Omnimaga
Calculator Community => Other Calculators => Topic started by: SirCmpwn on April 03, 2010, 07:45:49 pm
-
As you all are aware, TI has been quite pissy about the whole signing key debate. For a while now, the article on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Instruments_signing_key_controversy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Instruments_signing_key_controversy)) has elected to take down the keys, and is under watch by the Wikimedia Foundation Office to ensure that no one puts them back up.
I have taken issue with this.
In the talk page of the article, found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Texas_Instruments_signing_key_controversy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Texas_Instruments_signing_key_controversy), I have made a well reasoned argument to the restoration of the keys. I have also asked for others who agree with the argument to add credibility to the argument and post their agreement on the talk page.
I trust I can get support from the community on this issue. Thank you.
-
I thought the EFF allowed them to put them back up last summer? (or at least, TI did not awnser, then people were allowed to put them back up after a certain amount of days?)
-
Well, Wikipedia does not wish to take the risks that people like Brandon and the others are taking. And, I think they need to grow a pair, and put up the information that is being witheld. I pasted the argument I made on Wikipedia here, so I do not have to re-type it:
Due to the lack of response from TI and the lack of a legal basis to their argument, I propose restoring the keys. Additionally, it appears that TI's current actions regarding the keys have all but stopped. It has become obvious they are attempting to prevent further distribution of these keys through inaction. By remaining silent, they remove all chance of having the keys replaced by a badly written letter or the like. After understanding the above, the conclusion is easily drawn that the supposedly neutral Wikipedia is siding with Texas Instruments. I request that in order to prevent such an accusation being made, Wikipedia kindly remove their restrictions on this article and allow the signing keys to be replaced on the page. To further this argument, I bring to light the nature of the signing keys. The keys themselves are, by their very nature, large prime numbers. According to U.S Copyright Law regarding material not eligible for copyright, section 201.1.b and section 201.1.d clearly state that "Ideas, plans, methods, systems, or devices, as distinguished from the particular manner in which they are expressed or described in a writing" are not eligible for copyright, including methods of encryption. The signing keys themselves are simply numbers that are used for encryption. In addition, it says "Works consisting entirely of information that is common property containing no original authorship," such as numbers, which no person can copyright. Material that is not under copyright, such as these keys, are free to be distrubuted however one wishes. I trust the argument has been made clear, and if Wikipedia wishes to retain its reputation as neutral, they grant permission to restore these keys. I ask that those that see sense and logic in the above argument also state their thoughts here, and add credibility to this argument.
-
sounds like a good argument to me
-
Well, I'm in the middle of arguing with Wikipedia over email, laying down clear and accurate references to US legislation that shows TI's threats and claims are baseless, and they aren't listening. Give me a few minutes, I might be able to get something going. The Wikipedia lawyer in charge of the case is Mike Godwin by the way, who's email is [email protected]. If you send him emails, please use a reasonable amount of discresion.
-
This is the email that I just sent to Mr. Godwin:
Mr. Godwin,
It has come to my attention that the Wikipedia article regarding the signing keys Texas Instruments uses to digitally sign OSes is under your supervision, and that the keys themselves are not to be replaced on the site.
I have made a comment in the talk page regarding this, and I will try not to be redundant in the following email, but I wish to present my argument for their restoration.
Holding aside mention of the creative potential of the community with these keys in their possesion, I would like to discuss the lack of legal basis for TI's claims. Under section 201.1.b and 201.1.d of United States Copyright law, under which these keys are supposedly protected, materials that are "consisting eniterly of information that is common property containing no original authorship," including numbers, cannot be copyrighted. In addition, "ideas, plans, methods, systems, or devices, as distinguished from the particular manner in which they are expressed or described in a writing," is stated in the same legislature. The nature of the signing keys is that they are part of a method of encryption. As expressed above, this cannot be copyrighted. TI's claims are based on copyright law, and seeing as they hold no rights over the signing keys, are baseless.
It has also begun to appear that TI has decided to stop their distribution through inaction. If TI does not make a case with those that distrubuted that, they do not hold a chance of losing. However, if they do not, websites like Wikipedia are less likely to post the keys. However, due to the obvious lack of a legal basis, it appears very much that the self-proclaimed "neutral" Wikipedia is taking a side. The side that Wikipedia is taking is one that has no legal base. However, by allowing the keys to be published, you take a neutral stance by publishing non-copyrighted material to the general public.
Wikimedia's mission statement claims to "develop educational content," and the signing keys provide the only method of creating a OS for these calculators that are easily accessible to the user. Also, there is no legal basis whatsoever in Texas Instruments claims that would prevent this goal. I hope we can both agree that, for the betterment of technology and for the improvement of Wikipedia, these numbers be replaced.
I hope to see your reply soon.
--
======================
Drew DeVault
======================
-
Intriguing proposition, sir.
Well stated.
I got your back on this one. :)
EDIT: Make sure you pester that dude for the keys to be re-upped.
Your letter holds more logic than their baseless claims.
-
this seems pretty good SirCmpwn. I also hope you can get help from other people who are also experienced in such american legal matters. (I unfortunately am not, as I live outside the States)
-
If you agree, would you support me on the Wikipedia talk page? Posts that they don't see on Omnimaga do not add credibility to my argument ;)
-
Well, you would need to tell me a quick sumary on how to add stuff to the discussion, since I'm wiki-illiterate, and also do I need to login/register for that?
-
Well, its quite easy. Login or register if you have yet to do so. Then, navigate to the article. Click on "Discuss" near the top.
You can click "Edit" from that page, and then you can simply type your approval underneath my argument. Type five tildes ("~~~~~") to sign your post.
-
ok, I will try to figure out what to say. Since I know nothing about laws and did not follow the key factoring stuff as much since I didn't understand much, if I post something and it makes no sense or is not founded on facts, I am afraid of trash talk or getting booted off the convo
-
Unless you have a well-reasoned argument you wish to post, it can be as simple as "I agree with SirCmpwn on this issue." I just need some credibility to this argument if it is going to get anywhere.
-
Really? I guess then I will just do so, for now.
-
First off, I would have to politely disagree with this argument. I am however not saying you are wrong in your argument. I just think arguing with Wikipedia about reposting these keys is a little pointless because from my view it just sounds like they don't want them posted because, one, of the trouble they caused with TI and such and, two, they just don't want it leading to something that could potentially become illegal or something. Again, I'm not saying the argument is wrong or that your points are wrong, I just think it would be a better idea to obtain the keys from someone who does have them such as, I saw that the name Brandon was thrown around so this is an assumption, BrandonW (I have no idea if he has them or if he was the Brandon refered to, just a guess since I know he's pretty well known in the TI programming community) and then get them up on TIBD because it is a place that will deffinitely support your efforts (I'm sure) and it is a place that is devoted to help teach people about the calculator, programming, and all that stuff. Again, I'm trying to stress this, I'm not trying to upset anyone with this, make anyone mad, offend anyone's oppinion, or anything like that. I am simply voicing a different oppinion and a different view.
P.S. In case you didn't know what I mean by the Wikipedia not letting them on by their own choice I kind of think of it like DJ here saying "I don't want the keys posted here on Omnimaga." or Goose over at UTI saying that (I believe he is the one in charge over there, correct? ???). Just how I think of that.
P.P.S. I am very sorry if I do upset anyone by this, that is not my intentions at all. I'm just trying to voice a different view, as I stated. Sorry.
-
Oh, the reason why I didn't want the keys on Omnimaga is because TI may send the DMCA notice to 1and1 web hosting provider instead of myself, and who knows what 1and1 will do with Omnimaga website? Technically, I could post the keys in the download section, fight the DMCA with the help of the EFF like other people did so far, wait for TI countering that would never happen, then by EFF standards, I could reput the keys back online and be within my rights. But the issue is that if TI sent the notice to 1and1, 1and1 might misinterpret it as a violation of their TOS, then delete the entire Omnimaga website, while if I received the DMCA notice myself, I would simply have to take down the keys, fight, then I win. I just dont want to go through the process of having to fight against both 1and1 and TI instead of just TI.
Also, Meishe91, BrandonW was within his rights for posting the keys. He did not violate any copyright laws. TI DMCA wasn't even appropriate to begin with. Hence why everyone who hosted the keys won and could put them back up. TI received a warning to stop sending notices. However, they still continued sending notices to new people who post the keys online, just not those who alerady won. Basically TI could send a notice to Wikipedia, Wikipedia could fight it the way BrandonW and other #tcpa users did then Epic Win.
In other words, putting the keys on Wikipedia or anywhere else is legal. Re-using TI source code in your own software (like an OS) is not, though.
-
Oh, ya, I know. That is what I was saying wasn't wrong. I was just saying the Wikipedia thing sounded like what you just described with why Omnimaga, they just might not want more trouble than they need. About BrandonW, I just said that because I wasn't sure if it was even him. But I know he was. I wasn't saying anything was wrong with any of it, just saying that Wikipedia might just have their own reasons for not posting the keys is all :)
-
They may not be well aware of everything the TI community did to fight. Maybe they are afraid we might also still get in trouble for posting the keys and won't take a chance. They most likely just need to get updated or be knocked some sense into their head about how what TI did is wrong.
-
They may not be well aware of everything the TI community did to fight. Maybe they are afraid we might also still get in trouble for posting the keys and won't take a chance. They most likely just need to get updated or be knocked some sense into their head about how what TI did is wrong.
I'm doing my best talking to their lawyers to tell them exactly how much work we did, how utterly outside the law TI is operating, and trying to "knock some sense" into them as well. It is very frustrating, though, as it appears to not be working. I'm trying to get an appeal with the Wikipedia Board of Trustees.
-
Wikipedia adopts a strict stance against censorship. Unless this is a violation of licensing, (probably the case) then I can't imagine why the keys would be removed.
I'm not privy to all the details, but I'm guessing employees of Texas Instruments are probably monitoring these articles and attempting to pose as normal Wikipedians. This is something that occurs very frequently with a number of companies, political parties, religious organizations, and so forth. None of them want to be defamed or have certain secrets / materials leaked through Wikipedia.
The best way to go about this is to submit the keys to WikiLeaks, which is a Wiki designated solely for anonymous publishing of leaked information. You can then link to the WikiLeaks page which contains the keys in relative Wikipedia articles. :)
-
I would like to direct your attention to the talk page. All of these have been discussed. TI hit Wikipedia with a DCMA letter, too, and they got scared. It is being moderated by respected users that I am sure have nothing to do with TI :(
-
Are the keys currently hosted on WikiLeaks?
-
If I recall correctly, they were, last time I checked. I don't know if they are still there, though. I know Wikileaks got a DMCA notice, then after fighting it, TI didn't respond, and Wikileaks could put the keys back up. It was posted on Reddit or something like that too, but idk if they're still there.
-
They are still on Brandon Wilson's blog if you need them.
-
Update:
I have been emailing back and forth with the Wikimedia lawyer who has authority over the article, and he claims to not have the authority the article attributes to him. I have asked him to direct me to the person who has that authority.
-
X.x weird, I hope the other person will not say the same thing... stupid bureaucracy sometimes...
-
Wikipedia is a valuable information resource, but its editors and administration are all human. People are fallible, and so is Wikipedia. It's a good idea not to take any of the edit-wars seriously. If other people want to waste their time bickering over POV and semantics, then let them. There are more important things to live for.
As long as the keys are up on WikiLeaks, (or other servers) I think that should suffice. They really can't do anything about the content hosted there. WikiLeaks has been pressured by much larger figures, and none of them have been successful in censoring them; although, some have succeeded in illegally DDoS'ing the site and causing downtime. :P
-
Wikipedia is a valuable information resource, but its editors and administration are all human. People are fallible, and so is Wikipedia. It's a good idea not to take any of the edit-wars seriously. If other people want to waste their time bickering over POV and semantics, then let them. There are more important things to live for.
As long as the keys are up on WikiLeaks, (or other servers) I think that should suffice. They really can't do anything about the content hosted there. WikiLeaks has been pressured by much larger figures, and none of them have been successful in censoring them; although, some have succeeded in illegally DDoS'ing the site and causing downtime. :P
I agree. As long as they are up somewhere what is the big deal, ya know?
-
Agreed.