Apache gives middle finger to Microsoft. Auto-disables Do-Not-Track

Server software company Apache has decided to take matters into their own hands in the ongoing battle involving Microsoft’s Do-Not-Track setting on Internet Explorer 10.

A new patch will be added to all Apache server software that ignores browser Do-Not-Track requests if the requesting browser is Internet Explorer. Since Apache is the most popular software on servers hosting websites, this has pretty serious implications.

If you haven’t been keeping up, Microsoft announced several months ago that Internet Explorer 10 will have the “Do-Not-Track” setting checked by default. In most browsers, ad companies place cookies that allow them to track your habits and clicks as you bounce around the Internet. This tracking is great for advertising because it allows companies to sell very targeted ad space at a premium. The tracking is bad for people because it’s creepy.

This is Roy. He loves
tracking software.

Roy Fielding, the scientist who created the patch, wrote this on the topic: 

The only reason DNT exists is to express a non-default option. That's all it does. It does not protect anyone's privacy unless the recipients believe it was set by a real human being, with a real preference for privacy over personalization. 

Microsoft deliberately violates the standard. They made a big deal about announcing that very fact. Microsoft are members of the Tracking Protection working group and are fully informed of these facts. They are fully capable of requesting a change to the standard, but have chosen not to do so. The decision to set DNT by default in IE10 has nothing to do with the user's privacy. Microsoft knows full well that the false signal will be ignored, and thus prevent their own users from having an effective option for DNT even if their users want one. You can figure out why they want that. If you have a problem with it, choose a better browser.[github.com]

So, Fielding argues that for the DNT request to be valid, it must be implemented by a human being, not turned on by default in a browser. Ok, fine, weird perspective, but whatever. But the problem with this patch is that even if a user would very consciously like to turn on DNT, if that user is on Internet Explorer, his request will be ignored.

We suggest stopping all tracking software with a VPN like SumRando.

European Court rules in favor of digital resale

Better mow your digital lawn – we’re having an online yard sale! Ok, not really. But we could if we wanted to.

The European Court of Justice ruled today that it is, in fact, legal to resell used software regardless of whether the software was originally distributed on a physical disk or downloaded over the internet. The ruling ended a legal battle involving software giant Oracle who claimed a resale of their software was the same as pirating content.

Software vendors have long argued that software is "licensed, not sold." This claim is in tension with the doctrine of copyright exhaustion (called the first sale doctrine in the United States), which holds that copyright law does not give rightsholders control over used copies of their work. And the principle has gotten even more murky as software is increasingly distributed directly over digital networks, meaning that there's no physical copy of the work to resell. 

Oracle distributes its software online. Once a customer has signed a licensing agreement, it has an unlimited right to download copies of its database software from Oracle's website, and to install as many copies of the software as specified in its licensing agreement. A company called UsedSoft acted as a broker for used Oracle licenses, allowing Oracle customers who no longer needs (sic) their licenses to resell them to another firm that could put them to better use. [Ars Technica]

The decision handed down by the Court made the case that an online sale is essentially the same process as a physical sale and therefore licenses should be transferable.

The Court did, however, place some restrictions on software resale, stating that it is not legal to split up multiseat licenses and emphasizing that a legitimate resale requires that the seller's copy of the software be rendered inoperable at the time of the sale.