Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Copyright Office: Everyone Uses MSIE, Right?

Posted by timothy on Tue Aug 09, 2005 09:59 AM
from the typical-myopia dept.
United States Internet Explorer The Internet
richardtallent writes "Tim Bray caught that the United States Copyright Office's upcoming copyright pre-registration web application apparently only works with Internet Explorer, and they are seeking written comments from anyone who might have a problem being forced to use IE. Slashdotters, start your snail-mail."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Copyright Office: Everyone Uses MSIE, Right? 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Be Respectful! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kajoob (62237) on Tuesday August 09 2005, @10:02AM (#13278707)
    Can I just say that if you do write in, don't flame. Be intelligent, clear, concise, to the point, and most of all RESPECTFUL. This isn't a rant, this is a opportunity to voice a legitimate gripe. Since they're requesting our opinions, they'll likely listen - let's not blow it.

  • Lazyness or lack of resource? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by BlackCobra43 (596714) on Tuesday August 09 2005, @10:06AM (#13278738)
    I'm willing to bet it's a combination of these factors and not out of malice or of spite for Firefox and other browsers. No need to get /.'s collective panties in a bunch, I'm sure they're willing to fully cooperate with said users to develo pa solution that satisfies all parties.

  • The best answer I usually give.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Lally Singh (3427) on Tuesday August 09 2005, @10:09AM (#13278788) Journal
    I simply tell people that IE's been discontinued for the macintosh. Everyone recognizes the Mac as a different platform that other people use, and the fact that IE is no longer shipping on it is a good motivator. Simple, easy to understand for non-techs, and respectful.
    • Might also be useful to point out that the Unix version of IE is no longer available either.
        • Well I was thinking you can illustrate that not only is market share for IE going down because of things like Firefox, and people switching to other browsers, but the platforms that IE used to run are also no longer being supported. e.g. Solaris, HP-UX, Mac OS[0]. Not only that but whatever features they are considering that "require" IE will probably alienate a large section of Windows users as well.

          [0]Well, sorta. You can still get it, AND it comes pre-installed in OS X, but when was the last update
    • Another possibility is to mention that IE7 renders the page different than IE6 - and leave the question whether they want to "design for IE6", "design for IE7" or design according to standards.

      When people state that they are "designing for Internet Explorer", it is pretty easy to ask what version they are "designing for". When they get uneasy about the upcoming (and apparently unexpected) IE7 and the memories of (poor design with) several stylesheets, several conditional scripts, the DOM/standards argument
  • Anyone who actually cares about their web application reaching a larger audience will automatically make an effort to get firefox, netscape working regardless of what the law saids.

  • The address (RTFM iz hard) (Score:5, Informative)

    by Safety Cap (253500) on Tuesday August 09 2005, @10:11AM (#13278807) Homepage Journal
    for mail:
    Copyright GC/ I&R
    P.O. Box 70400
    Southwest Station
    Washington, DC 20024-0400

  • At least they're asking! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by freality (324306) on Tuesday August 09 2005, @10:24AM (#13278930) Homepage
    A few years ago they probably would have assumed IE and skipped the public comment process. Now there's too many creatives using macs.

    Now, asking for 5 copies of a comment letter is like saying "Unless you're a corporate lawyer representing a major publishing house, keep your comments to yourself. You serf."

    And no, they don't care about Linux users since it's the office of copyRIGHT, not copyLEFT.. that office is located at creativecommons.org.

  • Security (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Gadren (891416) on Tuesday August 09 2005, @10:26AM (#13278955)
    Perhaps it should be mentioned that it's odd that Homeland Security said that it's best to use an alternative to IE, and the same government is requiring IE.
    • That is a damn good point and one I completely forgot. I will have to remember to mention that the next time I clean 700 viruses and 250 pieces of spyware of my relative's computer (those numbers are NOT exaggerated).

      As much of a PC person as I am, my new stock suggestion to relatives is "if you can't build your own PC, but a Mac."
  • Remember kids, getting a copyright without Internet Explorer on a Microsoft operating system is the first step towards piracy. Look what happens when Amazon puts out a patent. Those are made on Apple computers. First thing after they are anounced they are proven to be weird. Don't take chances USE MICROSOFT!

  • Isn't this like. . . (Score:5, Funny)

    by Tachikoma (878191) on Tuesday August 09 2005, @10:33AM (#13279035)
    . . .only permitting people who drive stationwagons to enter the postoffice parking lot? What genius CIO thought it would be a good idea to limit people who can use this to one, albeit large, sect of people? If I said "hey boss, lets make a great web app, but lets only let MSIE people use it because I'm incapable of making it available to more than one browser and MSIE is the whore of internet browsers and lets anything in" he would laugh at me. Then fire me. And then laugh a lot more. And then have a heart attack, but that's just my CIO...

    "I'm sorry ma'am, you can only apply for a patent if you only have 1 leg."

    "But I have two legs, its much more effiecient and I'm much more stable!"

    "Two legs huh? That's nice but my give-a-shit is broken today, so you're going to have to handicap yourself like everyone else to use this. And you have to get in the back of the line."

      • And the worse is that they don't make station-wagons anymore

        Well, there's the Malibu Maxx [chevrolet.com], but they call that a "5-Door Extended Sedan", and I don't know whether it'd qualify as a station wagon or not.

        There's also the Dodge Magnum [dodge.com], but if by "they" you're referring to US companies, that doesn't really count. (If you're not referring to US companies, the same corporation that makes the Dodge Magnum also makes other wagons [mbusa.com]. Here's another wagon [citroen.com] from a non-US company, but those aren't sold in North America

  • At this point in the process of developing the Copyright Office's system for online preregistration, it is not entirely clear whether the system will be compatible with web browsers other than Microsoft Internet Explorer versions 5.1 and higher. Filers of preregistration applications will be able to employ these Internet Explorer browsers successfully. Support for Netscape 7.2, Firefox 1.0.3, and Mozilla 1.7.7 is planned but will not be available when preregistration goes into effect. Present users of these browsers may experience problems when filing claims.

    Sounds like they hired the developers under the common practice of the "lowest bidder"

    • And they'll probably rehire the developers to fix the code so that it can work with other browsers. Sounds like a new business plan to me:
      1. Code website to standards but add IE only hacks that break support for other browsers.
      2. ???
      3. Profit!
      4. Get rehired for twice the price and spend 5 minutes removing IE only hacks.
      5. ???
      6. Profit!
  • has anyone found a way to submit comments via he web? Having to submit comments in writing is silly, and inconsistent with what other US government agencies do.

  • IANAL

    Assuming the site only works for IE, that means, chances are that the site is in violation of federal law.

    I urge people to check all .gov and .mil sites in the US and urge them to comply with section 508. If they fail to do so, they may be vulnerable to a lawsuit in Federal Court.

  • Maybe the "United States Copyright Office's upcoming copyright pre-registration web application" was a pro bono work from "MS Business Solutions Development Group" with help from the "Win2003 Server Group"?

  • What this is (Score:3, Informative)

    by SwiftOne (11497) on Tuesday August 09 2005, @11:10AM (#13279371)
    The article doesn't make it very clear what this is talking about, but here's what I've pieced together from the various links:

    * "The ART Act amends section 408 of the Copyright Act to add a new subparagraph (f), which directs the Register of Copyrights to allow reregistration for any work that is in a class of works that the
    Register determines has had a history of infringement prior to authorized commercial distribution."

    In other words, if in danger of infringement, you can register your copyright in advance. (Remember that under U.S. (and many others) law, you HAVE copyright from the moment of creation, but REGISTERING lets the government know. I'm guessing from context that they normally only let you register upon publication.

    So this is enacting a law to let studios sue more easily when their movies get pirated on day 0.

    Later:

    * "Therefore, this notice seeks information whether any potential preregistration filers would have difficulties using Internet Explorer (version 5.1 or higher) to file preregistration claims, and if so, why. More generally, in the interest of achieving support for browsers in the Office's preregistration processing environment, this notice inquires whether (and why) an eligible party who anticipates preregistering a claim on the electronic-only form will not be able to use Internet Explorer to do so, or will choose not to preregister if it is necessary to use Internet Explorer."

    So: Unless you are someone who is going to file one of these, they don't care about your comments. Slashdotting the postal system isn't likely to get a response. (Of course, they COULD respond to the comments anyway, but they aren't asking for them)
  • This is bullshit! I can't believe a government website would be allowed to make a site only viewable to one brand of browser, and only one OS. Then again, the US Patent office is clearly lacking in the computer skills they need from the kind of shit they've let get copywritten. >:(
  • 1. Linux is free (as in beer).
    2. Windows is not free.
    3. The applicable statute and federal regulation establishes a right for any developer of a work in the covered class to preregister that work for copyright.
    4. Requiring the use of a web browser only available with a non-free operating system amounts to the requirement of an additional fee. This fee is not permitted by statute, because the Copyright Office is not given permission to cause fees to be collected by other agencies. Nor could any subsid

  • Unironic (warning: sarcasm) (Score:3, Funny)

    by bsdbigot (186157) on Tuesday August 09 2005, @11:46AM (#13279707) Journal
    The anti-copyright crowd and the anti-MSIE crowd are pretty much one in the same. A Venn diagram [venndiagram.com] of the two would probably look like a basketball in a red/green stereoscopic photo. Where's the problem? People that don't/won't use IE are likely never to transact any business with the Copyright Office, other than to deluge them with comments about how if they ever were to file for Copyright protection, they would have to *gasp* use a technology that is readily available? Unbelievable.

  • rtfa? (Score:5, Informative)

    by mullein (37149) on Tuesday August 09 2005, @11:58AM (#13279819)
    From the federal register link in the /. article:

    "Support for Netscape 7.2, Firefox 1.0.3, and Mozilla 1.7.7 is planned but will not be available when preregistration goes into effect. Present users of these browsers may experience problems when filing claims."

    It doesn't seem that they plan on restricting usage to IE users only, and in fact sounds more like they have the position, "it might work on firefox, but we haven't tested it."
  • It is so kind for them to ask. In other places I've seen IE-only solutions being done out of ignorance.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.