Partially true. The new system does require considerably more detail and accuracy, but that's only one of the issues that's come up. Another issue that's come up is that more detail = more data to process, and the system appears like it wasn't designed with that in mind: it's been severely overloaded all week. Add to that the non-existant training in the new system (my company was given what amounted to a 3-minute demonstration of the new interface we had to use before being required to use it exclusively), the bugs that are still being worked out (some of which have made data entry impossible for hours at a time), and a very poor effort at explaining the new procedures that Customs have implemented as a result of the change-over, and you get the current situation.
It's true that the main problem isn't the software (although the bugs don't help): it's the way the new system was implemented
"Every sentence" is an exaggeration. What the Scientology organisation has actually done is registered copyrights to individual works as well as making a separate copyright registration for compilations of those works. In effect, posting one body of text could count as at least two infringements.
I don't recall if Judge Whyte ever ruled on this when it came to his attention back in 1995 (the only time I've seen it come before the courts). In any case, it doesn't matter what a "reasonable" court thinks if they must base their decision on law which sucks donkey's balls.
They might trade MP3s with their friends, private sharing networks might become the norm, or perhaps private networks will have the ability to hook to other private networks such that your machine is never connecting to an unknown computer.
This sort of thing is already happening. A friend of a friend goes to LAN parties where music and movie files are routinely swapped between friends. Even if P2P sharing is stopped, that won't stop this "Sneakernet". in fact, this kind of informal arrangement could easily become the norm. Would copyright owners then start hiring people to try and infiltrate such groups? Or will they simply accept that technology has made the business model which they have been relying on no longer practical?
Slashdot Mirror
It's true that the main problem isn't the software (although the bugs don't help): it's the way the new system was implemented
"Every sentence" is an exaggeration. What the Scientology organisation has actually done is registered copyrights to individual works as well as making a separate copyright registration for compilations of those works. In effect, posting one body of text could count as at least two infringements.
I don't recall if Judge Whyte ever ruled on this when it came to his attention back in 1995 (the only time I've seen it come before the courts). In any case, it doesn't matter what a "reasonable" court thinks if they must base their decision on law which sucks donkey's balls.
This sort of thing is already happening. A friend of a friend goes to LAN parties where music and movie files are routinely swapped between friends. Even if P2P sharing is stopped, that won't stop this "Sneakernet". in fact, this kind of informal arrangement could easily become the norm. Would copyright owners then start hiring people to try and infiltrate such groups? Or will they simply accept that technology has made the business model which they have been relying on no longer practical?