"Fossies" - the Fresh Open Source Software Archive

Member "libgcgi.a-0.9.5/examples/file-upload-example-unix.txt" (22 Jun 2002, 13576 Bytes) of package /linux/www/old/gcgi-0.9.5.tar.gz:


As a special service "Fossies" has tried to format the requested text file into HTML format (style: standard) with prefixed line numbers. Alternatively you can here view or download the uninterpreted source code file.

    1 -----------------------------18042893838469308861681692777
    2 Content-Disposition: form-data; name="uploaded_file"; filename="list.txt"
    3 Content-Type: text/plain
    4 
    5 University of Washington, Seattle    <http://www.cs.washington.edu>
    6         Application Fee:  $45
    7         Deadline:         December 31, 2001 
    8 	Average for admitted students:
    9         GPA:              3.70
   10         GRE Verbel:       629
   11         GRE Analytical:   759
   12         GRE Quantitative: 778
   13         GRE Subject:      785
   14 	Transcripts:      1
   15 
   16 University of Maryland, College Park <http://www.cs.umd.edu>
   17         Application Fee:  $50
   18         Deadline:         January 15, 2002 
   19 	Transcripts:      2
   20         Average for admitted students:
   21         GPA:              3.50
   22         GRE:              1950
   23 
   24 Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh          <http://www.cs.cmu.edu>
   25 	Application Fee:  $65
   26 	Deadline:         January 5, 2002
   27 	Transcripts:      1
   28 
   29 University of Oregon, Eugene         <http://www.cs.uoregon.edu>
   30 	Application Fee:  $50
   31 	Deadline:         February 1, 2002
   32 	GRE Verbel:       50%
   33         GRE Analytical:   65%
   34         GRE Quantitative: 65%
   35 	Transcripts:      1 
   36 
   37 Johns Hopkins University             <http://cs.jhu.edu/>
   38 	Application Fee:  $0
   39 	Deadline:         January 15, 2002
   40 	Transcripts:	  1
   41 
   42 Cornell University                   <http://www.cs.cornell.edu/>
   43 	Application Fee:  $65
   44 	Deadline:         January 1, 2002
   45 	Transcripts:      1
   46 
   47 University of California, Berkeley   <http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/>
   48 	Application Fee:  $40
   49 	GPA:              3.00
   50 	Deadline:         December 15, 2001
   51 	Transcripts:      1
   52 
   53 University of Wisconsin, Madison     <http://www.cs.wisc.edu>
   54 	Application Fee:  $45
   55 	GPA:              3.00 (3.75 in CS courses)
   56 	GRE Verbel:       600
   57 	GRE Analytical:   600
   58 	GRE Quantitative: 700
   59 	GRE Subject:      700
   60 	Deadline:         December 31, 2001 (December 1, 2001 for fellowships)
   61 	Transcripts:      1 (+1 copy)
   62 
   63 Michigan State University           <http://web.cse.msu.edu/>
   64 	Application Fee:  $30
   65 	Deadline:         December 28, 2001 (December 1, 2001 for fellowships)
   66 	Transcripts:      2
   67 	GPA:              3.2
   68 	GRE:              2000 
   69 
   70 New York University                 <http://cs.nyu.edu/csweb/Academic/Graduate/>
   71  	Application Fee:  $60
   72 	GRE Analytical:   ~700
   73 	GRE Quantitative: ~700
   74 	Deadline:         January 4, 2002 
   75 	Transcripts:      2
   76 
   77 University of California, San Diego <http://www-cse.ucsd.edu/>
   78 	Application Fee:   $42
   79 	Preapplication Id: 3559
   80 	Deadline:          January 7, 2002
   81 	Transcripts:       1
   82 
   83 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
   84 	Application Fee:   $60
   85 	Deadline:	   January 1, 2002
   86 	Transcripts:       1
   87 
   88 
   89 -----------------------------18042893838469308861681692777
   90 Content-Disposition: form-data; name="uploaded_file2"; filename="fairuse-part3.txt"
   91 Content-Type: text/plain
   92 
   93 Fair Use in a Digital Age (Snve Hfr va n Qvtvgny Ntr)
   94 The Full Weight of the DMCA
   95 
   96 By Julian Catchen <topeka@catchen.org>
   97 Third part in a series.
   98 
   99 In 1998, Congress passed a law known as the Digital Millennium Copyright 
  100 Act (DMCA).  The act fundamentally altered the landscape of copyright law, 
  101 making it a crime to "circumvent a technological measure that effectively 
  102 controls access to a work" or to distribute any such circumvention 
  103 device.  At the end of 1999, a small hacker magazine, known as 2600 was 
  104 sued for providing access to software that allowed the content of DVDs to 
  105 be viewed.  2600 was the first of what would become many cases of people 
  106 being prosecuted, sued and threatened under the purview of the DMCA.
  107 
  108 In July of 2001 Dmitry Sklyarov gave a talk at the DEF CON computer hacker 
  109 conference in Las Vegas, Nevada.  His lecture focused on a relatively new 
  110 publishing format, the electronic book  (eBook), and security 
  111 considerations of using it. Sklyarov was a Russian graduate student who 
  112 studied cryptography and also worked for a Russian company, Elcomsoft.  
  113 Elcomsoft published software that recovered passwords, allowing companies 
  114 to recover the data contained in password-protected documents where the 
  115 password had been lost.  His lecture discussed the weaknesses inherent in 
  116 eBook software, and showed how easily protection schemes for that software 
  117 could be broken.   On July 17, on his way back to Russia, Sklyarov was 
  118 arrested at the Las Vegas airport.
  119 
  120 eBook files are basically modified versions of portable document files 
  121 (PDFs) with attributes added to control how many times the file could be 
  122 read, copied, printed or used.  The idea of the format was to give 
  123 publishers great control of how their copyrighted works could be used.  
  124 The publisher could produce everything from free texts to "pay-per-view" 
  125 books -- the software would enforce the license of the book.  The only 
  126 problem was the manufacturers had over-sold the capabilities of their 
  127 eBook software to actually protect the texts stored within them.  Some of 
  128 the manufacturers had created protection schemes so flimsy, that the 
  129 encryption meant to protect the text from unauthorized use was a step 
  130 above pig-Latin.  Sklyarov's lecture at DEF CON discussed how to break 
  131 several of these weak schemes and demonstrated a product that Elcomsoft 
  132 had built for this exact purpose. 
  133 
  134 Adobe Corporation, which is best known for its Photoshop and Acrobat 
  135 Reader products, had been investing heavily in eBook technology.  Since 
  136 they invented the original PDF standard they had high hopes for the sale 
  137 of eBooks and produced one of the most popular programs for reading 
  138 eBooks, the Acrobat eBook Reader.  Sometime earlier, Adobe had heard of 
  139 Elcomsoft's efforts at breaking the protection of eBooks and knew that 
  140 they were selling a product that could disable the protections eBooks were 
  141 supposed to provide to book publishers.  As the criminal complaint against 
  142 Sklyarov showed, Adobe approached the FBI and told them about the 
  143 Elcomsoft software and that Sklyarov, the Russian graduate student and 
  144 employee of Elcomsoft, would be giving a lecture in Las Vegas in ten 
  145 days.  Soon after, Sklyarov was taken into custody and charged with 
  146 violating the DMCA. If proven guilty, Sklyarov faced a possibility of 
  147 twenty-five years in prison.  
  148 
  149 The DMCA makes it illegal to circumvent a technological measure whose 
  150 purpose is to protect a copyrighted work.  But, in an interesting feat of 
  151 circular logic, the DMCA is only supposed to make it a crime to circumvent 
  152 "effective" technological measures.  Of course, if a measure was broken it 
  153 would seem that it was not very effective.  However, this fact has not 
  154 deterred prosecution.  The DMCA also makes it illegal to traffic in such 
  155 software.  It is important to note, however, that the DMCA is an American 
  156 law and Elcomsoft is a Russian company.  There is no DMCA in Russia and it 
  157 is not illegal to produce software that can break copy controls there.
  158 
  159 Many people were outraged by this action of the U.S. Government.  Protests 
  160 broke out in July in more than 25 different cities and a boycott was 
  161 launched against Adobe for its role in the affair.  The founder of the 
  162 Free Software Foundation, Richard Stallman stated, "this is an ironic 
  163 reversal of roles for the US and Russia. During the cold war, Russia was 
  164 noted for its harsh efforts to stamp out the unauthorized copying and 
  165 redistribution of information (samizdat). Today Russia has dropped this, 
  166 and the United States is picking up where Russia left off. "
  167 
  168 Under extreme pressure from computer hackers, free speech activists and IT 
  169 professionals, Adobe withdrew its support from the complaint later in 
  170 July.  The Government, however, refused to halt its prosecution.  
  171 Eventually, a plea agreement was worked out and Sklyarov was allowed to 
  172 return to Russia in exchange for testifying against his company.  While in 
  173 the U.S., Sklyarov spent a total of twenty-one days in jail, and five 
  174 months of forced home-detention in Northern California.  The case against 
  175 Elcomsoft is still pending.
  176 
  177 In September of 2000, a consortium of music and technology companies, 
  178 known as the Secure Digital Music Initiative (SDMI), offered up a 
  179 challenge to the digital community.  "Hack SDMI" was a way to "show off 
  180 your skills, make some money, and help shape the future of the online 
  181 digital music economy."  The contest was simple:  SDMI had been working on 
  182 several "watermarking" technologies to prevent digital music from being 
  183 copied.  A watermark could theoretically be inserted into a digital music 
  184 file, and would be detectable by SDMI approved music players, but would 
  185 not change the quality of the music.  The idea was to create a watermark 
  186 that could not be removed without destroying the digital music itself.  If 
  187 you tried to play or copy a digital music file without the mark, the 
  188 hardware would refuse to cooperate.  So, show that the watermarks could be 
  189 removed, and SDMI would pay you and your cohorts $10,000.  Of course, as 
  190 part of the deal, any information you uncovered during the process, or any 
  191 code you wrote to help do it would become the property of SDMI and you 
  192 would have to sign a non-disclosure agreement.
  193 
  194 Many hackers refused to participate in the contest.  They saw it as the 
  195 music industry arrogantly trying to convince people to destroy their own 
  196 fair use rights to digital files for a little prize money.  Some 
  197 cryptographic researchers, however, thought that the contest was silly.  
  198 As cryptography expert Bruce Schneier stated, "watermarking does not work. 
  199 It is impossible to design a music watermarking technology that cannot be 
  200 removed," and hence they wanted to prove that the SDMI technologies could 
  201 never work.
  202 
  203 Soon after a group of researchers, led by Dr. Edward Felten of Princeton 
  204 University and including people from Rice University and Xerox's Palo Alto 
  205 research lab, announced that they had broken all six proposed 
  206 technologies.  Instead of collecting their prize, however, they gave up 
  207 the $10,000 and instead elected to publish their results at an upcoming 
  208 security conference.
  209 
  210 When the work of Felten's team became public, along with their intention 
  211 to publish the results, members of the SDMI, represented by the Recording 
  212 Industry Association of America (RIAA), sent a letter to Felten.  In it, 
  213 they warned him, "[u]nfortunately, the disclosure that you are 
  214 contemplating could result in significantly broader consequences and could 
  215 directly lead to the illegal distribution of copyrighted material. Such 
  216 disclosure ... would subject your research team to enforcement actions 
  217 under the DMCA and possibly other federal laws."  Felten temporarily 
  218 withdrew his research from publication.
  219 
  220 As with the Sklyarov case, the action of the SDMI companies created a huge 
  221 public backlash and several days later the RIAA claimed it never really 
  222 intended to sue Felten and his team and subsequently, they published their 
  223 research.  In order to preemptively protect their right to publish, Felten 
  224 and his team sued the RIAA and sought a declaratory judgment from the 
  225 court recognizing their right to publish research without violating the 
  226 DMCA.  In November 2001 the case was dismissed and in February 2002, 
  227 citing further assurances from the RIAA and  the government, Felten agreed 
  228 not to appeal the decision.
  229 
  230 These cases represent only the beginning of the use of the DMCA as a blunt 
  231 weapon.  In March of this year the Church of Scientology threatened to sue 
  232 the Google search engine if it did not remove links to a popular 
  233 anti-Scientology web site that was supposedly posting copyrighted church 
  234 documents (xenu.net).  Blizzard, Inc., makers of popular computer games, 
  235 which can be played over the Internet, threatened to sue the volunteers 
  236 who produced bnetd, an Internet-based program  that allows owners of 
  237 Blizzard games to play them over the Internet without using Blizzard's own 
  238 software.  Blizzard claimed that the makers of bnetd were violating the 
  239 DMCA by circumventing controls to Blizzard's proprietary software.  In 
  240 November 2001, the World Trade Organization threatened the Yes Men (a 
  241 group of prankster activists) with action under the DMCA, if the group did 
  242 not give up their ownership of the "gatt.org" domain name.  The WTO's 
  243 predecessor had been the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and 
  244 the Yes Men were using the gatt.org web site as a parody of the WTO.
  245 
  246 When the 2600 case first started, many people dismissed it because it only 
  247 affected a small hacker magazine with a niche readership.  However, time 
  248 has shown the effect of the full weight of the DMCA on American society.  
  249 It has impacted everyone from foreign citizens to university 
  250 researchers.  From video-game-playing teenagers to political dissidents.  
  251 According to the Department of Justice, the average prison sentence served 
  252 for rape is about five years.  Dimitry Sklyarov faced twenty-five years in 
  253 an American prison for working for an employer who had him writing a 
  254 program that was legal in his own country. A program that at the very 
  255 worst allowed publishers to know that their texts were insecure and at the 
  256 very best allowed a blind man to have his computer read an eBook to him 
  257 aloud despite the eBook's license that forbid auditory performances.   
  258 
  259 In the final part of this series, I will investigate possible alternatives 
  260 to the current course the DMCA has set for American society.  We will look 
  261 at realistic rights to fair use and the continuing threat to it that the 
  262 Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act presents.
  263 
  264 -----------------------------18042893838469308861681692777--