When they want to make changes to the way copyright work, it *does* concern the little man. You do understand the premise that copyrights were introduced under I hope?
Spot on. Unfortunately, a vast majority of/. readers are probably Americans. And they are blindly patriotic, to the point where the vast majority of them will NEVER admit any fault with their country. Sad, but true.
Oh and the AC says this. Get some balls and post under a user account you coward.
How you got rated +5 insightful I'll never know, it just reinforces my opinion that most/. readers are blind, dumb idiots.
It's not so much that it's law, but that the government is thinking of doing this stuff.
It's about time that a new political party was forged. One that looks after the people. Not what the US wants. Not what big business wants. Not one that makes idiotic decisions. Not one that spies on its people.
ONE THAT IS FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE
Neither the Labour party or the Liberal party will get my vote. And I encourage every other voter in the country to go with a donkey vote. It'll send a clear message to the politicians and political parties that their current political motives and methods are not welcome. Of course, given the apathetic, idiots that live in Australia, this will never happen.
Yes, the store is free to refuse to do business with you, but you are quite within your rights to pursue it and get it in writing from them too. And then to go to town as much as possible with how that store discriminates against people who don't play their bait & switch games.
Unlike many, I don't think businesses should have any rights at all. It's a well known fact amongst anyone who has half a brain that businesses will fuck a customer over at the first opportunity, especially if it means making more money. I'm all for 100% consumer rights, zero business rights, because in the end, it's never the consumer trying to fuck the business over, but the other way around.
I guarantee he'll end up missing, if he isn't already. The governments of today will NOT tolerate this. They will kill to keep their dirty secrets quiet.
Let's look at it this way. If this case goes against Blizzard, every large software vendor is going to be hurt by it. It'll never happen. There'll be sufficient pressure both from the government, and large business, to ensure that Blizzard wins.
Look, I agree with you, we buy the software, we friggen own it. This licence BS is just crap. EULAs should be made illegal on sight. Alas, the ordinary person doesn't "own" this world, and we have no say in how it's run. It's the rich and the powerful. Don't like this? Tough. Until 99% of the ordinary population realises that they're getting fucked over, and that there's one rule for them, and one rule for the rich and the powerful, and that governments and the judicial areas are all corrupt, nothing will ever happen. Even then, I see a growing number of ordinary people realise this, but sadly, they're so apathetic that they simply don't care. It doesn't bode well for our society, as I think that we'll end up with a Matrix style society, with only a few "freedom" fighters...
You guys think this is a win? Seriously? Crikey... all the government agencies will do is say they considered Linux, but it didn't suit their needs, cite a list of reasons, and still continue to use Windows. I think you'll find that more and more government departments will probably start switching to OS X. It's a far better o/s than Linux or Windows I'm afraid.
and so the bastards should be. Hell, I'm monitored @ my work, as are most other IT workers. Where's my rights? The law says my employer can do this, but the law says it's wrong to video the police doing corrupt and abusive actions? WTF?
It just shows how out of touch the legislative and jurisprudence systems are.
400 years is NOT enough data, not when looking at a star that might have a lifespan of nearly 10 billion years. All stars are variable to some degree, and 11 years is a very tiny period.
Dave
PS If the sun is cooling, (yeah right!), then the amount of radiated heat we receive will drop, and that means our core mean temperature will also drop. If that is the case, then why are our temperatures rising? Maybe there is something to global warming being man made;-)
Yes, but that still leaves them open for legal action for the period that they violated the licence. Worse, once informed, Apple should have complied and has failed. That won't bare well in a court of law.
Yes, you are correct. The person is in jail, with no rights, and the legislative branch and judicial branches are both corrupt, bowing to public wants. The problem here is that most of the public are idiots who know jack shit. Opinions are like assholes - every one has one. Public opinion is the largest asshole of all. Judge a person, sentence a person, then let them go at the *end* of the judged sentence. Don't just arbitrarily change things to suit your needs. These judges need to be shot. A real society has no need of judges that make warped decisions like this that are clearly supportive of abuses of power.
I know I'm an anarchist, and I can't wait for the day when society falls apart.
Well, you see. When your medical and welfare systems have been ignored for many years, so that the rich and powerful can continue to stay rich and powerful, and when you have a government that can afford an illegal multi trillion dollar in Iraq and Afghanistan, but ignore damning stats on both welfare and health systems, then you have to start to wonder if the government is really for the people. It seems that many Americans are such staunch nationalists that they refuse to acknowledge, let alone condone their governments inactions. Add to that the patriot act, dmca, acta and the Military Commissions Act 2006 (which strips the basic human right of habeas corpus) and the list goes on and on and on and on. Your government leaves a lot to be desired, and whilst I don't dislike the American people, like many area the world, I detest your government, and your capitalistic business greedy pigs. I see no reason why the American people, already rightly royal screwed as is, should be paying for the fuckups of the rich and the powerful. I say strip *every* one of the directors, owners etc of their entire personal wealths, to help prop their ailing companies back up. A government with a backbone would have done that.
Absolutely. We have a judicial system that is so out of touch with the real world, and the ordinary person, and bases legal decisions not on common sense, but law (anyone who's studied law, and who is honest will tell you that law is not based on commonsense, far, far, far from it). We have a political system that doesn't give a fuck about the ordinary person, but ONLY caters to the needs of the wealthy, powerful and business, usually at the expense of the ordinary person. Nothing will get done. And when a political party is started that sets out to right these wrongs, it'll be blacklisted as a terrorist organisation by the established parties. They won't dare let anyone ruin their little "party" (pun intended).
Yes, but the judge could have marked them as goods, forcing the government to change the definition. It's nothing more than a cop out on the judge's part. Politicians never do anything, other than line their fucking greedy pockets with more money and do more dirty deals with big business. The ordinary person just got screwed some more with this decision.,
Well, if we got on percentage coverage, 3/26 is rougly 11.5% or thereabouts. Apple don't have that market penetration level;-) so, you could argue that Apple has more coverage on/. than it deserves.
That said, Apple is starting to dominate both the mp3 and phone markets, so you could argue that the percentage level is fair.
*shrugs*
I do what you do, if I don't like the article, I don't read it.
There ya go AC - I've reported both/. and your post to the FBI. Hopefully they take down your post, and punish/. for allowing it in spite of the court order, and if they can get your IP address and track you down you gutless prick then even better. Oh, and I'm going to be complaining to the domain registrar and web host as well.
As we say in Australia, what you've done is "lower than a snakes belly".
How is this marked as funny? What is wrong with/. moderation? Are you guys morons? Insensitive idiots? The mods should be removing the URL below out of respect for the deceased, and her family. Come on mods, got any balls? Or are you so entrenched in your computers, that human stories mean nothing to you? Yeah, it's probably the latter. I wonder if I reported/. to the FBI, if they'd order a take down. Yeah. I just might do that. That's *my* right.
Yup, 100% correct. But, remember, moderation on/. has always been fucked. Once you get modded down, even once, none of your posts show, and it's impossible to get modded back up again. And if the posts don't show, then hey, why post at all? Even on/. geeks socially ostracise others and bully them, just cos they disagree. I've always found the terms "troll" and "flamebait" downright offensive, and actually, bordering on defamation of character. I wonder if I could sue/. for a crappy moderation system?
Read: we want to make more money, and Linux doesn't really let us do that. We'd rather sell the product to Windows and Macs and make money, than live up to the original ideals that we released the software under in the first place. Never used it, certainly wouldn't now.
Well, if it was up to me, a fair price WOULD be set by a government body. This would be priced on what is considered fair to the consumer, and also to the manufacturer. It would be the maximum price that said goods could be sold for. Of course, normal capitalistic bargaining would usually take place, driving prices down and allowing for competition.
At the moment, many businesses (I'll use Apple computers as an example) radically overcharge for products. You seen how much Apple is charging for RAM updates to their MacBook Pro line? Or hard drives? They can set whatever price they want, because it's a "free market". The result is they make more profits, and people get ripped off. Now, if a government body were to say to Apple (and others), "no, you can't charge that price, you can only charge a maximum of this price", the consumer wins. Now remember, competitors who are charging considerably less than Apple in this example, for the same product(s), are still making a profit. It's not like they're selling @ wholesale prices and not making anything. Apple is being ultra greedy. And people are stupid and gullible to pay Apple anyways. People need to be protected from their own stupidity sadly.
The whole issue is that shareholders, a very fucking dirty word imho, are greedy sons of bitches, that continously always want more returns. If a company isn't always increasing returns, that's a bad thing. This has several effects - reduced wages to employees, usually poorer working conditions (i.e wage vs contract or casual employment, i.e. no sick leave or annual leave and when the majority of staff are on contract/casual terms, you can drop wages and there's no way of arguging, since there's no wage earners and they can't argue extra pay for being casual/contract, etc). It also usually means poorer QA (read: consumer loses). It also means less employees, which means more work for less people, which results in more health (stress related) issues for those employees that are left. The ordinary people get screwed, the few select rich shareholders get richer. Does that sound morally right? Not in my eyes. And it never will. There is no argument that you can ever use that will make that sound right to me.
Plainly, it's GREED. And it's the reason why this world is very fucked up. It's not sustainable, but those in power, and the wealthy don't care. When things do go bang, they'll just get rid of those inconvenient poor people. It's not a matter of it, but when.
No, taxes the corporate businesses and the wealthy people too. Tax them both. They can afford it. You wonder why you have a shit educational, welfare and medical systems in the US? I can tell you why...but you won't like it.
Communism is a better idea, but it's not pure. Man is greedy, and that destroys the purity of the idea of communism.
Collusion is more frequent in industrids that you imagine, and governments, know of it, but will never do anything about it.
Let's consider the US DOJ case vs Microsoft. They were as guilty as hell, we all knew it. What eventually happened. Fuck sweet all. Why? To punish Microsoft would have permanently damaged the US economy. Can't have that now can we. Consumers 0 Microsoft 1 Government 1
Why bail out all those crooked banks? How much? 1.2 trillion dollars wasn't it. And who's paying for it - the ordinary person. Why should we bail these fucking greedy banks out, that fucked up? I (and many others) were always taught as a kid that if you made a mistake, you owned up to it and learnt from it. But these banks aren't. By paying them out, your encouraging them to be risque, as they know that they'll get bailed out later on.
It's just not morally right.
I really couldn't give a fuck what you think, you must be from the US I'd say, since communisism is such a bad word there. The current capitalistic system does NOT work. We have the rich getting richer, the poor getter poorer (and the middle class slowly disappearing), businesses getting wealthier, and governments lining their pockets. Let me REMIND you that governments are voted in by people. Not businesses, people. Businesses (and religions), should have absolutely NO say whatsoever. That was the original intent of the founding fathers too I might add. Of course, it's convenient for you to forget this.
DMCA? Because business wants it. Pro for business, fucks the consumer (ordinary voters). DRM is a direct child of DMCA. ACTA? Same thing. Patriot Act, same thing. Shall I go on?
Up until now, Amazon has offered cheaper books, along comes Apple, does some deals at higher prices (which greedy corporate businesses, love - more money!). Of course you can't have a cheaper competition in the market, hence Amazon is pressured to up its prices. That's not competition, it's bullyism and market price fixing (i.e. collusion). There's more than one book supplier, and hey guess what, they all want the same rrp for eBooks. How did they come to that magical figure, pray do tell.
Businesses must be tightly monitored, and tightly controlled. Every single one. All of the time. It's like letting your kids run wild without any supervision, would you do that?
Slashdot Mirror
When they want to make changes to the way copyright work, it *does* concern the little man. You do understand the premise that copyrights were introduced under I hope?
Dave
The US will do the same that Israel did several months ago...an illegal execution...
Dave
So, witnesses don't count?
Dave
Spot on. Unfortunately, a vast majority of /. readers are probably Americans. And they are blindly patriotic, to the point where the vast majority of them will NEVER admit any fault with their country. Sad, but true.
Dave
Oh and the AC says this. Get some balls and post under a user account you coward.
How you got rated +5 insightful I'll never know, it just reinforces my opinion that most /. readers are blind, dumb idiots.
It's not so much that it's law, but that the government is thinking of doing this stuff.
It's about time that a new political party was forged. One that looks after the people. Not what the US wants. Not what big business wants. Not one that makes idiotic decisions. Not one that spies on its people.
ONE THAT IS FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE
Neither the Labour party or the Liberal party will get my vote. And I encourage every other voter in the country to go with a donkey vote. It'll send a clear message to the politicians and political parties that their current political motives and methods are not welcome. Of course, given the apathetic, idiots that live in Australia, this will never happen.
Dave
Yes, the store is free to refuse to do business with you, but you are quite within your rights to pursue it and get it in writing from them too. And then to go to town as much as possible with how that store discriminates against people who don't play their bait & switch games.
Unlike many, I don't think businesses should have any rights at all. It's a well known fact amongst anyone who has half a brain that businesses will fuck a customer over at the first opportunity, especially if it means making more money. I'm all for 100% consumer rights, zero business rights, because in the end, it's never the consumer trying to fuck the business over, but the other way around.
Dave
I guarantee he'll end up missing, if he isn't already. The governments of today will NOT tolerate this. They will kill to keep their dirty secrets quiet.
Dave
Let's look at it this way. If this case goes against Blizzard, every large software vendor is going to be hurt by it. It'll never happen. There'll be sufficient pressure both from the government, and large business, to ensure that Blizzard wins.
Look, I agree with you, we buy the software, we friggen own it. This licence BS is just crap. EULAs should be made illegal on sight. Alas, the ordinary person doesn't "own" this world, and we have no say in how it's run. It's the rich and the powerful. Don't like this? Tough. Until 99% of the ordinary population realises that they're getting fucked over, and that there's one rule for them, and one rule for the rich and the powerful, and that governments and the judicial areas are all corrupt, nothing will ever happen. Even then, I see a growing number of ordinary people realise this, but sadly, they're so apathetic that they simply don't care. It doesn't bode well for our society, as I think that we'll end up with a Matrix style society, with only a few "freedom" fighters...
Dave
You guys think this is a win? Seriously? Crikey... all the government agencies will do is say they considered Linux, but it didn't suit their needs, cite a list of reasons, and still continue to use Windows. I think you'll find that more and more government departments will probably start switching to OS X. It's a far better o/s than Linux or Windows I'm afraid.
Dave
and so the bastards should be. Hell, I'm monitored @ my work, as are most other IT workers. Where's my rights? The law says my employer can do this, but the law says it's wrong to video the police doing corrupt and abusive actions? WTF?
It just shows how out of touch the legislative and jurisprudence systems are.
Dave
Now I'm howling mad!
Dave
400 years is NOT enough data, not when looking at a star that might have a lifespan of nearly 10 billion years. All stars are variable to some degree, and 11 years is a very tiny period.
Dave
PS If the sun is cooling, (yeah right!), then the amount of radiated heat we receive will drop, and that means our core mean temperature will also drop. If that is the case, then why are our temperatures rising? Maybe there is something to global warming being man made ;-)
Yes, but that still leaves them open for legal action for the period that they violated the licence. Worse, once informed, Apple should have complied and has failed. That won't bare well in a court of law.
Dave
Yes, you are correct. The person is in jail, with no rights, and the legislative branch and judicial branches are both corrupt, bowing to public wants. The problem here is that most of the public are idiots who know jack shit. Opinions are like assholes - every one has one. Public opinion is the largest asshole of all. Judge a person, sentence a person, then let them go at the *end* of the judged sentence. Don't just arbitrarily change things to suit your needs. These judges need to be shot. A real society has no need of judges that make warped decisions like this that are clearly supportive of abuses of power.
I know I'm an anarchist, and I can't wait for the day when society falls apart.
Dave
Well, you see. When your medical and welfare systems have been ignored for many years, so that the rich and powerful can continue to stay rich and powerful, and when you have a government that can afford an illegal multi trillion dollar in Iraq and Afghanistan, but ignore damning stats on both welfare and health systems, then you have to start to wonder if the government is really for the people. It seems that many Americans are such staunch nationalists that they refuse to acknowledge, let alone condone their governments inactions. Add to that the patriot act, dmca, acta and the Military Commissions Act 2006 (which strips the basic human right of habeas corpus) and the list goes on and on and on and on. Your government leaves a lot to be desired, and whilst I don't dislike the American people, like many area the world, I detest your government, and your capitalistic business greedy pigs. I see no reason why the American people, already rightly royal screwed as is, should be paying for the fuckups of the rich and the powerful. I say strip *every* one of the directors, owners etc of their entire personal wealths, to help prop their ailing companies back up. A government with a backbone would have done that.
Dave
Absolutely. We have a judicial system that is so out of touch with the real world, and the ordinary person, and bases legal decisions not on common sense, but law (anyone who's studied law, and who is honest will tell you that law is not based on commonsense, far, far, far from it). We have a political system that doesn't give a fuck about the ordinary person, but ONLY caters to the needs of the wealthy, powerful and business, usually at the expense of the ordinary person. Nothing will get done. And when a political party is started that sets out to right these wrongs, it'll be blacklisted as a terrorist organisation by the established parties. They won't dare let anyone ruin their little "party" (pun intended).
Dave
Yes, but the judge could have marked them as goods, forcing the government to change the definition. It's nothing more than a cop out on the judge's part. Politicians never do anything, other than line their fucking greedy pockets with more money and do more dirty deals with big business. The ordinary person just got screwed some more with this decision.,
Dave
Well, if we got on percentage coverage, 3/26 is rougly 11.5% or thereabouts. Apple don't have that market penetration level ;-) so, you could argue that Apple has more coverage on /. than it deserves.
That said, Apple is starting to dominate both the mp3 and phone markets, so you could argue that the percentage level is fair.
*shrugs*
I do what you do, if I don't like the article, I don't read it.
Dave
There ya go AC - I've reported both /. and your post to the FBI. Hopefully they take down your post, and punish /. for allowing it in spite of the court order, and if they can get your IP address and track you down you gutless prick then even better. Oh, and I'm going to be complaining to the domain registrar and web host as well.
As we say in Australia, what you've done is "lower than a snakes belly".
Have a nice day.
Dave
How is this marked as funny? What is wrong with /. moderation? Are you guys morons? Insensitive idiots? The mods should be removing the URL below out of respect for the deceased, and her family. Come on mods, got any balls? Or are you so entrenched in your computers, that human stories mean nothing to you? Yeah, it's probably the latter. I wonder if I reported /. to the FBI, if they'd order a take down. Yeah. I just might do that. That's *my* right.
Dave
Yup, 100% correct. But, remember, moderation on /. has always been fucked. Once you get modded down, even once, none of your posts show, and it's impossible to get modded back up again. And if the posts don't show, then hey, why post at all? Even on /. geeks socially ostracise others and bully them, just cos they disagree. I've always found the terms "troll" and "flamebait" downright offensive, and actually, bordering on defamation of character. I wonder if I could sue /. for a crappy moderation system?
Dave
Read: we want to make more money, and Linux doesn't really let us do that. We'd rather sell the product to Windows and Macs and make money, than live up to the original ideals that we released the software under in the first place. Never used it, certainly wouldn't now.
Dave
Well, if it was up to me, a fair price WOULD be set by a government body. This would be priced on what is considered fair to the consumer, and also to the manufacturer. It would be the maximum price that said goods could be sold for. Of course, normal capitalistic bargaining would usually take place, driving prices down and allowing for competition.
At the moment, many businesses (I'll use Apple computers as an example) radically overcharge for products. You seen how much Apple is charging for RAM updates to their MacBook Pro line? Or hard drives? They can set whatever price they want, because it's a "free market". The result is they make more profits, and people get ripped off. Now, if a government body were to say to Apple (and others), "no, you can't charge that price, you can only charge a maximum of this price", the consumer wins. Now remember, competitors who are charging considerably less than Apple in this example, for the same product(s), are still making a profit. It's not like they're selling @ wholesale prices and not making anything. Apple is being ultra greedy. And people are stupid and gullible to pay Apple anyways. People need to be protected from their own stupidity sadly.
The whole issue is that shareholders, a very fucking dirty word imho, are greedy sons of bitches, that continously always want more returns. If a company isn't always increasing returns, that's a bad thing. This has several effects - reduced wages to employees, usually poorer working conditions (i.e wage vs contract or casual employment, i.e. no sick leave or annual leave and when the majority of staff are on contract/casual terms, you can drop wages and there's no way of arguging, since there's no wage earners and they can't argue extra pay for being casual/contract, etc). It also usually means poorer QA (read: consumer loses). It also means less employees, which means more work for less people, which results in more health (stress related) issues for those employees that are left. The ordinary people get screwed, the few select rich shareholders get richer. Does that sound morally right? Not in my eyes. And it never will. There is no argument that you can ever use that will make that sound right to me.
Plainly, it's GREED. And it's the reason why this world is very fucked up. It's not sustainable, but those in power, and the wealthy don't care. When things do go bang, they'll just get rid of those inconvenient poor people. It's not a matter of it, but when.
Dave
No, taxes the corporate businesses and the wealthy people too. Tax them both. They can afford it. You wonder why you have a shit educational, welfare and medical systems in the US? I can tell you why...but you won't like it.
Dave
Communism is a better idea, but it's not pure. Man is greedy, and that destroys the purity of the idea of communism.
Collusion is more frequent in industrids that you imagine, and governments, know of it, but will never do anything about it.
Let's consider the US DOJ case vs Microsoft. They were as guilty as hell, we all knew it. What eventually happened. Fuck sweet all. Why? To punish Microsoft would have permanently damaged the US economy. Can't have that now can we. Consumers 0 Microsoft 1 Government 1
Why bail out all those crooked banks? How much? 1.2 trillion dollars wasn't it. And who's paying for it - the ordinary person. Why should we bail these fucking greedy banks out, that fucked up? I (and many others) were always taught as a kid that if you made a mistake, you owned up to it and learnt from it. But these banks aren't. By paying them out, your encouraging them to be risque, as they know that they'll get bailed out later on.
It's just not morally right.
I really couldn't give a fuck what you think, you must be from the US I'd say, since communisism is such a bad word there. The current capitalistic system does NOT work. We have the rich getting richer, the poor getter poorer (and the middle class slowly disappearing), businesses getting wealthier, and governments lining their pockets. Let me REMIND you that governments are voted in by people. Not businesses, people. Businesses (and religions), should have absolutely NO say whatsoever. That was the original intent of the founding fathers too I might add. Of course, it's convenient for you to forget this.
DMCA? Because business wants it. Pro for business, fucks the consumer (ordinary voters). DRM is a direct child of DMCA. ACTA? Same thing. Patriot Act, same thing. Shall I go on?
Up until now, Amazon has offered cheaper books, along comes Apple, does some deals at higher prices (which greedy corporate businesses, love - more money!). Of course you can't have a cheaper competition in the market, hence Amazon is pressured to up its prices. That's not competition, it's bullyism and market price fixing (i.e. collusion). There's more than one book supplier, and hey guess what, they all want the same rrp for eBooks. How did they come to that magical figure, pray do tell.
Businesses must be tightly monitored, and tightly controlled. Every single one. All of the time. It's like letting your kids run wild without any supervision, would you do that?
Dave