And here's yet another example where traditional Copyright Industry territory is being invaded! That's right! The revolving door was between RIAA/MPAA (members) and the Government. And now those telco boys are butting in there too? It's a scandal and something should be done to restore the Old Way Of Things!
Heh, nobody can stand against the mighty #GOP... except #TJR The Justice Riders! (Where "a pro-Union posse of diverse multinationals" is particulary apt.)
Sony hired FireEye (where In-Q-Tel is a major investor) which since Dec 2013 owns Mandiant. The latter and it's operations features prominently in the HBGary emails from a couple of years ago. I wouldn't put it past any of them to carry out a false flag operation, at the expense of the Sony employees (compare to the "hit me, hit me hard" to lamely cover up letting a prisoner escape) to try and draw out the GOP.
GOP is also doing nobody a favour, if they did, by releasing a couple of pre-release movies. That makes Sony the legitimate victim. Releasing documents, on the other hand, that show dirty backstabbing, expose lies, and otherwise shed some light at the secretive goings-on of a major Copyright MAFIAA member makes Sony the perp.
Don't forget, the keyword of the 2010s is Victimship. The art of making yourself look like the victim. It's not really new, as burglars that were caught in the act and became good acquintances with the homeowner's baseball bat always did this.
Didn't you read? It's not a crime. Just because you personally don't like what they do doesn't mean that it's a crime.
Oh, cool. If it's not a crime, then we all can do what GCHQ does. Belgacom, here we come! Ur box3z r m1ne? How about Sony? Warner? As long as it's not a crime, that is.
She simply does not understand internet issues and thus promptly falls back on an industry-friendly position.
Perhaps she fully understands the Internet issues, but it's just more lucrative to side with the industry (who also understand Internet issues) than with the users (who for the vast majority do not understand Internet issues). Same with patent term extension on pharmaceuticals; it's always hidden on the 3rd or 5th page of the business section and in the "may" pay more (vs. generics) language bracket. Same with copyright term extensions: items that would become public domain do not, which DOES rob society. As long as the majority of society doesn't understand the issue, greedy politicians will always side with the money or power or fame.
That usually makes the guy who sold you it for $205,000 look a little stupid.
A little? Make that VERY stupid -- unless the seller(s) got something out of it personally, which would make it illegal. NEVER license exclusively unless you make sure you have leveraged the upside potential.
I wish/. would spend less time on these celebrity spectacles and more on the people who actually make a difference, who actually are on our side, whose interest goes beyond having a mansion and a private helicopter.
That's the whole point. Kim Dotcom is able to reach the masses that don't even know about slashdot. So just hanging around on slashdot going on about Michael Geist, Derek Khanna, the EFF, etc. is like going on about a rare stamp among stamp collectors. Nobody else knows/cares. So a widely-known name is what we need so badly. A popular, public figurehead that takes on the Copyright MAFIAA openly and that can't be "crushed like a bug" quite easily like Aaron Swartz was. Unfortunately that takes a lot of money, so you need even more "lots of" money so you can just don't care and easily spend it on top-notch lawyers.
So who is our big Anti-"IP Chapter in the TPP" guy/gal? Who's our big Let's-Bring-Copyright-terms-back-to-2-times-14 guy/gal? What Heroes of the Digital Age would auntie Ethel be able to name? You'd be surprised how many people know about Kim Dotcom, especially Down Under and among Kiwis.
I absolutely detest video on blogs/sites/etc. instead of text and where appropriate pictures. Text I can quickly skim through, get to the relevant part, etc.
Video you have to wait a few seconds for it to start, then most of the time have to apply the 30(?)-second-rule, if it's slow you can't fast-forward and you just hope you're luckly you find the relevant bit. Note: the 30 second rule is not the one about making an impression, it's about skipping the leader, the talking head that explains what you're about to see, etc.
The takedown was fake, but there's nothing we can do about that.
Oh, yes we can!
Until DMCA takedown requests are required to submit proof of ownership and have escalating penalties for false/fraudulent claims, this situation will only get worse.
Very simple and restores some balance. The "proof" is not proof of ownership, but proof the complainant work is actually infringing on the claimed work. This can just be something like a report from an automated analysis tool with a confidence percentage, but at least something needs to be submitted to substantiate the claim instead of just having to believe it on their big blue eyes. The second part is a penalty system and the submitted proof will also be used to determine the penalties in case of false/fraudulent and I'd even include frivolous claims (e.g. 20-second clip of baby dancing to music playing on tv in the background) to cover obvious Fair Use cases. An entity, having incurred 2 strikes already, caught complaining about an outdoors video featuring birds singing as infringing on their #1 rap artist's copyright would then have to pay a hefty fine as even the most casual of checks would determine the work is not infringing. As to what to do with the collected monies, aside from financing the whole system so the tax payer is off the hook, I'm sure there are plenty of cultural projects that need funding.
I just received an e-mail with the same subject, offering me to buy certain medications from Thailand that will enlarge my telomeres, so I can drink all the pop I want!
But foreigners themselves are loving this stuff, as they can use this against their own governments, often "sharing" (actually: just handing it over, but that paints too much a picture the actual situation) intercepted data with the NSA. Did you hear any arrest warrants being issued against UK citizens by Belgian authorities regarding the Belgacom hack by GCHQ? What DID the Belgian government/intelligence services know?
I say it's time to pull their pants down. You won't see any balls, but you will see how they soiled themselves, and where they wiped themselves with their citizens' rights to privacy.
One thing I found interesting right at the beginning was about whether information and knowledge should be free.
Later on they talk about a (presumably LCARS) Tricorder-like app disappearing from "the" app store, stongarmed by CBS without any criticism (and also genuinely wonder why there are no bluetooth sets shaped like Uhura's earpiece). So they seem "on board" with a strong "intellectual property" regime or at least put it in the "things fall down", "a hot stove hurts when you touch it", everyday-thruths-that-just-are-and-not-given-a-second-thought category.
Which brings us to the information that really should be free. Like JSTOR. Remember Aaron Schwartz? The biggest thing standing in the way of the dream of freely accessible knowledge is the crazy long copyright term. Now THAT is something to hold a discussion about! How many times on the various Star Trek shows does an "entire civilisation's collection of knowledge and culture" get uploaded to the Enterprise's computer, or the Earth's/Federation's science and cultural works uploaded by the Enterprise to an adversary that suddenly decides humanity is worthy after all?
Plus there are cases of outright bans on some kinds of solar setups (I cant find a cite right now but there have been cases where people have wanted to install solar panels and a battery bank or whatever and completly disconnect from grid power but have been prohibited from doing so by state and local laws)
What happens if you don't pay your power bill and they come and disconnect you themselves? If they come and see the solar and have been instructed by company brass to forgo the disconnection in those cases, let the poor (that DO get disconnected) and their advocates know... won't take long before that changes.
Oh, the MPAA, RIAA and BSA were screaming for it... the "trust" in "trusted computing" was that you as a "trusted computer" user could be trusted not to get around any kind of Digital Restrictions Management system... to be introduced once your head is already firmly stuck in the noose.
There's really not much to see here if you exclude the "Premium" titles. It's a bit how lefties want to make people use public transportation: not by improving public transportation (increasing quality of life), but by making the car less attractive (decreasing overall quality of life). Quickflix CAN be a one or two bucks per month more expensive... but have 90% of what Netflix US has, and add to that a bunch of quality Aussie content, and they'll blow Netflix out of the water. But no, let's take the easy way out again (a/k/a Sit On Fat Well-paid Ass) and attack the alternative.
That sounds like massively incompetent organisations who take artists' music, sell them for billions and billions, and then hand over a fraction of that to said artists. The exception of course being the "made men" in the industry (conform their equivalent in the real Mafia and Biker gangs) who can basically do what they want including setting up their own labels and do distribution deals.
But these kind of ideas also thrive there. Coincidence? I think not.
Slashdot Mirror
And here's yet another example where traditional Copyright Industry territory is being invaded! That's right! The revolving door was between RIAA/MPAA (members) and the Government. And now those telco boys are butting in there too? It's a scandal and something should be done to restore the Old Way Of Things!
Heh, nobody can stand against the mighty #GOP... except #TJR The Justice Riders! (Where "a pro-Union posse of diverse multinationals" is particulary apt.)
Sony hired FireEye (where In-Q-Tel is a major investor) which since Dec 2013 owns Mandiant. The latter and it's operations features prominently in the HBGary emails from a couple of years ago. I wouldn't put it past any of them to carry out a false flag operation, at the expense of the Sony employees (compare to the "hit me, hit me hard" to lamely cover up letting a prisoner escape) to try and draw out the GOP.
GOP is also doing nobody a favour, if they did, by releasing a couple of pre-release movies. That makes Sony the legitimate victim. Releasing documents, on the other hand, that show dirty backstabbing, expose lies, and otherwise shed some light at the secretive goings-on of a major Copyright MAFIAA member makes Sony the perp.
Don't forget, the keyword of the 2010s is Victimship. The art of making yourself look like the victim. It's not really new, as burglars that were caught in the act and became good acquintances with the homeowner's baseball bat always did this.
Frig, don't know where that url came from; can't leave the computer alone for a minute. http://www.spiegel.de/internat... is the correct one.
Didn't you read? It's not a crime. Just because you personally don't like what they do doesn't mean that it's a crime.
Oh, cool. If it's not a crime, then we all can do what GCHQ does. Belgacom, here we come! Ur box3z r m1ne? How about Sony? Warner? As long as it's not a crime, that is.
She simply does not understand internet issues and thus promptly falls back on an industry-friendly position.
Perhaps she fully understands the Internet issues, but it's just more lucrative to side with the industry (who also understand Internet issues) than with the users (who for the vast majority do not understand Internet issues). Same with patent term extension on pharmaceuticals; it's always hidden on the 3rd or 5th page of the business section and in the "may" pay more (vs. generics) language bracket. Same with copyright term extensions: items that would become public domain do not, which DOES rob society. As long as the majority of society doesn't understand the issue, greedy politicians will always side with the money or power or fame.
That usually makes the guy who sold you it for $205,000 look a little stupid.
A little? Make that VERY stupid -- unless the seller(s) got something out of it personally, which would make it illegal. NEVER license exclusively unless you make sure you have leveraged the upside potential.
I wish /. would spend less time on these celebrity spectacles and more on the people who actually make a difference, who actually are on our side, whose interest goes beyond having a mansion and a private helicopter.
That's the whole point. Kim Dotcom is able to reach the masses that don't even know about slashdot. So just hanging around on slashdot going on about Michael Geist, Derek Khanna, the EFF, etc. is like going on about a rare stamp among stamp collectors. Nobody else knows/cares. So a widely-known name is what we need so badly. A popular, public figurehead that takes on the Copyright MAFIAA openly and that can't be "crushed like a bug" quite easily like Aaron Swartz was. Unfortunately that takes a lot of money, so you need even more "lots of" money so you can just don't care and easily spend it on top-notch lawyers.
So who is our big Anti-"IP Chapter in the TPP" guy/gal? Who's our big Let's-Bring-Copyright-terms-back-to-2-times-14 guy/gal? What Heroes of the Digital Age would auntie Ethel be able to name? You'd be surprised how many people know about Kim Dotcom, especially Down Under and among Kiwis.
Bah, humbug! My money is on Pitiemacs.
I absolutely detest video on blogs/sites/etc. instead of text and where appropriate pictures. Text I can quickly skim through, get to the relevant part, etc.
Video you have to wait a few seconds for it to start, then most of the time have to apply the 30(?)-second-rule, if it's slow you can't fast-forward and you just hope you're luckly you find the relevant bit. Note: the 30 second rule is not the one about making an impression, it's about skipping the leader, the talking head that explains what you're about to see, etc.
The takedown was fake, but there's nothing we can do about that.
Oh, yes we can!
Until DMCA takedown requests are required to submit proof of ownership and have escalating penalties for false/fraudulent claims, this situation will only get worse.
Very simple and restores some balance. The "proof" is not proof of ownership, but proof the complainant work is actually infringing on the claimed work. This can just be something like a report from an automated analysis tool with a confidence percentage, but at least something needs to be submitted to substantiate the claim instead of just having to believe it on their big blue eyes.
The second part is a penalty system and the submitted proof will also be used to determine the penalties in case of false/fraudulent and I'd even include frivolous claims (e.g. 20-second clip of baby dancing to music playing on tv in the background) to cover obvious Fair Use cases. An entity, having incurred 2 strikes already, caught complaining about an outdoors video featuring birds singing as infringing on their #1 rap artist's copyright would then have to pay a hefty fine as even the most casual of checks would determine the work is not infringing. As to what to do with the collected monies, aside from financing the whole system so the tax payer is off the hook, I'm sure there are plenty of cultural projects that need funding.
What do those Jedis have that Kopmists do not? We'd like to copy it.
No, he was in a "I'm Feeling Lucky" mood.
I just received an e-mail with the same subject, offering me to buy certain medications from Thailand that will enlarge my telomeres, so I can drink all the pop I want!
SPOILER ALERT
Please stop throwing Dr. Who surprise plots around.
On closer inspect, it is a defunct battle station of unknown origins.
Come a little closer, and witness the firepower of this fully ARMED and OPERATIONAL battle station!
From: FBI Field Office
To: Anonymous Coward
Thank you for your report. Rest assured, crimes with a Biden Index of 1.0 will be investigated and prosecuted thoroughly.
P.S. we're hiring! Please send us your resume.
But foreigners themselves are loving this stuff, as they can use this against their own governments, often "sharing" (actually: just handing it over, but that paints too much a picture the actual situation) intercepted data with the NSA. Did you hear any arrest warrants being issued against UK citizens by Belgian authorities regarding the Belgacom hack by GCHQ? What DID the Belgian government/intelligence services know?
I say it's time to pull their pants down. You won't see any balls, but you will see how they soiled themselves, and where they wiped themselves with their citizens' rights to privacy.
One thing I found interesting right at the beginning was about whether information and knowledge should be free.
Later on they talk about a (presumably LCARS) Tricorder-like app disappearing from "the" app store, stongarmed by CBS without any criticism (and also genuinely wonder why there are no bluetooth sets shaped like Uhura's earpiece). So they seem "on board" with a strong "intellectual property" regime or at least put it in the "things fall down", "a hot stove hurts when you touch it", everyday-thruths-that-just-are-and-not-given-a-second-thought category.
Which brings us to the information that really should be free. Like JSTOR. Remember Aaron Schwartz? The biggest thing standing in the way of the dream of freely accessible knowledge is the crazy long copyright term. Now THAT is something to hold a discussion about! How many times on the various Star Trek shows does an "entire civilisation's collection of knowledge and culture" get uploaded to the Enterprise's computer, or the Earth's/Federation's science and cultural works uploaded by the Enterprise to an adversary that suddenly decides humanity is worthy after all?
Plus there are cases of outright bans on some kinds of solar setups (I cant find a cite right now but there have been cases where people have wanted to install solar panels and a battery bank or whatever and completly disconnect from grid power but have been prohibited from doing so by state and local laws)
What happens if you don't pay your power bill and they come and disconnect you themselves? If they come and see the solar and have been instructed by company brass to forgo the disconnection in those cases, let the poor (that DO get disconnected) and their advocates know... won't take long before that changes.
...Bananaphone!
Within a couple of weeks you can download all of that stuff "pro bono".
Oh, the MPAA, RIAA and BSA were screaming for it... the "trust" in "trusted computing" was that you as a "trusted computer" user could be trusted not to get around any kind of Digital Restrictions Management system... to be introduced once your head is already firmly stuck in the noose.
If you can't beat them, outlaw them
There's really not much to see here if you exclude the "Premium" titles. It's a bit how lefties want to make people use public transportation: not by improving public transportation (increasing quality of life), but by making the car less attractive (decreasing overall quality of life). Quickflix CAN be a one or two bucks per month more expensive... but have 90% of what Netflix US has, and add to that a bunch of quality Aussie content, and they'll blow Netflix out of the water. But no, let's take the easy way out again (a/k/a Sit On Fat Well-paid Ass) and attack the alternative.
That sounds like massively incompetent organisations who take artists' music, sell them for billions and billions, and then hand over a fraction of that to said artists. The exception of course being the "made men" in the industry (conform their equivalent in the real Mafia and Biker gangs) who can basically do what they want including setting up their own labels and do distribution deals.
But these kind of ideas also thrive there. Coincidence? I think not.