Linux Today Quick Takes

In this Quick Takes you will find: IBM, Lotus and Linux:
Redpieces, How you can integrate a scripting language with LaTeX?,
Redmond Linux, DeCSS: Jack Valenti’s deposition transcript released
and Do they read what they write (legislate)…?

• ---

• Chessy send in these
  links:

  IBM, Lotus and Linux: Redpieces [in .pdf format]
  Linux for
  S/390
  Linux Web
  Hosting with WebSphere, DB2 and Domino

  ---

• Glenn Mullikin writes:

  “How you can integrate a scripting language with LaTeX?
  See: http://machineofthemonth.com/articles/a9/index.html.”

  Note: Annoying popup ad windows will appear on this site

  ---

• Joseph Cheek sent
  us this announcement:
  “I’m starting a project called Redmond Linux that will be
  a new distribution developed in the backyard of Microsoft. The
  first edition, Redmond Linux Personal, will be catered to
  new computer users and will be as easy to use as possible.

  This project will be free software. We are looking for developers,
  testers, and technical writers; if you want to contribute, or just
  look to see what we are doing, please visit our web site at
  http://www.redmondlinux.org/.

  Thanks!”

  Joseph Cheek

  ---

• Sean writes:
  “DeCSS: Jack Valenti’s deposition transcript released
  http://www.2600.com/dvd/docs/2000/0606-valenti.txt

  Jack Valenti testifies that he doesn’t know who he’s suing, what
  they did, or even if what they did was illegal or not. He makes
  Bill look like Einstien.

  I find it intersting that Valenti says that under all
  circumstances, decrypting a dvd is illegal.. apparently this
  dinosaur doesn’t understand Fair Use.”

  ---

• Finally Pierre Fortin
  sent in this:
  “Do they read what they write (legislate)…?

  On the very days that Virginia and Maryland governors
  respectively signed UCITA into law, I wrote to each stating that I
  would not knowingly be making any future purchases from either
  state’s businesses.

  Just now, I received the following reply from Maryland… the
  argument is that they have made changes to …. so much for the
  notion of “Uniform” in [U]CITA.

  ================================

  From: BETTY ANDERSON

  Thank you for writing Governor Glendening regarding House Bill 19 –
  the Maryland Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act (UCITA).
  As you know, the Governor signed this bill on April 25, 2000.
  Knowing the importance of this issue to consumers as well as the
  academic community, I would like to explain the reasons for the
  Governor*s support of House Bill 19.

  Maryland*s UCITA is a uniform commercial law drafted by the
  National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. The
  bill provides substantive rules governing the formation,
  construction, and interpretation of computer information
  agreements. These agreements pertain to the creation, use or
  distribution of computer information and products, including
  computer software, computer data and databases, and Internet and
  online information. The bill also specifies express warranties and
  implied warranties contained in an agreement, rules for determining
  whether a breach has occurred, and remedies for breach.

  UCITA is intended to address concerns that expansion of the
  nation*s digital economy will be significantly impeded by extreme
  differences in laws in each state. Through the adoption of uniform
  laws, UCITA will provide greater legal certainty for the millions
  of transactions which are occurring daily under less than certain
  legal rules. As introduced, the Governor and many legislators
  shared Attorney General Joseph Curran*s concerns that Maryland
  consumers were not adequately protected under the model statue.
  After long hours of deliberation, the General Assembly added
  numerous consumer protection provisions including measures
  that:

  clarify that the Maryland Consumer Protection Act applies to
  computer information transactions governed by UCITA;

  • prohibit the use of electronic self-help in mass-market
    transactions;
  • ensure that implied warranties cannot be disclaimed in most
    consumer contracts;
  • provide that Maryland consumers are protected by Maryland law
    and have access to Maryland courts; and
  • clarify that requirements contained in laws other than UCITA
    that terms must be conspicuously disclosed or separately assented
    to also apply to contracts governed by UCITA.

  The Attorney General*s Office stated that the above provisions
  *address the substantial majority of the concerns ….raised about
  the impact of UCITA on Maryland consumers.* With regard to academic
  concerns over copyright preemption, the Legislature added a
  provision to House Bill 19 stating that a contract term governed by
  UCITA may not preempt in any way federal copyright law.

  The Governor and General Assembly believe that the many safeguards
  added to Maryland*s UCITA law will adequately address the concerns
  raised by consumers and the academic community. Additionally, the
  Legislature has created an oversight committee to closely monitor
  the implementation of UCITA to determine if additional provisions
  are needed. During floor debate on House Bill 19, members of the
  Legislature made clear their intentions to revisit UCITA to address
  any inadequacies in future sessions. Ultimately, the Governor was
  satisfied that the majority of concerns over UCITA were adequately
  addressed and decided it was in the best interest of the State to
  sign the measure into law.

  I hope this information is helpful in understanding why the
  Governor felt it was important to sign House Bill 19. He is
  optimistic that UCITA will promote the continued growth of
  Maryland*s new digital economy.

  Sincerely,
  Joseph C. Bryce
  Chief Legislative Officer