-fi character. What are they on?

A year later and they're still smearing me... geez (doesn't matter that much though, because everyone knows they're insane).

-eventhorizon5
ryan at tliquest.net

@rjamorim: Soooo, Rarejim, has someone subpoenaed (damn, I hate typing that word) your IP records

@eventhorizon5: Welcome, Ryan! Hope you enjoy being here with us Audio Enthusiasts (euphemism for 'geeks' )

Please tell me, RareJim, aren't you playing with fire?

edit: regarding VX30, things are improving:
http://www.vx30.com/Products/OpenSourceFAQ

Hmmm... I thought the "J" was lowercase... it's supposed to be Rarejim instead of RareJim... although yes your way of writing shows more of his latino blood...

They don't really need it. I have a Passport account



Of course I am! playing with fire makes me feel alive.

Seriously now: I don't think I am, I am a brazilian citizen, I live in Brazil and the file is hosted in a brazilian server. We don't have laws here similar to the DMCA. The worst they can do to me is scaring my ISP into deleting my account. In that case, I would just sigh and sign up with another ISP.

But in some cases, if your oponent has enough money, it seems that laws are not that relevant. After all, some industry proponents managed quite easily to change laws in several places (DMCA and DADVSI, Mickey Mouse) to create a kind of golden fortress for them.

Viodentia better watch his/her @$$. DRM has made this a golden age for hacking/cracking, but a golden age for getting smacked down for it as well because of the DMCA and similar laws.

Read This

Kudos to Vio, Jim, and others because if it were't for their bravery to make or post this tool and others like them in the face of legal action, not much would be done to protect fair use these days.

Mad props, roberot. Viva Brasilia!

If/when they change laws here in Brazil, I'll take FU4WM down. Considering how dynamic our lawmakers are, it should happen around 2013

Hopefully by then, it will be perceived as prudence by Brazil, rather than slow policymaking.

Not really lol. They're also missing the video codec they use which is XviD (since they've always been saying that VX30 was an in-house codec). Also Media Player Classic is the open-source video player project they used for the encoding apps.

"Yes, MXS's has a strict corporate policy to obey all copyright and patent laws. Before an open source application is used it's copyright policy is closely examined to make sure that it is compatible with our business practices. If a developer makes a mistake or disobeys corporate policy we will take immediate steps to resolve the infringement."

lol yeah right. After last year's fiasco, there's no way anybody's going to believe that. They tried everything they could to "hide" the evidence of the open-source software by doing things such as packing the executables, but nothing worked for them. Also, if they're "closely examining" the licenses, they'd find out that they're supposed to be distributing the modified source code also (and they cannot strip the authorship and copyright info from it, like they did with one app). The apps they mention are LGPL, but the ones they don't are GPL haha.

From the LGPL:
"A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the Library, but is designed to work with the Library by being compiled or linked with it, is called a "work that uses the Library". Such a work, in isolation, is not a derivative work of the Library, and therefore falls outside the scope of this License."
(their stuff wasn't externally linking to the libraries - they were compiled into the app).

also
" You must give prominent notice with each copy of the work that the Library is used in it and that the Library and its use are covered by this License. You must supply a copy of this License. If the work during execution displays copyright notices, you must include the copyright notice for the Library among them, as well as a reference directing the user to the copy of this License. Also, you must do one of these things:

* a) Accompany the work with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code for the Library including whatever changes were used in the work (which must be distributed under Sections 1 and 2 above); and, if the work is an executable linked with the Library, with the complete machine-readable "work that uses the Library", as object code and/or source code, so that the user can modify the Library and then relink to produce a modified executable containing the modified Library. (It is understood that the user who changes the contents of definitions files in the Library will not necessarily be able to recompile the application to use the modified definitions.)"

So yeah, they're screwed again lol.

-eventhorizon