With an email address saying.co.nz, I was assuming that you were from over the Tasman.
I think we'll have to disagree on what's moral and what's not. I think that using market power in one market to substantially lessen competition in another is immoral.
BTW why are we discussing morals in the same sentence with the word company though? A moral company in most cases is a oxymoron. Companies have policies and cultures - never morals.
Ebay had to contact the ACCC because they were going to do something (I think it's 3rd line forcing). That requires approval from the ACCC otherwise I believe it is illegal.
LOL, the posts are starting to sound like they want the features in the Itanium processors.
Speculative loads so you can start a pre-fetch of data then check to see if it's been loaded later and predication so some branches are not need just different bits of code executed based upon a predicate.
The Itanium CPU needs a good and intelligent compiler to get good performance. It may be a slow start but perhaps it's the way of the future (ROTFL).
You could have RTFA, but this is slashdot almost no-one does that. The method for detecting the planets is in it:
The satellite uses the transit method to detect planets as they pass in front of their parent star and block out part of the light seen by the telescope.
Except that Nintendo sells the consoles at a profit, not a loss. What you might expect instead is that 3rd party titles may dry up. But most of the reason to buy a Wii seems to be for first party titles anyway and this mod doesn't seem to allow you to actually run burnt copies of games only homebrew stuff.
Backward compatibility is not a bad thing in itself.
MS seems to have wanted to keep bug/quirks compatibility not just simply backward compatibility. Strict backwards compatibility would have meant that only documented functionality must be kept and must work from version to version. Other bugs, quirks, and inconsistencies could be removed - this didn't happen.
In the meantime developers are stuck designing for the LCD (least common denominator, not liquid crystal display!)...
I believe that you'll find that people will be designing for the lowest common denomintor, not least, there is a major difference between lowest and least.
While I have both consoles the PS3 is for Blu-Ray movies, the 360 is for games which to be honest are more plentiful and usually significantly cheaper in Australia (@JB HiFi). I prefer the game play on the 360 and it always scales the games to 1080p rather than the PS3 version of you'll play that at the resolution it wants you to and you'll like it!
For what it's worth, he also poked holes in EFF's argument that Media Sentry - as an agent of the RIAA, cannot infringe on their own copyright. He argues that the RIAA / et all never intended to license Media Sentry to authorize distribution or reproduction and therefore the 12 copies Media Sentry downloaded stand up as "unauthorized" copies of the works. The issue remains open as to whether Howell can be held liable for these copies.
Does this mean it's possible for the current defendant to ask for MediaSentry to be added as a co-defendant? Or, does that require permission from the RIAA (or just the judge) to do that? After all MediaSentry did make unauthorised copies (by their own admission).
... but something like %30-50 of traffic on the internet is bittorrent, and a big chunk of bittorrent traffic is regarded as illegal activity (in most jurisdictions) by a good many folks. If there was a highway where %30-50 of the vehicles were widely known to be transporting something illegal, would you be surprised if the local authorities took an increased interest in that particular road and began to watch things a bit more closely?
Using the logic at hand if the road was a toll road the government would be filing charges against the operator of the toll road for not making sure that all of the traffic on the road was in fact not transporting anything illegal.
Clearly in that particular case the onus would be on some level of government to ensure that the illegal transportation of goods was stopped not the operator of the toll road.
Since copyright is something granted to the copyright owner it should be up to the owner to enforce their copyrights.
Perhaps it would be less onerous for the ISPs if the copyright owners had to install their own appliances on specific networks. They would need to pay for the software, hardware, software and hardware support, traffic costs, and rack space (including power, aircon, etc) assocated with it. There would have to be limits on how many and where but the cost of enforcing copyrights should lay with the copyright owners as I have a feeling that they definitely want the enforcement costs to be paid for by anyone else but them.
Then the providers paying would probably get exclusive use of the new bandwidth and everone else stuck into a certain size cap.
After all if you need to increase your backhaul between two places from 100 Mb/s to 200 Mb/s (made up numbers) to take care of traffic the people paying for prioritised traffic wouldn't be too happy if the link was underutilised to the point where prioritisation made no difference. If the old split was 80/20 it would make more sense to have the new split 50/50 and keep the peek usage of the "bus lane" very high and the paid for traffic flowing a lot faster in it's own dedicated bandwidth.
The split might change over time as peak usage in the "bus lane" increased but there's always the chance that the "bus lane" may stay fixed in size (relative to the priority lane) and the only way to get decent speeds is to pay up. At that point I can see the name and shame working well, the BBC naming and shaming ISPs who interfere with the iPlayer should work to pressure ISPs (e.g. Explaining to every consumer who is throttling the iPlayer and perhaps produce and run a show on BBC1 aimed at explaining how ISPs over sell bandwidth and running a few exposes of business practices in the ISP business in the UK?).
If you pay for traffic priority you would want to know that you're actually getting something for it and that you're not buying snake oil.
If you want to move copyright infringement to covered under criminal law it should be removed from being a civil matter at the same time (so you can't be had twice) and any fines collected go to the government not the copyright owner. No statutory damages to the copyright owner, just a criminal prosecution. I bet you no-one or very few people get prosecuted though if that ever happens.
Ray, you're doing a great job. Your posts are always interesting and generate a lot of comments/discussion.
I've got a question for you though. Does the discussion actually generate much useful information for you (as a lawyer) that may lead you to re-evaluate strategies or directions in a case you're involved with?
Since you're still here I have to imagine that it's at least sometimes useful for getting technical details or just having many people thinking about the issues and coming up with some useful comments or suggestions.
Of course it does. Try copying/dev/zero into a file to have a read of their double secret ABI! Once you're done you can save a copy by copying it back to/dev/null then removing the original file.
I did also, lots of the HD DVD movies came with U-Control features to move seamlessly into PiP mode to get an explaination of what was happening, how something was made, or view the picture before (for example) special effects were added it. It was both very informative and generally quite interesting to watch.
I am not looking for free music. I am looking for music distributed through non-RIAA channels (i.e., new distribution models).
You might try this: http://www.sellaband.com/shop/ some of the songs are free (as in gratis - for the artists that do have songs there), none of the recordings were funded by record labels only by fans of the artists.
As I said, the so-called "right" to vote is a privilege; the obligation to vote per se is not. If the "privilege" is something you didn't want to do in the first place then the only part that matters to you is the obligation.
I think that you're mixing the two when you shouldn't, no "right" is a privilege but your ability to vote in Australia is not a right, it's a franchise granted by the government provided for in the electoral laws of your state and federally (with a few exceptions it's granted to all citizens over the age of 18).
In terms of obligation it really is your choice if you register to vote or not. AFAIK it is not illegal to never register to vote although almost everyone probably registers when their parents told them to when they turned 18. Your obligation to vote starts when you've registered.There's no reason why the one thing can't be a privilege and at the same time also be an obligation. Just because one part of obligation and privilege means more to you doesn't make the other untrue just meaningless to you (it's still a privilege if you hate the obligation).
BTW Why did you register to vote if you never wanted to vote in the first place given that you can't get off the electoral rolls until you're dead (or perhaps surrender your Australian citzenship)?
Oops, I take one thing back the changes to copyright law to allow some forms of reverse engineering specificly nullified provisions in an EULA or any kind of licensing agreement that prohibited the allowed forms of reverse engineering.
Some forms of software reverse engineering are specificly allowed under Australian copyright law (similar to the EU), an EULA can forbid it (which might lead to a contract dispute) but as long as it's an allowed usage it's not against copyright law. He might hate license agreements but in terms of copyright he shouldn't have a problem if he as job doing reverse engineering, for more information: http://www.policybandwidth.com/doc/JBand-AustSingRevEng.pdf
Also in terms of it being a goverment granted priviledge, have a look at the history of how different rules for the voting franchise in Australia have applied over time: http://australianpolitics.com/elections/features/franchise-history.shtml. To paraphrase something you said: "You have to earn the right to drive on the roads, and it can be taken away from you." could be rephrased as "Citzens over the age of 18 only have to enroll to vote to be able to vote in Australia, and it can be taken away from you.". The government only has to change the electoral laws to remove your "right" to vote so it's not a right it's a privilege (although it is unlikely to be taken away).
That's the thing, voting is only compulsory once you have registered to vote. If you never register to vote you never have to vote (you also then never vote in state of local government elections either). If it was such a chore I'd have recommended that they never enroll to vote. There are multiple places you can vote in the weeks before an election and then there's postal voting so you can do it from home at a time that is convienient to you (and you can vote at any polling station in Australia on election day you don't have to vote locally).
I meant priviledge because our constitution doesn't guarantee us the right to vote, it's a franchise granted by the government. It's also an obligation because we're required to vote once registered. The number of voters turning up to vote gets closer my figure though if you do include the informal voters. Informal voting is a form of civil protest against the two major parties (even if most of them are done that way because they couldn't work out how to do it correctly).
Slashdot Mirror
With an email address saying .co.nz, I was assuming that you were from over the Tasman.
I think we'll have to disagree on what's moral and what's not. I think that using market power in one market to substantially lessen competition in another is immoral.
BTW why are we discussing morals in the same sentence with the word company though? A moral company in most cases is a oxymoron. Companies have policies and cultures - never morals.
Yours - Nothing - Mine everthing.
Ebay had to contact the ACCC because they were going to do something (I think it's 3rd line forcing). That requires approval from the ACCC otherwise I believe it is illegal.
LOL, the posts are starting to sound like they want the features in the Itanium processors.
Speculative loads so you can start a pre-fetch of data then check to see if it's been loaded later and predication so some branches are not need just different bits of code executed based upon a predicate.
The Itanium CPU needs a good and intelligent compiler to get good performance. It may be a slow start but perhaps it's the way of the future (ROTFL).
Checking for updates doesn't seem to be working too well, they may be going for a record but I can wait.
YES!
You could have RTFA, but this is slashdot almost no-one does that. The method for detecting the planets is in it:
The satellite uses the transit method to detect planets as they pass in front of their parent star and block out part of the light seen by the telescope.Except that Nintendo sells the consoles at a profit, not a loss. What you might expect instead is that 3rd party titles may dry up. But most of the reason to buy a Wii seems to be for first party titles anyway and this mod doesn't seem to allow you to actually run burnt copies of games only homebrew stuff.
I don't think it matters both are equally interesting and kill approximately the same number of people in Australia per year.
Backward compatibility is not a bad thing in itself.
MS seems to have wanted to keep bug/quirks compatibility not just simply backward compatibility. Strict backwards compatibility would have meant that only documented functionality must be kept and must work from version to version. Other bugs, quirks, and inconsistencies could be removed - this didn't happen.
I believe that you'll find that people will be designing for the lowest common denomintor, not least, there is a major difference between lowest and least.
While I have both consoles the PS3 is for Blu-Ray movies, the 360 is for games which to be honest are more plentiful and usually significantly cheaper in Australia (@JB HiFi). I prefer the game play on the 360 and it always scales the games to 1080p rather than the PS3 version of you'll play that at the resolution it wants you to and you'll like it!
Does this mean it's possible for the current defendant to ask for MediaSentry to be added as a co-defendant? Or, does that require permission from the RIAA (or just the judge) to do that? After all MediaSentry did make unauthorised copies (by their own admission).
... but something like %30-50 of traffic on the internet is bittorrent, and a big chunk of bittorrent traffic is regarded as illegal activity (in most jurisdictions) by a good many folks. If there was a highway where %30-50 of the vehicles were widely known to be transporting something illegal, would you be surprised if the local authorities took an increased interest in that particular road and began to watch things a bit more closely?Using the logic at hand if the road was a toll road the government would be filing charges against the operator of the toll road for not making sure that all of the traffic on the road was in fact not transporting anything illegal.
Clearly in that particular case the onus would be on some level of government to ensure that the illegal transportation of goods was stopped not the operator of the toll road.
Since copyright is something granted to the copyright owner it should be up to the owner to enforce their copyrights.
Perhaps it would be less onerous for the ISPs if the copyright owners had to install their own appliances on specific networks. They would need to pay for the software, hardware, software and hardware support, traffic costs, and rack space (including power, aircon, etc) assocated with it. There would have to be limits on how many and where but the cost of enforcing copyrights should lay with the copyright owners as I have a feeling that they definitely want the enforcement costs to be paid for by anyone else but them.
Then the providers paying would probably get exclusive use of the new bandwidth and everone else stuck into a certain size cap.
After all if you need to increase your backhaul between two places from 100 Mb/s to 200 Mb/s (made up numbers) to take care of traffic the people paying for prioritised traffic wouldn't be too happy if the link was underutilised to the point where prioritisation made no difference. If the old split was 80/20 it would make more sense to have the new split 50/50 and keep the peek usage of the "bus lane" very high and the paid for traffic flowing a lot faster in it's own dedicated bandwidth.
The split might change over time as peak usage in the "bus lane" increased but there's always the chance that the "bus lane" may stay fixed in size (relative to the priority lane) and the only way to get decent speeds is to pay up. At that point I can see the name and shame working well, the BBC naming and shaming ISPs who interfere with the iPlayer should work to pressure ISPs (e.g. Explaining to every consumer who is throttling the iPlayer and perhaps produce and run a show on BBC1 aimed at explaining how ISPs over sell bandwidth and running a few exposes of business practices in the ISP business in the UK?).
If you pay for traffic priority you would want to know that you're actually getting something for it and that you're not buying snake oil.
... or at least not anyone not involved in commercial level copyright infringement/piracy.
If you want to move copyright infringement to covered under criminal law it should be removed from being a civil matter at the same time (so you can't be had twice) and any fines collected go to the government not the copyright owner. No statutory damages to the copyright owner, just a criminal prosecution. I bet you no-one or very few people get prosecuted though if that ever happens.
Ray, you're doing a great job. Your posts are always interesting and generate a lot of comments/discussion.
I've got a question for you though. Does the discussion actually generate much useful information for you (as a lawyer) that may lead you to re-evaluate strategies or directions in a case you're involved with?
Since you're still here I have to imagine that it's at least sometimes useful for getting technical details or just having many people thinking about the issues and coming up with some useful comments or suggestions.
Of course it does. Try copying /dev/zero into a file to have a read of their double secret ABI! Once you're done you can save a copy by copying it back to /dev/null then removing the original file.
I did also, lots of the HD DVD movies came with U-Control features to move seamlessly into PiP mode to get an explaination of what was happening, how something was made, or view the picture before (for example) special effects were added it. It was both very informative and generally quite interesting to watch.
You might try this: http://www.sellaband.com/shop/ some of the songs are free (as in gratis - for the artists that do have songs there), none of the recordings were funded by record labels only by fans of the artists.
I think that you're mixing the two when you shouldn't, no "right" is a privilege but your ability to vote in Australia is not a right, it's a franchise granted by the government provided for in the electoral laws of your state and federally (with a few exceptions it's granted to all citizens over the age of 18).
In terms of obligation it really is your choice if you register to vote or not. AFAIK it is not illegal to never register to vote although almost everyone probably registers when their parents told them to when they turned 18. Your obligation to vote starts when you've registered.There's no reason why the one thing can't be a privilege and at the same time also be an obligation. Just because one part of obligation and privilege means more to you doesn't make the other untrue just meaningless to you (it's still a privilege if you hate the obligation).BTW Why did you register to vote if you never wanted to vote in the first place given that you can't get off the electoral rolls until you're dead (or perhaps surrender your Australian citzenship)?
Oops, I take one thing back the changes to copyright law to allow some forms of reverse engineering specificly nullified provisions in an EULA or any kind of licensing agreement that prohibited the allowed forms of reverse engineering.
Some forms of software reverse engineering are specificly allowed under Australian copyright law (similar to the EU), an EULA can forbid it (which might lead to a contract dispute) but as long as it's an allowed usage it's not against copyright law. He might hate license agreements but in terms of copyright he shouldn't have a problem if he as job doing reverse engineering, for more information: http://www.policybandwidth.com/doc/JBand-AustSingRevEng.pdf
Also in terms of it being a goverment granted priviledge, have a look at the history of how different rules for the voting franchise in Australia have applied over time: http://australianpolitics.com/elections/features/franchise-history.shtml. To paraphrase something you said: "You have to earn the right to drive on the roads, and it can be taken away from you." could be rephrased as "Citzens over the age of 18 only have to enroll to vote to be able to vote in Australia, and it can be taken away from you.". The government only has to change the electoral laws to remove your "right" to vote so it's not a right it's a privilege (although it is unlikely to be taken away).
That's the thing, voting is only compulsory once you have registered to vote. If you never register to vote you never have to vote (you also then never vote in state of local government elections either). If it was such a chore I'd have recommended that they never enroll to vote. There are multiple places you can vote in the weeks before an election and then there's postal voting so you can do it from home at a time that is convienient to you (and you can vote at any polling station in Australia on election day you don't have to vote locally).
I meant priviledge because our constitution doesn't guarantee us the right to vote, it's a franchise granted by the government. It's also an obligation because we're required to vote once registered. The number of voters turning up to vote gets closer my figure though if you do include the informal voters. Informal voting is a form of civil protest against the two major parties (even if most of them are done that way because they couldn't work out how to do it correctly).