I have the right to sell something that I own. This is the very basis of capitalism. For instance, if I buy SSX for PS2 (a great game) but get bored of it, I have the right to sell it. This plan completely trashes those rights.
As if making $20/cd isn't enough, they make it such that I can't sell my used games any more. This is a dream for many companies -- look at the laws passed in Japan over the last 5 years. Selling used game software is a violation of federal law over there. I am getting sick of companies fretting about the last 5% they might be "losing" to piracy... and I am double-sick on the spectre of piracy being used to justify all means of restrictions.
It is getting harder and harder to be a fan of any digital medium. =(
"Profit motive" has nothing to do with it at all. If you have a valid copyright I can't exploit it for free or for pay. Otherwise, I could legally post The Matrix on a website and let people download it for free. Try saying "I wasn't trying to make any money" to the judge...
IANAL. But I have spent a good amount of time dealing with copyright both online and off. (If anyone remembers Intelligent Gamer Online circe 1994-1996, that was my baby...)
You cannot protect a fact as intellectual property or under copyright protection. This is why anyone in the nation can publish the scores of an NBA game -- the NBA does not "own" the statistics of the players. Anyone can write a film or game review -- it is not illegal for me to say what happens in your movie or game. For this reason, there is nothing illegal about reporting bugs, DMCA be damned. 1st Amendment wins, fatality.
Security Focus may not be able to copy-and-paste, but they can read a report in the Microsoft email and report on the report. Again, facts cannot be copyright protected.
I hate to admit it, but I never saw the original movie nor read the books. That said, I thought I spent two hours well last night. The effect of the blue eyes was extremely seamless. A special effect is good when you don't know it's a special effect -- after the first 5 minutes it was pretty much "just there," which is damn cool. The Worm looked incredible.
Did the first hour have too much exposition for anyone else? It really seemed to drag on quite a bit (though I guess I should expect that for a 4.5 hour miniseries!)
By my tape, there were just shy of 30 minutes of advertising. This is pretty remarkable, considering that most two-hour TV blocks contain over 36 minutes of ads (40 if you're watching certain cable channels!)
(For those of you who have not checked out Chron X, head to our site on The Station. It's an online collectible card game.)
Chron X is a game of skill, not of money. Some of our highest-rated players have not spent more than $10 on the game. Ever. Over 3 years of gameplay for $10 is pretty darn good, IMHO.
We put out expansions, and we put most of the "must haves" at a rarity or common or uncommon. This means that players usually have extras to trade. While most people need to spend between $25 and $50 to compete, spending more than that will not really give you a better deck. It will give you more options on the type of deck you want to build, and that's OK.
I work with Genetic Anomalies, the creators of the game. Sony is the online publisher for it... while my word is not gospel and shouldn't be taken as an "official company stance," you can take it as the stance of the designer of the game...
- Anthony Shubert Game Design Guru:: Genetic Anomalies
The US Government does not care at all about Kevin Mitnick. They are not out to get him, they are out to make an example and to set precedent. This case becomes worse every day... if this is not won (if Mitnick does not get access to his unencrypted files) then there will be legal precedent. Either you allow the Government to see your encrypted files, or you don't get them back.
Of course, this gets silly quickly - there could be off-shore datahubs that existed just to hold copies of people's private, encrypted data, such that if Big Brother ever came knocking, you knew that your data was out there for you to retrieve, even if you could not get the physical drive storing your data...
Then laws would get passed, continuing the "whack-a-mole," that would make this activity illegal. Then another method to keep your data and not let Big Brother have it would be made. And then that would become illegal. Repeat ad nauseum.
(My views, not my company's. I'm guessing you knew that.)
There will *always* be options...
on
AOL Nation
·
· Score: 1
Companies like AOL-Time/Warner will seek to dominate the Net just as other companies increasingly bulldoze over other parts of American business and cultural life...
Good article, but it's not going to be that bad. There will always be options for any given service. Examples:
Wal-Mart. I could go to another monolith, like Big K, or I could shop local, or I could *gasp* go online.
Blockbuster Video. Again, another monolith (West Coast Video/Hollywood Video), shop local or get it online.
Staples. OfficeMax, local, online.
Toys R Us. K-B Toys, local, online.
Starbucks. Who needs coffee when I have Pepsi? Besides, there is no "family" at a Starbucks like there is at a local cafe. =)
For the purpose of getting products, it is almost impossible for there to be a monopoly. The only "product monopoly" AOL/Time Warner will have is over the products they create themselves. Don't they deserve that? If you want CNN, you gotta get it from them.
Now when it comes to "service monopoly," or how people get online and what they have access to when they get there -- do you honestly believe that AT+T (with MediaOne, etc.) will lie down? That Bell Atlantic won't continue to push DSL down my throat up here in Boston? That local dial-up, in one form or another, won't continue to exist many years from now?
Slashdot Mirror
As if making $20/cd isn't enough, they make it such that I can't sell my used games any more. This is a dream for many companies -- look at the laws passed in Japan over the last 5 years. Selling used game software is a violation of federal law over there. I am getting sick of companies fretting about the last 5% they might be "losing" to piracy... and I am double-sick on the spectre of piracy being used to justify all means of restrictions.
It is getting harder and harder to be a fan of any digital medium. =(
You cannot protect a fact as intellectual property or under copyright protection. This is why anyone in the nation can publish the scores of an NBA game -- the NBA does not "own" the statistics of the players. Anyone can write a film or game review -- it is not illegal for me to say what happens in your movie or game. For this reason, there is nothing illegal about reporting bugs, DMCA be damned. 1st Amendment wins, fatality.
Security Focus may not be able to copy-and-paste, but they can read a report in the Microsoft email and report on the report. Again, facts cannot be copyright protected.
Did the first hour have too much exposition for anyone else? It really seemed to drag on quite a bit (though I guess I should expect that for a 4.5 hour miniseries!)
By my tape, there were just shy of 30 minutes of advertising. This is pretty remarkable, considering that most two-hour TV blocks contain over 36 minutes of ads (40 if you're watching certain cable channels!)
Chron X is a game of skill, not of money. Some of our highest-rated players have not spent more than $10 on the game. Ever. Over 3 years of gameplay for $10 is pretty darn good, IMHO.
We put out expansions, and we put most of the "must haves" at a rarity or common or uncommon. This means that players usually have extras to trade. While most people need to spend between $25 and $50 to compete, spending more than that will not really give you a better deck. It will give you more options on the type of deck you want to build, and that's OK.
I work with Genetic Anomalies, the creators of the game. Sony is the online publisher for it... while my word is not gospel and shouldn't be taken as an "official company stance," you can take it as the stance of the designer of the game...
- Anthony Shubert Game Design Guru:: Genetic Anomalies
Of course, this gets silly quickly - there could be off-shore datahubs that existed just to hold copies of people's private, encrypted data, such that if Big Brother ever came knocking, you knew that your data was out there for you to retrieve, even if you could not get the physical drive storing your data...
Then laws would get passed, continuing the "whack-a-mole," that would make this activity illegal. Then another method to keep your data and not let Big Brother have it would be made. And then that would become illegal. Repeat ad nauseum.
(My views, not my company's. I'm guessing you knew that.)
Good article, but it's not going to be that bad. There will always be options for any given service. Examples:
- Wal-Mart. I could go to another monolith, like Big K, or I could shop local, or I could *gasp* go online.
- Blockbuster Video. Again, another monolith (West Coast Video/Hollywood Video), shop local or get it online.
- Staples. OfficeMax, local, online.
- Toys R Us. K-B Toys, local, online.
- Starbucks. Who needs coffee when I have Pepsi? Besides, there is no "family" at a Starbucks like there is at a local cafe. =)
For the purpose of getting products, it is almost impossible for there to be a monopoly. The only "product monopoly" AOL/Time Warner will have is over the products they create themselves. Don't they deserve that? If you want CNN, you gotta get it from them.Now when it comes to "service monopoly," or how people get online and what they have access to when they get there -- do you honestly believe that AT+T (with MediaOne, etc.) will lie down? That Bell Atlantic won't continue to push DSL down my throat up here in Boston? That local dial-up, in one form or another, won't continue to exist many years from now?
WARNING: This might be a .sig