How does the law affect DJs? When your art consists of playing someone else's material for an audience (yes, I know you put creativity into spinning and mixing and all, but your instrument is not a thing that produces raw notes -- it is something that plays someone else's copyrighted material), does this not run up against some sort of legal issues?
Should DJs pay the same price as the rest of us? All I want to do is listen to a CD in my car, not play it for a club full of paying customers.
Or does this law only refer to movies, and not music? Still, any audiovisual store or department within a larger store is constantly showing things like this to display its equipment. Do Tweeter, Best Buy, Circuit City, The Sharper Image, etc. have the right?
You can shift an otherwise neutral-recipient of information to a position where (s)he would become sceptical fnord/fearfull fnord/against the idea simply by inserting certain words fnord in reference to the argument fnord fnord.
I don't know what fnord you fnord fnord fnord could be talking about.
Even cooler is the fact that Opera comes with a Google toolbar already built-in. Now if only they let you customize the searching shortcuts for other search engines, I'd be obnoxiously happy (instead of just plain obnoxious).
If it hasn't been accepted into widespread English use, grok definitely is a part of the jargon we should all be familiar with.
(Taken from dictionary.com)
grok (grk) tr.v.Slanggrokked,grokking,groks To understand profoundly through intuition or empathy.
[Coined by Robert A. Heinlein in his Stranger in a Strange Land.]
grok/grok/, var./grohk/ vt. [from the novel "Stranger in a
Strange Land", by Robert A. Heinlein, where it is a Martian word
meaning literally `to drink' and metaphorically `to be one with']
The emphatic form is `grok in fullness'. 1. To understand, usually
in a global sense. Connotes intimate and exhaustive knowledge.
Contrast zen, which is similar supernal understanding experienced
as a single brief flash. See also glark. 2. Used of programs,
may connote merely sufficient understanding. "Almost all C
compilers grok the `void' type these days."
The idea behind Nintendo using DVD technology for the Gamecube, yet only using 3" discs is somewhat as follows:
- Considering how much a DVD can hold, a 3" DVD can hold pleny of information for a full game. Especially considering that Nintendo is finally moving from a cart format to discs.
- Many many people already own DVD players in one form or another. They have no need for another (but they may WANT another). Sony is forcibly bundling this technology into the PS2, which is part of what pushes the price up to 300 USD when it should be at a comparable level to the Dreamcast.
- If you really want to get a Gamecube/DVD player, you can get one. Matsuhita (Panasonic) is the company working on the drive for the Gamecube, and they will be putting out a DVD player that will play Gamecube games as well.
It's a win-win situation, really. If you don't want to get another DVD player, you won't be forced to shell out 100-150 USD extra for one that's coming bundled with your console. If you do, get the Panasonic DVD player and go nuts. It's nice to have a choice in the matter, and I for one am very pleased that Nintendo won't be forcing the extra functionality down anyone's throats.
As has been said, a preliminary injunction means only that the case has some merit. But really, if Barnes & Noble literally took Amazon's patented 1-Click technology, then there's a case.
The good thing is that there is, as there is with many patents, a way around it -- Barnes & Noble just has to change enough that it can be considered different. Honestly, the technology used by places like amazon and buy.com aren't really that good. All they seem to do is store your ip. That's just great if you happen to order something from a public computer. It saves your info for anyone else to use. They do have this "if you're not XXX, click here" line, but that just relies on users to do the right thing. I have long ago learned that you can never rely on and end-user to do the right thing.
The sad thing is how many people don't seem to realize what can happen if they save private information on public machines. In the computer lab at school, so many people use programs like Eudora and Outlook Express to check their school mail accounts and leave their account info saved locally. They don't seem to realize that anyone who logs in at the same machine can access their mail account.
In my opinion, a company that cares about the people ordering from them would make them log in and produce the information from that. It's slightly less convenient, but it's also more secure.
They say that 80 percent of their customers will be better off under the per-megabyte charging? I seriously doubt that, unless they've got a high estimate of the amount of bandwidth most people use. I don't know how to seems to some of you people, but people tend to go for higher bandwidths for a reason: because they have a use for it. Most of the people using cable use it because a modem simply isn't fast enough for their purposes. And, as is said, charging per megabyte screws over the customer because of certain downloads beyond their control (ie spam). On the flip side, the customers do seem to have another choice for a cable provider. It seems that Telstra will just have to learn their lesson as their business drains away towards their competitor(s).
Altavista's going to float and it's worth 5 billion dollars, you say? Good thing I didn't try to read this in Italian via babelfish, or else I'd probably be reading something about my mother and a fish.
I'm all for technology advancing, really. Everything's getting smaller faster "better", and that's just beautiful. But this really screws up bragging. It just sounds weird to say "Yeah, I just bought a P5 1.25" "Pfft, I've got a 1.3, loser"
The patenting of genes seems to me a tricky issue. I agree that some sort of protection is needed if biotech companies are to gain anything (monetarily) from their time investment into engineering crops for the benefit of consumers. But how far can a company go? What happens when someone tries to patent, say, the grape? How specific does the patent need to be?
Slashdot Mirror
How does the law affect DJs? When your art consists of playing someone else's material for an audience (yes, I know you put creativity into spinning and mixing and all, but your instrument is not a thing that produces raw notes -- it is something that plays someone else's copyrighted material), does this not run up against some sort of legal issues?
Should DJs pay the same price as the rest of us? All I want to do is listen to a CD in my car, not play it for a club full of paying customers.
Or does this law only refer to movies, and not music? Still, any audiovisual store or department within a larger store is constantly showing things like this to display its equipment. Do Tweeter, Best Buy, Circuit City, The Sharper Image, etc. have the right?
I found this while searching for the horse's name. (Yes, I forgot "Mortis". I'm sorry.)
The script seems not bad, but as for Mews [sic] playing the lead role... I think some people are just a little too fond of their pet actors.
You can shift an otherwise neutral-recipient of information to a position where (s)he would become sceptical fnord/fearfull fnord/against the idea simply by inserting certain words fnord in reference to the argument fnord fnord.
I don't know what fnord you fnord fnord fnord could be talking about.
Even cooler is the fact that Opera comes with a Google toolbar already built-in. Now if only they let you customize the searching shortcuts for other search engines, I'd be obnoxiously happy (instead of just plain obnoxious).
(Taken from dictionary.com)
grok (grk)
tr.v. Slang grokked, grokking, groks To understand profoundly through intuition or empathy.
[Coined by Robert A. Heinlein in his Stranger in a Strange Land
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
grok
Source: Jargon File 4.2.0
The idea behind Nintendo using DVD technology for the Gamecube, yet only using 3" discs is somewhat as follows:
- Considering how much a DVD can hold, a 3" DVD can hold pleny of information for a full game. Especially considering that Nintendo is finally moving from a cart format to discs.
- Many many people already own DVD players in one form or another. They have no need for another (but they may WANT another). Sony is forcibly bundling this technology into the PS2, which is part of what pushes the price up to 300 USD when it should be at a comparable level to the Dreamcast.
- If you really want to get a Gamecube/DVD player, you can get one. Matsuhita (Panasonic) is the company working on the drive for the Gamecube, and they will be putting out a DVD player that will play Gamecube games as well.
It's a win-win situation, really. If you don't want to get another DVD player, you won't be forced to shell out 100-150 USD extra for one that's coming bundled with your console. If you do, get the Panasonic DVD player and go nuts. It's nice to have a choice in the matter, and I for one am very pleased that Nintendo won't be forcing the extra functionality down anyone's throats.
Personally, I believe Infogrames is one of the lamest names ever. They make nice games and all, but that name just irritates me.
I thought it was hilarious when The Mushroom ran their "Infogrames Finally Drops 'R' From Name" article.
As has been said, a preliminary injunction means only that the case has some merit. But really, if Barnes & Noble literally took Amazon's patented 1-Click technology, then there's a case.
The good thing is that there is, as there is with many patents, a way around it -- Barnes & Noble just has to change enough that it can be considered different. Honestly, the technology used by places like amazon and buy.com aren't really that good. All they seem to do is store your ip. That's just great if you happen to order something from a public computer. It saves your info for anyone else to use. They do have this "if you're not XXX, click here" line, but that just relies on users to do the right thing. I have long ago learned that you can never rely on and end-user to do the right thing.
The sad thing is how many people don't seem to realize what can happen if they save private information on public machines. In the computer lab at school, so many people use programs like Eudora and Outlook Express to check their school mail accounts and leave their account info saved locally. They don't seem to realize that anyone who logs in at the same machine can access their mail account.
In my opinion, a company that cares about the people ordering from them would make them log in and produce the information from that. It's slightly less convenient, but it's also more secure.
They say that 80 percent of their customers will be better off under the per-megabyte charging? I seriously doubt that, unless they've got a high estimate of the amount of bandwidth most people use. I don't know how to seems to some of you people, but people tend to go for higher bandwidths for a reason: because they have a use for it. Most of the people using cable use it because a modem simply isn't fast enough for their purposes. And, as is said, charging per megabyte screws over the customer because of certain downloads beyond their control (ie spam). On the flip side, the customers do seem to have another choice for a cable provider. It seems that Telstra will just have to learn their lesson as their business drains away towards their competitor(s).
Altavista's going to float and it's worth 5 billion dollars, you say? Good thing I didn't try to read this in Italian via babelfish, or else I'd probably be reading something about my mother and a fish.
I'm all for technology advancing, really. Everything's getting smaller faster "better", and that's just beautiful. But this really screws up bragging. It just sounds weird to say "Yeah, I just bought a P5 1.25" "Pfft, I've got a 1.3, loser"
I'd like to know the status is on porting Debian to the FreeBSD kernel. A combination of the daemon and debian - how delicious.
The patenting of genes seems to me a tricky issue. I agree that some sort of protection is needed if biotech companies are to gain anything (monetarily) from their time investment into engineering crops for the benefit of consumers. But how far can a company go? What happens when someone tries to patent, say, the grape? How specific does the patent need to be?
Accountable for what, I'd like to know. Should we get insurance in case our packets collide with somebody elses?