in the fact that if it were started by 2 identified campers, they surely would have been charged. it doesn't matter what percent of wildfires are caused by what, it is all about who didn't get charged because of retarded laws. simple fix: if you start a wildfire by any means, you pay the price.
but they never seem to captilize on it. i once emalied nato (national organization of theater owners) and asked about them standing up to the studios.
i went on about how their justification for outlandish concession prices in regards to not getting much on the actual showing of the movie was asinine
and that they should use their collective bargaining to get a higher share of ticket sales. yeah, they never did respond, but my point stands. they have all this power but do nothing about it. where else is hollywood going to show its films?
to have something in the sword (or vr gloves, for that matter) to give you just enough sensation to know that you've struck/touched something. seems this would've been worked out years ago. possibly even a whole "body glove", that has millions of sensor points that would depress inwards, with various amounts of force, and actually touch you. is no one working on this type of thing?
sorry, but this is one one my biggest pet peeves. using asterisks to "censor" the word does absolutely nothing, except come off as condecending to the reader. it is not more polite, as anyone with half a brain knows what the word is, thereby accomplishing nothing. shouldn't we finally grow the fuck up and realize that butt, ass, rear, et al., are synonyms and equally interchangeable in any conversation. applying childish morality scales to words only makes said people look like simple, childish, self-righteous cunts. yes, i am thinking of the children.
so wouldn't any other service that uses the isp's bandwidth, without being a customer themselves, also be stealing bandwidth? they either have to accuse everyone or no one.
i do have a subscription to hbo, and have for over 10 years (since the original airing of band of brothers). the reason that i also download it is to have a hard copy of it. if they would just make is super easy to dump the stuff from my dvr to my pc, it'd be a non-issue. sure, i could buy the blu-rays when they come out, but they already got my money. i was able to capture the analog stream back in the day without issue and to vcr before that. quality of product, lack of degradation, and bonus revenue streams have no relevancy in the discussion. the ball is in their court.
first making it so that disuse can cause expiration
yes! it should definitely have to be available for purchase to be protected. of course, they would just put up an exorbitantly priced digital download and say "here ya go".
you do realize why Solyndra failed, dont you? after the u.s. government invested $500 million in loans in solar tech, china went and invested $30 billion in loans for solar tech. game over, man.
No. Copyright infringement is wrong, but it is not theft.
copyright infringement is less wrong than life + 70 year copyrights. depriving the public domain (again & again) for generations is far more harmful to society as a whole. granted, i do buy quite a bit, but i still use my own discretion to choose when to futuractively borrow from my great-great-grandchildren's public domain. until copyright gains some sanity, it'll never be a black and white issue.
it hasn't happened because the threat of terrorism is ridiculously miniscule. if they, the "bad guys", were really wanting to cause trouble, there'd be little one-off events happening at least weekly: shooting up a mall here, car bomb downtown there. that randomness, especially in and around a specific region (la county, nyc), would certainly cause a lot of terror, but it hasn't happened because it's not that big of a threat. all this wasteful security spending is just another corporate-welfare program.
odd that a [paid?] performance by a cover band (or worse, a tribute band) isn't a violation, yet if they sold a copy of that recording it certainly would be.
sure, it's about the same price as a new release dvd with none of the benefits (bonus features, resale value, format shifting, lending value, ability to buy used). until it can match that, maybe $1/episode would work.
used games help create the money-glutton powerhouse that is today's console game industry. unless the prices drop drastically, i suspect this will not bode well. killing what's left of the rental industry too? nice. real fucking nice. i guess we should be happy we don't have to insert a quarter every time we play..whats that? it's in the works? figures...
they should just give up all the users, who should have known full well that this setup wasn't legal. they were all using infringing derivative works. i assume they kept all the payment records.
You can rent a VCR and record OTA broadcasts. You cannot pay a company to use their VCR to record a OTA broadcast for you.
i'll never understand this. if person A can do X and person B can do X, person A should almost always be allowed to do X for person B, for free, fee or whatever. anything else seems highly illogical. that's why i use torrents as my dvr, sure it is not legal, but i don't care. i have a cable subscription, but neither the time nor resources to capture all the shows i watch. i can see how they don't want non-subscribers to get free stuff, but if they would just offer me the download instead, it'd work out just the same. of course, since discovering yet another revenue stream of tv on dvd, they got the greedlust, and we all lost. precedent was set by allowing home recording, and no argument of quality, lack of generational degradation, etc. should have any bearing on this. they should get what they can from the initial broadcast and be happy at that. anything else is bonus at best and scumbaggery at worst.
As far as the cable rant, give it up. Unless you can convince cable companies to sell their products for less Best Buy and others have no options but to sell them at inflated prices. It's that or sell nothing at all.
what you are suggesting is that best buy isn't allowed to use its in-house brand names on cheaper cables. why can sellers on amazon, with much less purchasing power, sell 6' hdmi cables for $0.01 + $3.75 shipping?
why can Redbox rent me a physical disk for less than the studios want for a digital download?
because they've got it in their head that they can't possibly trust a third party not to screw with the numbers so they charge a large upfront licensing fee. if all the studios were smart, they'd create a unified rental interface that lets them control their own content directly. of course they'd lose before they began, as they would still try to charge $5/rental or $20+ for ownership, i mean unlimited viewing license, which you could never resell/lend/etc. i'm not sure why they are so stupid, but this if this is the future of digital entertainment, they will reap what they sow, hopefully in bloodshed and anguish.
Slashdot Mirror
i stopped watching IFC when they started putting ads in the movies. i'll watch their series sometimes, but never the movies.
awesome. just bought that app. thx for posting!
then any ad-farm sites that rely on misspellings should be sued for depriving the correctly spelled url's ad revenue?
in the fact that if it were started by 2 identified campers, they surely would have been charged. it doesn't matter what percent of wildfires are caused by what, it is all about who didn't get charged because of retarded laws. simple fix: if you start a wildfire by any means, you pay the price.
but they never seem to captilize on it. i once emalied nato (national organization of theater owners) and asked about them standing up to the studios.
i went on about how their justification for outlandish concession prices in regards to not getting much on the actual showing of the movie was asinine
and that they should use their collective bargaining to get a higher share of ticket sales. yeah, they never did respond, but my point stands.
they have all this power but do nothing about it. where else is hollywood going to show its films?
it's likely going to be filled with some of this newschool cheese-core bullshit like skrillex. i say let richard d. james (aphex twin) have at it.
Giving away stolen money doesnt make you a saint.
no, it makes you Robin Hood.
to have something in the sword (or vr gloves, for that matter) to give you just enough sensation to know that you've struck/touched something. seems this would've been worked out years ago. possibly even a whole "body glove", that has millions of sensor points that would depress inwards, with various amounts of force, and actually touch you. is no one working on this type of thing?
He would if he failed to Cupertino.
sorry, but this is one one my biggest pet peeves. using asterisks to "censor" the word does absolutely nothing, except come off as condecending to the reader. it is not more polite, as anyone with half a brain knows what the word is, thereby accomplishing nothing. shouldn't we finally grow the fuck up and realize that butt, ass, rear, et al., are synonyms and equally interchangeable in any conversation. applying childish morality scales to words only makes said people look like simple, childish, self-righteous cunts. yes, i am thinking of the children.
so wouldn't any other service that uses the isp's bandwidth, without being a customer themselves, also be stealing bandwidth? they either have to accuse everyone or no one.
i do have a subscription to hbo, and have for over 10 years (since the original airing of band of brothers). the reason that i also download it is to have a hard copy of it. if they would just make is super easy to dump the stuff from my dvr to my pc, it'd be a non-issue. sure, i could buy the blu-rays when they come out, but they already got my money. i was able to capture the analog stream back in the day without issue and to vcr before that. quality of product, lack of degradation, and bonus revenue streams have no relevancy in the discussion. the ball is in their court.
first making it so that disuse can cause expiration
yes! it should definitely have to be available for purchase to be protected. of course, they would just put up an exorbitantly priced digital download and say "here ya go".
you do realize why Solyndra failed, dont you? after the u.s. government invested $500 million in loans in solar tech, china went and invested $30 billion in loans for solar tech. game over, man.
No. Copyright infringement is wrong, but it is not theft.
copyright infringement is less wrong than life + 70 year copyrights. depriving the public domain (again & again) for generations is far more harmful to society as a whole. granted, i do buy quite a bit, but i still use my own discretion to choose when to futuractively borrow from my great-great-grandchildren's public domain. until copyright gains some sanity, it'll never be a black and white issue.
I'm surprised this hasn't happened yet.
it hasn't happened because the threat of terrorism is ridiculously miniscule. if they, the "bad guys", were really wanting to cause trouble, there'd be little one-off events happening at least weekly: shooting up a mall here, car bomb downtown there. that randomness, especially in and around a specific region (la county, nyc), would certainly cause a lot of terror, but it hasn't happened because it's not that big of a threat. all this wasteful security spending is just another corporate-welfare program.
odd that a [paid?] performance by a cover band (or worse, a tribute band) isn't a violation, yet if they sold a copy of that recording it certainly would be.
sure, it's about the same price as a new release dvd with none of the benefits (bonus features, resale value, format shifting, lending value, ability to buy used). until it can match that, maybe $1/episode would work.
used games help create the money-glutton powerhouse that is today's console game industry. unless the prices drop drastically, i suspect this will not bode well. killing what's left of the rental industry too? nice. real fucking nice. i guess we should be happy we don't have to insert a quarter every time we play..whats that? it's in the works? figures...
they should just give up all the users, who should have known full well that this setup wasn't legal. they were all using infringing derivative works. i assume they kept all the payment records.
You can rent a VCR and record OTA broadcasts. You cannot pay a company to use their VCR to record a OTA broadcast for you.
i'll never understand this. if person A can do X and person B can do X, person A should almost always be allowed to do X for person B, for free, fee or whatever. anything else seems highly illogical. that's why i use torrents as my dvr, sure it is not legal, but i don't care. i have a cable subscription, but neither the time nor resources to capture all the shows i watch. i can see how they don't want non-subscribers to get free stuff, but if they would just offer me the download instead, it'd work out just the same. of course, since discovering yet another revenue stream of tv on dvd, they got the greedlust, and we all lost. precedent was set by allowing home recording, and no argument of quality, lack of generational degradation, etc. should have any bearing on this. they should get what they can from the initial broadcast and be happy at that. anything else is bonus at best and scumbaggery at worst.
As far as the cable rant, give it up. Unless you can convince cable companies to sell their products for less Best Buy and others have no options but to sell them at inflated prices. It's that or sell nothing at all.
what you are suggesting is that best buy isn't allowed to use its in-house brand names on cheaper cables. why can sellers on amazon, with much less purchasing power, sell 6' hdmi cables for $0.01 + $3.75 shipping?
its a "temporary phenomenon"? why are these fucks so behind the times?
i play swtor and have never been able to [flirt] with a same sex companion or npc. wtf are they talking about?
why can Redbox rent me a physical disk for less than the studios want for a digital download?
because they've got it in their head that they can't possibly trust a third party not to screw with the numbers so they charge a large upfront licensing fee. if all the studios were smart, they'd create a unified rental interface that lets them control their own content directly. of course they'd lose before they began, as they would still try to charge $5/rental or $20+ for ownership, i mean unlimited viewing license, which you could never resell/lend/etc. i'm not sure why they are so stupid, but this if this is the future of digital entertainment, they will reap what they sow, hopefully in bloodshed and anguish.