Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Grokster Case Aftermath: Busy times Ahead for EFF

Posted by Hemos on from the but-of-course dept.

Tractorjector writes "Mad Penguin has published part two of their MGM vs Grokster interview series (the first part was featured on Slashdot on 2005-06-27). This time the focus is on EFF Director Shari Steele. A very compelling (and somewhat concerning) interview."

4 of 194 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Typo? by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Informative

    Concerning:

    (1) that causes anxiety or uneasyness (this EFF article is concerning)

    (2) to engage the attention of (this EFF article is still concerning)

    (2) to be interesting (this EFF article keeps on being concerning)

    On the other hand:

    Disconcerting:

    (1) Upsetting, embarassing (this EFF article isn't disconcerting, apart to Microsoft perhaps)

    (2) Frustrating (this EFF article isn't disconcerting, even for Microsoft)

    So, no, no typo there...

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  2. Not the only effects of the judgement... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://management.silicon.com/government/0,3902467 7,39145066,00.htm
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/07/04/brit_sacke d_for_newsnight/
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/news/0,12597,1520 588,00.html

  3. Re:Typo? by xhorder · · Score: 4, Informative

    But here it is being used as an adjective, and concerning is not an adjective...

    After a quick google search:
    The Oxford English Dictionary has a limited amount of evidence for concerning as an adjective meaning 'causing concern; worrying; important; weighty'. Their first example is from 1649, and the most recent is from 1834; it's marked "archaic."

    reduce the phrase to "a very concerning interview", and is just sounds wrong... /end of pedatic discussion

  4. Re:The whole thing is very clear by argent · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wouldn't this also apply to Apple's "Rip. Mix. Burn." campaign?

    Copying music for your own personal use is explicitly legal. Apple is very clear that the goal is to give you control of your own playlist, not to aid piracy. Their packaging and advertising is full of statements like "iTunes is licensed for reproduction of non-copyrighted materials or materials the user is legally permitted to reproduce. The music tracks shown are for demonstration purposes only."