Well, people who decided to pay for the album this time perfectly knew how many would have paid zero, regardles wether it is a download or a physical cd...
> On the other hand, imagine if the battery somehow breaks starting to leak acid all over the guy's skin
Good point. The "somehow breaking" should indeed be taken into consideration when conceiving a device to be worn be someone who's supposed to be shot at sooner or later...
> Why punish the people who actually pay for your product? The only way to suffer from this is if you > purchased a copy, the people who are downloading this are free of the pain... It's like they _want_ > you to pirate it. They are creating a system with incentives for illegal copying.
The best way to make money twice: once from the people who buy the players and the original movies, the second time from people buying CD-DVD-HDDVD-burners and supports, and new PCs for the copying...
>> [The GPL] was designed to make sure that no company could take GPL'd code and use it without >> returning the favor.
> The GPL only covers redistribution, not use.
The original poster didn't mean "use" as in "using the gpl'd software as a user" but "using the code" in the sense of taking portions of code form a gpl program and "use" (or copy) it in derivative work.
Why should a company be bothered to provide support not to their clients, but to users who pirated/stole the product?
OK, one may argue it's MS themselves who fostered piracy to establish their monopoly...
Slashdot Mirror
Well, people who decided to pay for the album this time perfectly knew how many would have paid zero, regardles wether it is a download or a physical cd...
> On the other hand, imagine if the battery somehow breaks starting to leak acid all over the guy's skin
Good point. The "somehow breaking" should indeed be taken into consideration when conceiving a device to be worn be someone who's supposed to be shot at sooner or later...
> Why punish the people who actually pay for your product? The only way to suffer from this is if you > purchased a copy, the people who are downloading this are free of the pain... It's like they _want_ > you to pirate it. They are creating a system with incentives for illegal copying. The best way to make money twice: once from the people who buy the players and the original movies, the second time from people buying CD-DVD-HDDVD-burners and supports, and new PCs for the copying...
> If they're remotely intelligent, a "firmware update" involves putting a disc in the player. It'll > > probably be included on new discs too,
Easier said than done, as the firmware for model x from manufacturer y could hardly work for model z from manufacturer w.
Unless you include dozens of alternative firmware updates...
>> [The GPL] was designed to make sure that no company could take GPL'd code and use it without
>> returning the favor.
> The GPL only covers redistribution, not use.
The original poster didn't mean "use" as in "using the gpl'd software as a user" but "using the code" in the sense of taking portions of code form a gpl program and "use" (or copy) it in derivative work.
Actually the French Revolution didn't start out because the people wanted more rights, but becuase peasants were hungry.
I don't think there are all so many examples of revolutions started with full stomach, if you don't count rebellions against foreign oppressors.
Why should a company be bothered to provide support not to their clients, but to users who pirated /stole the product?
OK, one may argue it's MS themselves who fostered piracy to establish their monopoly...
They have embraced open source when it comes to taking a top knotch kernel (freebsd) for free and use for their own.