Fighting established precedent is just as hard as establishing new precedent in case law. It's always been trivially easy to commit fraud over fax with regard to signatures. Technology only makes it easier. The same thing but on a computer was sanely rejected because of security concerns. It takes a lot more to challenge the established precedent on faxes.
The real reason it's still in use is that a faxed copy of a signed legal document counts as a legal original in most cases in the US. This loophole really needs closed in today's age because it enables fraud but nobody has taken the time to challenge it.
The first sale doctrine explicitly makes this legal in the US. And furthermore, in Bethesda's statement:
We do not allow non-authorized resellers to represent what they sell as 'new' because we can't verify that the game hasn't been opened and repackaged
They can't unilaterally not allow something. The seller doesn't have a reseller agreement that they would be breaking. They have no relationship to the company whatsoever, so the company has absolutely zero standing to sue.
I've been saying it with a soft g for around 20 years now. There were no debates because nerds were not talking to each other out loud, only by electronic communication. When they had to add the word to their vernacular spoken English they finally had to think about pronunciation. Before that, everyone assumed we all pronounced it the same, if at all.
If a website is wholly supported by advertising, they probably aren't making enough money on ads that aren't based on heavy tracking data. So they refuse their operational expenses by blocking access from unprofitable areas. This doesn't mean it's good or right. Just more transparent than it was before
I doubt soybean oil in any variety is all that healthy compared to current alternatives. Soybean oil is just a really cheap waste product leftover from making cheap livestock feed.
I highly doubt there was any library code prior to the N64. Programming on bare hardware in assembly seems like the only good option when dealing with hardware constraints like that.
Why deal with the console? Just buy the cartridges, discs, etc, and make a legal format-shifting backup copy (at least for the ones without DRM). I'm not going to argue for the RetroPie because I would rather have accurate emulation than cheap, but just about anything is easier than using original hardware to play on.
If there's no DRM, then the DMCA in the US says it's completely OK and legal to copy those ROMs onto a PC and run them with your emulator of choice (personal backup copy, format shifting).
What happened was that they "sold" their rights to the song to the (for nearly nothing) to avoid litigation that could have cost an astronomical amount. The actual symphony recording and the original Rolling Stones song were both put out by the same label, so it's really crazy that they had no obligation to inform them of the conflict and ask for that licensing up front.
Slashdot Mirror
T.38 protocol will encode/decode fax data for transit over an IP network.
Fighting established precedent is just as hard as establishing new precedent in case law. It's always been trivially easy to commit fraud over fax with regard to signatures. Technology only makes it easier. The same thing but on a computer was sanely rejected because of security concerns. It takes a lot more to challenge the established precedent on faxes.
The real reason it's still in use is that a faxed copy of a signed legal document counts as a legal original in most cases in the US. This loophole really needs closed in today's age because it enables fraud but nobody has taken the time to challenge it.
They typically wear a uniform and are easily identified.
And this is why social engineering attacks work so well. As long as you look the part, people don't even question you.
Isn't this what happened with the primaries?
I think you'll find that stupidity is a fully bipartisan thing.
The first sale doctrine explicitly makes this legal in the US. And furthermore, in Bethesda's statement:
We do not allow non-authorized resellers to represent what they sell as 'new' because we can't verify that the game hasn't been opened and repackaged
They can't unilaterally not allow something. The seller doesn't have a reseller agreement that they would be breaking. They have no relationship to the company whatsoever, so the company has absolutely zero standing to sue.
Try to prove I didn't. Especially if I bought and sold my ROM dumper secondhand.
Women should avoid it for all the same reasons.
Static pages are less resource intensive than dynamic content. Also, people don't tend to browse around from blocked page to blocked page.
I don't know the details, but I think most of the oil is gone from the soy meal by the time it's fed to them.
I've been saying it with a soft g for around 20 years now. There were no debates because nerds were not talking to each other out loud, only by electronic communication. When they had to add the word to their vernacular spoken English they finally had to think about pronunciation. Before that, everyone assumed we all pronounced it the same, if at all.
If a website is wholly supported by advertising, they probably aren't making enough money on ads that aren't based on heavy tracking data. So they refuse their operational expenses by blocking access from unprofitable areas. This doesn't mean it's good or right. Just more transparent than it was before
I doubt soybean oil in any variety is all that healthy compared to current alternatives. Soybean oil is just a really cheap waste product leftover from making cheap livestock feed.
if a game is 10 years old and you still haven't been compelled enough to play maybe it wasn't all that worth creating in the first place?
Or maybe I don't have that much free time and way too many other hobbies and interests.
Because most people aren't interested in being criminals. Really.
...yet they still seem to have a lot customers for new games.
Because this hasn't been implemented.
I highly doubt there was any library code prior to the N64. Programming on bare hardware in assembly seems like the only good option when dealing with hardware constraints like that.
Putting it on the web site is distribution. Nobody's saying making your own copy is illegal - just that duplicating it for anyone who asks is illegal.
You sure about that? My local Target has 3 for in-store pickup today. Wal-Mart, it's a 3 day wait but they can ship it right away.
Why deal with the console? Just buy the cartridges, discs, etc, and make a legal format-shifting backup copy (at least for the ones without DRM). I'm not going to argue for the RetroPie because I would rather have accurate emulation than cheap, but just about anything is easier than using original hardware to play on.
If there's no DRM, then the DMCA in the US says it's completely OK and legal to copy those ROMs onto a PC and run them with your emulator of choice (personal backup copy, format shifting).
They have a stake, but no standing to sue over those.
100KB is longer than a work of Shakespeare (whether typed by monkeys or otherwise).
What happened was that they "sold" their rights to the song to the (for nearly nothing) to avoid litigation that could have cost an astronomical amount. The actual symphony recording and the original Rolling Stones song were both put out by the same label, so it's really crazy that they had no obligation to inform them of the conflict and ask for that licensing up front.