Slashdot Mirror

Well, Anonymous Coward, we've already paid for it, let the professionals we've paid to do so build the damn thing.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060131/2021240.shtml

*ahem*

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060131/2021240.shtml (that's just the first link google gave me, there are many more)

Give me my fiber, I've already paid for it. They have my money, give me my services. I'm not asking for a handout, I want what I paid for. THEY however seem to regard my diligent payments as some sort of *gasp* hand-out.

Hypocritical foolishness of the highest order. Socialism for the rich, dog-eat-dog for those of us that don't deserve such luscious gigadollar treats.

Fiber has been subsidized. http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060131/2021240.shtml

In 2006 China was looking at standardising the phone charger market.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061219/092747.shtml

I am not sure if they were successful or not (but given the plethora of chargers still on the market i'm guessing not). Another note, it is possible to get L+R stereo from a mini USB port (the motorola razr has a dongle that does just that. It should be entirely possible to make a dongle that does video out.

I get so tired of companies pushing thier proprietory solutions when an already established would do the job just fine. (Sony and Apple, I'm looking at YOU!)

Now that I finally understand your issue, I regret that the letter from Melaleuca was actually correctly registered with the copyright office. However, I think that people need to keep fighting these notices. I'm guessing that you may be the d2 who the court said should be "outed" when he refused to make 43rd State Blues disclose the true identity of "Tom Paine." You may want to talk to someone at the Electric Frontier Foundation (www.eff.org) and/or the allied group, Chilling Effects (chillingeffects.org) about pursuing an appeal on the First Amendment and fair use issues that the trial judge apparently rejected. Somehow we have to get the Bill of Rights back.

Now that I finally understand your issue, I regret that the letter from Melaleuca was actually correctly registered with the copyright office. However, I think that people need to keep fighting these notices. I'm guessing that you may be the d2 who the court said should be "outed" when he refused to make 43rd State Blues disclose the true identity of "Tom Paine." You may want to talk to someone at the Electric Frontier Foundation (www.eff.org) and/or the allied group, Chilling Effects (chillingeffects.org) about pursuing an appeal on the First Amendment and fair use issues that the trial judge apparently rejected. Somehow we have to get the Bill of Rights back.

It might be worth pointing out that, while the iPhone may be searched, it's not just a random 'I think I'll look through that guy's pockets' type search (not ostensibly anyway), but only an incident to arrest (if I remember the term correctly, though I'm from the UK not the US...). So, how I understand it, if a person is arrested for anything from solicitation, drug dealing or having a faulty brake-light, items in their possession may be searched by the police.

I guess the easiest way, in principle, would be to avoid arrest in the first place. Of course as legislation increases that, in itself, becomes more problematic. Whether or not I agree with the rights of the police to randomly search property following an arrest, particularly for evidence unrelated to the original arrest (I don't) is moot; but I thought it'd be worth pointing out.

It's also been discussed on Techdirt recently.

...and the customers (CDs costs pennies to manufacture but cost much more, 30-year-old titles selling for more than new releases, etc.)...

Hey, how about that? Here's a link an article about it.

"The IP address simply can help you know who paid for the internet access, but not who was using what computer on a network. In fact, this even had some people suggesting that, if you want to win a lawsuit from the RIAA, you're best off opening up your WiFi network to neighbors. It seems like this strategy might actually be working. Earlier this month the inability to prove who actually did the file sharing caused the RIAA to drop a case in Oklahoma and now it looks like the same defense has worked in a California case as well. In both cases, though, as soon as the RIAA realized the person was using this defense, they dropped the case, rather than lose it and set a precedent showing they really don't have the unequivocal evidence they claim they do."

Well, whaddya know?

I don't even own any WiFi equipment for fear of someone using my connection to do something questionable...but now maybe I will buy one. Nothing like a get out of jail free card, y'know?

IMHO music was the most important one to fall (HD-DVD/Blueray etc are also important, but I think music leads the way), because it is music that is most overpriced (see http://www.james-scott.co.uk/2008/01/07/the-end-of-digital-rights-management-drm-for-music/ for more background) and the best suited for downloading given the relatively low quantity of data involved. It is therefore the most prone to suffering from illegal peer to peer sharing, but also the best suited to legal online distribution.

However, studios would not have let this happen without a couple of important factors acting in concert against them, namely:
1) Fear of the growing power of Apple in digital music
2) Competition with free downloading on illegal services (it seems that despite their earlier denials - http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20051202/0233234.shtml, it is possible to 'compete with free')

Whatever the reason, it is great that there is finally some headway here, however no-one should be complacent. Video is the next big thing, and while I have more sympathy with the dynamics of the industry (greater up-front costs/higher risk of lossmaking venture, lower prices), one must not forget that this is just one battle.

Someone should mod you up for "informative".

Anyways, I found the /. posting where I got the "decidedly legal" idea about space-shifting. From that posting, TFA makes that claim, and references the Rio case that is discussed in the wikipedia article you shared. But in the Napster case, it seems that the context of that ruling [against space-shifting] would not include ipods*. The MP3.com case seems to be in a similar context. Is it true that the law differentiates between various kinds of space-shifting? If so, then it looks like copying to an ipod is legit.

*or any other portable mp3 player

Techdirt has more: details. To add to the conversation, it also asserts a "networked gaming system" but again that's pure bollocks as Quake and Doom before it obviously provide prior art even for that!

(an edited rendition of my response to the Techdirt article on this same topic)

One citizen's relationship to another, and the rules by which that relationship (and its details) are made available to some subset of the world, must exist outside any specific social network, tool, or other Web site.

Social network sites should offer "individually calibrated privacy controls", which should encompass who should see what information, and not just within a single social network/tool/site. Compliant sites should, therefore, only block exports of information that are themselves blocked by the privacy controls and overall standards/rules for social graph data exchange, not a blanket "you can't export anything" or "you can't export email addresses" or "we own your data, so go suck eggs" or some such.

Both the Techdirt and eWeek articles have an inappropriate focus — exclusively on Facebook. PR notwithstanding, Facebook is not a social network — it is a tool that facilitates the publicizing of the real-world social network. Facebook is merely a window on the world — it is not the world. Or, to put it another way, Facebook is not a social graph -- it is a tool that helps people describe the real-world social graph. The fact that "portability" even has to be raised as an issue is a matter of greed among tool-makers like Facebook, who labor under the naive supposition that they somehow own everybody's relationships with everyone else. I liken it to firms who try to copyright facts.

We need standards, rules, and watchdogs for adherence to the rules for this information, so privacy is truly up to the individuals, not based on some set of meta-rules unique to some site (e.g., can't export email addresses). And, we need the tool-makers to follow the standards and rules, plus respect the watchdogs. IMHO, tool-makers that are venture-backed will need to be beaten soundly over the head repeatedly in order for them to make those agreements...which is why the Scoble incident is useful. Criticizing Facebook for cases like this is going to be necessary to force change.

While Sears is spying on you, it's also exposing your purchase records to anyone with your contact info. What penalty will Sears pay for violating its own privacy policy? Will it be on lay-away?

Yes, this was discussed in an earlier Slashdot story, " RIAA Argues That MP3s From CDs Are Unauthorized", and in a bunch of other places:

* Boing Boing p2pnet reddit Heise Online (German) Truemors BlogRunner/Digital Rights Hugh Casey IDG (Polish) Geek News Central CE Pro Gizmodo TechDirt Read/Write Web Thomas Hawk's Digital Connection TDPRI WhatReallyHappened.com Slyck Root.cz (Czech) Craigslist Forums Hard OCP Wired.com Uneasy Silence Overclock.net Wake World SpaceBattles.com Hydrogen Audio BrickFilms.com Hockey Zombie iLounge Zune Scene AllmanBrothersBand.com Golem (German) PC Magazin (German) Tweakers (Dutch) Mackauf (German) Wake Space Kino-eye.com Digital Copyright Canada Northwest Progressive Institute Louisville Music News Frant

There is new one IP = intellectual privileges, it only considers copyrights and patents, trademarks are excluded since they are not developed to be incentive for creators. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1023735 http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071023/133936.shtml http://www.intellectualprivilege.com/blog/

Go to chillingeffects.org
They watch this stuff. Here is a fun link for you though: DMCA Takedown For Professor Showing How Copyright Owners Exaggerate Their Rights

You forgot collusion, which the Kazaa owners have mysteriously settled http://www.sharmannetworks.com/content/view/full/321/

Other collusion investigations have quietly ended (surprised?) as well. http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/0,1000000097,39118776,00.htm

A nice summary of how the whole thing works: http://techdirt.com/articles/20060112/1223218.shtml

This kind of mea culpa is a way to deflect the obvious control of global media distribution. They are still going to overcharge you for a DVD, and screw most of the creative/production people with questionable accounting. Please don't start a "but actors are getting paid..." discussion. A FEW actors get paid ridiculous sums, media conglomerates get paid even more and no one is the wiser.

Whether /.'ers like it or not, there's no reason to celebrate.

Insightful? Please, RTFA.

Power in Northlake costs $0.05 per kWh.

Even Google's cheapest (by power cost) datacenter, their Columbia River facility on a hydro grid, costs roughly 25 cents per watt/year -- or about $.028 per kWh. Yes, slightly more than half the power cost of the Northlake facility.

However, if you think about it, there are benefits to diversified data center locations. They reduce the impact of regional disturbances such as storms (or, as you point out, power outages). They also distribute the demand for qualified labor, which keeps labor costs down.

Here's a link with some info about power costs affecting datacenter locations, with some other useful links included

Also please note that the cost of the land is one of the most minor costs of building a datacenter.

Wrong. Although the TelCo's use that lie to great effectiveness; worked on you.

Please don't go digging around and cutting open the tubes for money.

From the linked article:

With Radiohead's new business model getting so much attention, we're hearing a bunch of folks start to claim that this kind of business model only works for big, established bands. Funny thing is, when we point to smaller artists doing similar things, people say that such a model may work for no name artists, but couldn't possibly work for big pop stars...

In essence Sprint is just a reseller of at&ts' product. Let them come out with their own product to compete.

AT&T got all kinds of subsidies and grants of right-of-way to build their infrastructure. The theory was that this was in exchange for access.

Now the RIAA can use this case to turn up the heat in their threat letters.


Unfortunately, the villagers recognise the angry bull elephant in town is thrashing anybody in the path and are responding. Moves are well underway to nuter the elephant http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060503/0411203.shtml to shooting the elephant http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2005/10/oregon-riaa-victim-fights-back-sues.html to getting out of the way and getting out of sight. http://phoenixlabs.org/pg2/

Hell, I want to patent stuff in shipping containers now. I'm going to patent the Starbucks in a shipping container, a McDonald's (or generic fast food franchise) in a shipping container, a branch bank in a shipping container and a whorehouse in a shipping container. This is going to be the new thing in business model patents now that the courts have ruled that taking something obvious and computerizing it is not automatically patentable.

1. Put your activity in a shipping container.
2. Patent
3. ?
4. Profit*

*I was going to use the three phase business model but those unspeakable bastards Matt Stone and Trey Parker have patented it.

There are always a few of these.

I do recall someone telling me that no CPU would ever run at more than 2GHz, as it would then start emitting microwave radiation...

I remember watching a documentary about Depeche Mode many years ago. The thing that I remember most was that over $1 million was made just in merchandise at a concert. I don't remember how much was made in actual ticket sales but I figure it's roughly comparable (assuming a T-shirt cost about as much as a concert ticket back then).

I've also read several times that artists prefer live appearances to making CDs because they personally get more money that way. And if you ever read Techdirt, you'll see that giving away the music (an infinite good) makes the finite good (the concert ticket) much more valuable.

While Comcast's recent actions threaten to stifle innovation in this space, Netflix and Amazon Unbox will eventually win. Not to mention YouTube. What is interesting is that related industries such as video search engines and content producers like this will flourish.

I'd like to see some statistics on how many people upload videos vs. how many download/watch them.

I agree that they have a right to defend their copyright, but the punishment is not proportional with the "crime"

The have repeatedly asked students to quit school. Apparently the RIAA can't wait untill they get a job to pay them. The RIAA needs money so badly, that they think it's worth destroying kids hope of a real life.

They have also sued 12 year olds, and even dead grandmothers aren't safe...

Comcast hasn't dropped my broadband price a single time (they have raised it, however). That said, has anyone actually figured out exactly *how* to get the $10 DSL that was the FCC requirement of the BellSouth Merger?

With every day, I become more disgusted with the corporate greed stranglehold. Even more so, I amazed that consumers largely don't care.

Good point, but it's not even just international folks like you who are interested... Here in the US, people in Vermont and no doubt in other places, too, are having troubles getting iPhone service from AT&T. As annoyed as AT&T may be with Apple for not *protecting* their phones well enough, Apple has got to be annoyed with the limitations of AT&T, both foreign and domestic.

At:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070817/143014.s html

The only thing I worry about in terms of AI is humans just accepting whatever answer the computer gives them. I couldn't find a link to it but a year or so ago was a case where someone was sent a property tax bill for millions of dollars even though no one else in the neighborhood's tax was that high, and even though their property tax was only in the very low thousands for years before that. Did anyone bother to double check? No, the computer said it, thus it must be correct. People are continuously trusting computers despite common sense not to. I worry that someday people will be convinced of the absolute infallibility of computers and do what ever it tells them to. It looks like that day might have already passed.

I blame the intern!

Yes, it is. See this example of how costly sloppy grammar and punctuation can be.

http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9745926-7.html?pa rt=rss
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070424/064058.s html

{sigh} you really must be new here. There's no need to be snide over a typo, and other than your pointless grammar-Nazism, you offered nothing of substance in your reply.

Your inappropriateness aside, are you actually claiming that the Federal Government does not subsidize the conversion of corn into motor fuel? Huh. That's a remarkable degree of ignorance, given the nearly forty billion dollars that Congress has given in such subsidies in the past decade. Your taxpayer dollars at work. In any event, just so you won't think that I'm making this up, there are some who would disagree with you on this subject.

Well, the Air Force doesn't seem to be pulling up the DoD average, which is still an F on the 2006 Federal Computer Security Report Card. http://republicans.oversight.house.gov/Media/PDFs/ FY06FISMA.pdf

Overall, the report shows a slight (C-) improvement from 2005's dismal D+. But whatever "large US Governemt agencies" are doing, it doesn't seem to be enough. I know how joyous I was when my personal information escaped the Veterans Administration--along with that of about half a million others. http://techdirt.com/articles/20070214/064307.shtml

Nor has the Air Force been immune, though I haven't heard of a data loss there since the 2005 episode involving 33,000 officers. http://www.computerworld.com/securitytopics/securi ty/story/0,10801,104080,00.html?SKC=security-10408 0

Of course, for some serious good times, you have to read about the Department of Homeland Security having to report 800 security incidents (virus outbreaks, 'hacking' tools found on servers, breakins, etc.) over a two year period to Congress, as reported here on Slashdot. http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/20/125 9219

I don't get to hear enough from DoD people who are down in the trenches (no pun intended) on a daily basis. That rather sucks, as I'm a security guy. Would you care to share any thoughts on what might be wrong? Or, if you're in an area where things are going well, what are you doing differently from those departments/agencies where things seem to be a complete mess?

Yes there are several articles about this aspect, the Law of Unintended Consequences in all its glory. For example "Indiscreet Photos on Social Networking Sites Can Hurt Career, Warns Expert". Although that cuts both ways of course: "Jobseekers Doing Online Background Checks On Employers, Too".

Actually, you haven't lost your "gadget." My law firm PH&P (Patent, Hoard, and Profit), has successfully stopped you from infringing on our patent for "Use of misc. gadgetry." We'll be happy to restore your access to the gadget, once the licensing matter is brought up to date.

Remember our slogan, "Patents are about sharing, not FUD!"

nonetheless here's a few links on it: http://techdirt.com/articles/20070610/172049.shtml http://news.com.com/TorrentSpy+ordered+to+start+tr acking+visitors/2100-1030_3-6189866.html?part=rss& tag=2547-1_3-0-20&subj=news http://www.techfirm.com/logorder.pdf http://torrentspy.com/privacy.asp

I bet it was theodp

link to evidence.

It would be useful if you used a legitimate source to make your point, and not an "obvious parody" http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070606/105850.s html#comments By the way, the "obvious parody" isn't my claim, it's the claim made by the actual author who wrote that Whitacre skit during his rebuttal in the comments section of the Techdirt story. Of course the fact that I've seen numerous instances of this story being referenced in Slashdot, Digg, Crooks & Liars, and a few other sites as if it were legitimate suggests what is "obvious" to him must not be quite so obvious to most other people.

Here's the link: http://techdirt.com/articles/20070606/105850.shtml

The "Save The Internet" group, which is for "internet freedom" (that is, it wants net neutrality enshrined in law), has really taken things to a new low. Ed Whitacre, one of the biggest sources of hot air in this debate, stepped down this week at CEO of AT&T. Save The Internet decided to mark the occasion by making a video of what they imagine Whitacre's final pep talk to AT&T execs was like, with all sorts of inflammatory -- and made-up -- quotes. They then put the quotes in a blog post, as if they'd actually come from Whitacre. While they embed the video in the blog post, there's no indication that the quotes aren't actually real. If you watch the video, it's pretty obvious, but few people seem to be noticing.

Take a look at http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070606/105850.s html or *gasp* watch the video and notice that NONE of the quotes are in there.

IH speaks! "Can't stop what Napster started."
Ya, a copyright infringement website defends copyright infringement. Who'd've thought. also, this lesson has been learned before.

Besides, I AM an artist. If I were signed with a label/distribution company/other organ, I would make >10 per unit sold. I much prefer that people burn or download my album, then buy me a beer. I get more out of it that way.

Also, 15,010 angry nerds can't be wrong. http://consumerist.com/consumer/worst-company-in-a merica/riaa-wins-worst-company-in-america-2007-245 235.php
[/rebuttal] Okay, fair point, the RIAA are just doing their job. We'll disregard for the moment it's a job that doesn't need to be done. In this case, the only thing the RIAA are guilty of is boundless enthusiasm. Unfortunately, the low-income single mothers on the receiving end of the lawsuits don't see it that way.

Okay, I've lost the thread of my argument, so I'm just going to say what I originally intended to say.

Clearchannel.

Money talks. Independent labels can't afford to get music on the radio in America, because they don't have the resource to buy the airtime or lobby the execs. The internet is their only hope. The RIAA, as far as I can work out, is accidentally crushing independent artists while they're going after the roaches. So, sure. Blame the RIAA-haters for depriving artists who already have record labels, have a valid form of income. I'll keep blaming the RIAA for keeping the little guy down with its' clumsy antics.

We should resist terms like "stealing" when talking about music. The word has a lot of connotation from thousands of years of usage, but it has only been possible to record music for less than two centuries. (You can see RMS's article about intellectual property for more than just the sound-bite).

Another thought, from a recent blog entry I found on Digg:

The purpose of property is to better manage the allocation of scarce resources. Since the resource is limited and not everyone can have it, property rights and property law make complete sense for a civilized society, allowing those with rights to the property to buy, sell and exchange their property. This allows for resources to be efficiently allocated through commerce and the laws of supply and demand. It's a sensible system for the best allocation of scarce resources. However, when it comes to infinite resources, there's simply no need to worry about efficient allocation -- since anyone can have a copy.

A 2.5-pound notebook running Linux with WiFi and Bluetooth sounds sweet...but one report says it's a closed system, which means until somebody hacks past that limitation, it's a dead-end. For about $500, I'm expecting at least a mostly-open system (like Maemo with the Nokia N800).

The target market for this is the business traveller, not an uber geek like you.

A 2.5-pound notebook running Linux with WiFi and Bluetooth sounds sweet...but one report says it's a closed system, which means until somebody hacks past that limitation, it's a dead-end. For about $500, I'm expecting at least a mostly-open system (like Maemo with the Nokia N800).