This is an all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares issue.
IP is intangible property. An original trademarked name, an original concept, an unoriginal trademarked name and a stolen concept are all IP.
Since you probably missed the point the first 2 times I stated in this post, all original trademarked names and concepts are IP, but not all IP is original concepts or trademarked names.
If you want it to be easy, get a ton of money, and buy it.
If you want it to be (relatively) cheap, build it yourself.
You are so wishy-washy that there isn't a solution for you.
Syousef is right. If you had any idea what you were looking for, the/. community would be able to help you. Instead, I wasted time posting this response.
At that point, the job of a human will be to build a better robot burger maker, or to find a way for people to make a better / cheaper / unique yet beneficial in ways the robot is not burger.
Likewise, car repair, once all vehicles go electric in about 150 years (I'll get my flying car too:) ), will be about repairing the electronic systems when they break down.
More likely, a socialist regime will create a world in which people choose not to work because they can do things they want without working. This will drive up prices of everything, because less people will be working, so less will be produced, and some people who arent working will have to work to survive. At some point we will reach equilibrium, either through appropriate supply / demand or through people dying off due to not working.
If you buy a car and it arrives with a license plate, you should assume that the car is stolen. Generally, license plates deal with the driver, not the car (its to show ownership of the vehicle, not license to operate).
You will find that a dealership will give you a temporary license plate, that states the date by which you have to register the car in your home state/county. Sometimes it will include the dealership name.
If you find a state that will let you get a potentially offensive vanity plate, thats another issue entiretly. If I can't get "SuperJew", you probably can't get "nigger".
Hang on one second...what the hell is a college grad with 50k in debt doing working at a 7-11?
Secondly, why would "mom" download a $2500 adobe master suite when the features she gets from her free copy of photoshop that was installed for her on her windows box from Dell (thus driving up the profits for the manufacturer) provide all the picture amusement she wants?
Now for a long rant. To ignore the rant, read outside the brackets.
[Begin Rant]
If adobe thought they could make more money by lowering their price on proprietary software, they would. In reality, nothing else comes close to the value provided by their $2500 software packaage, and those who can afford it, buy it. Those who can't afford it, probably don't need it. There isnt a situation where a legitimate user of the software for commerical purposes would have a client that would ask them to work without appropriate tools.
If you find yourself in the position where a client wants you to complete work that requires software that you dont have, you either get the client to pay for it, pony up the money yourself because multiple clients will need you to use it, or you turn them down for the position.
A home user of photoshop will at some point work with 100MB images. They certainly don't today, but 3-5 MB images are common. A 10 Megapixel point and shoot camera sells for under $200 today. A quick craigslist search in my area (atlanta) shows a Sony 60 GB internal hard drive camcorder available for sale for under $500. Its even easier to use than the one my mother does.
The line between professional and home user is shrinking every day, and quite honestly, the difference doesn't matter to the vast majority of users. Breaking software into professional and home makes less sense over time. The difference between consumer piracy and commercial piracy is that the consumer has more assets at stake when caught and the commericial is more likely to be caught.
I don't know where the concept of a lost sale comes from, but it isnt from piracy. Consumers either purchase things or they dont. It is the purpose of the business to produce things that consumers want to buy. Not to produce things that consumers want to use. With software, the only thing you are really selling is the promise to continue to sell and back up that product. A copy of software has no intrinsic value.
[Hey look, a car analogy!] A car, in contrast, has intrinsic value. It serves a purpose, of transportation of people, goods, and creation of ability for service involving the transportation of people and goods. Over time, the value of a car decreases, as newer models are produced that complete the same function with less upkeep, higher safety features, and improved functions. Software, quite similiarly, gets updated, gets improved, and becomes more functional and useful over time. If I tweak my car, and make it faster, or more fuel efficient, or safer, or upgrade it from automatic to manual for better handling, or paint it a ridiculous color that matches your favorite sports team, I can sell it for more than I bought it. If I buy software, and I tweak it to perform better, or improve the skin, or actually work with my alternate operating system, I can't resell it. This makes sense. There is no value added when I tweak software, because infinite copies can be made at no marginal cost.
When you buy software, you are buying the next upgrade. You are paying salary, and R&D, and education for future software engineers, and updates, and upgrades, and maybe even a small/large profit to create incentive for the software creators to keep creating. With professional software, this is a business. If you create software as a hobby, you aren't going to be better than a business. By definition, there is no guarantee that future software or upgrades or improvements or service will be provided, and businesses need these things to remain competitive.
[End Rant]
Getting slightly on topic, I don't believe that DRM beneficial to businesses. Its a c
"I know some voice mail systems already allow speeding up the message, but it's not very intuitive and you still get those awful menus. Plus, the voice on the menus speaks So. Fucking. Slowly. When. They. Tell. You. What. Time. The. Person. Who. Left. The. Message. Called."
A troll is someone who posts explicitly to gather a reaction, often a specific one.
To simplify, if you post something with the intention getting a response that you dont actually agree with, as opposed to furthering real discussion, then you are a troll.
Staying on topic, the function of the UN is not to limit the voice of the strongest powers, after all, this would have no discernible effect (See US, China, Russia, Israel).
Instead, rather than sharing power, the UN is simply a global voice that says "bad dog, no soup for you." It has absolutely no effect on what anyone can or will do, and quite frankly, regardless of where you go, anyone who is not specifically a member of the UN will have no idea of anything that the UN pushes through.
If you disagree, you are wrong. Not due to my opinion, but rather due to the fact that that the UN hasnt just done nothing for the US since inception, but rather that it hasnt done anything for anyone since inception.
It is nice to know that taxes in multiple countries fund it anyway.
Don't bother responding to anything on/. in the future; it is clear that you don't know how to debate. Here is a hint: it starts with being objective, and ends with responses that are rational and have actual thought put into them, because they are in context. It does not involve parsing words and then insulting whoever you are responding to.
If I were in a situation where a sorerign nation's military had justifiably defended itself and had in this process killed members of my family, I would not take action by firing back at civilians. Instead, I would either join my countries military, or if I was a refugee, implore my home country to take appropriate military action.
Now looking at reality, Israel is providing foreign aid into the area. They are correctly attempting to prohibit transfer of items into the area that hamas has claimed and in the past used to attack both civilian and military targets. This is under the pretext of defense. Hamas, on the other hand, is not distibuting the aid properly, which results in some members obtaining what they need, while others are starving to death.
If I were a palestinian, I would blame the arab nations for my situation, and would any irrational action against them. In their defense, the palestinians elected hamas to lead them, with the stated goal of destruction of Israel, so I can't blame Egypt for not accepting refugees when they have a truce with Israel.
As for the 13 years olds death, she entered into a zone that she reasonably should have known was off limits to her, and that if she were to do so, in the manner that she did (carrying a backpack, which was interperated as possibly carrying a bomb), that she was taking the risk of being misconstrued as a terrorist. Israel was correct to shoot her, whether you agree with it or not. Since you are tying to personalize this, my daughter certainly by the time she she can travel without being at my side, will know not to travel into a war zone, with or without something that looks like a bomb. That "asshole" made a judgement call that her age had nothing to do with the fact that her death was justifiable compared to risking mulitple innocent lives, or mulitple military lives. Then again, I actually read your linked article.
Personally, I don't live in the UK at the moment. When I did, I watched tv news long enough to realize that news in the UK doesnt report the truth, but rather reports an interpratation of facts that misconstrue reality to whatever will incite hatred towards the actually correct party. See UK coverage of any military action and they will show the legally correct side as something to demonize. "The famous case often replayed on the TV in the UK and Israel never apologises for cases where it was pretty obvious after investigations and watching live TV footage that they had shot people for the sheer enjoyment of it"
Clearly, that is your misinterpretation. No Israeli soldier is happy that they have to kill people. Obviously, the only thing Israel wants is peace. I, for one, am insulted that you would insinuate otherwise.
"I am sure you can remember that Israel used to impose the death penalty without trial for Palestinian children throwing stones."
Actually, I can't, but only because it isnt true.
What I do remember is that palestinian women have dressed up, pretending to be pregnant and in labor, but in reality were carrying homemade bombs, so that they could try to blow up hospitals in Israel.
I am fairly certain that Israel would notice the difference between non-violent protest and rocket attacks.
Now granted, most of those attacks miss. Not the least bit relevant. Israel should not apologize for responding to constant, daily, continuous (yep, repeating this point on purpose) terrorism from the palestinians. Hamas is a terrorist organization, and those who support hamas are supporting terror.
Ghandi may have abhored violence, but his real goal was peace. So is Israel's goal. The palestinians want the destruction of Israel if Jews are to live there. They do not recognize Israel's right to exist. Because of this, you most certainly should condemn violence by palestinians, and be excited that Israel is finally taking real action to stop terrorism.
As a US citizen, I like my freedoms, which come from recognizing all citizens as having basic equal rights. The US supports Israel because Israel shares this view. Any time there is an attack on a US citizen, we fight back. Israel is a sovereign nation, and has both the right and the obligation to protect itself. Shame on you for trying to say otherwise.
I'll bite. You either havent brought this idea to a lawyer (IANAL), or your lawyers are dumb as bricks.
I assume you are throwing the explanation into a EULA, and not into the product title. If you put it in the title, no one is going to bother to download it, much less install it, so you are wasting time and money. However, if you throw it into a EULA, you have changed your offer within the software, without giving me a real option to return if I don't agree with the changes (which in this case most certainly would not be immaterial, and since I'm not a merchant, goods have to conform exactly anyway), which would make this a tort.
"We have no duty of care nor contract with such downloaders"
Yes you do. Your company is a merchant, and therefore is under the UCC. When you are in the business of selling a product, and someone obtains a stolen version of that product, you still have strict product liability. If I weigh 200 lbs, and buy a chair (sorry, this isnt a car analogy) that says it holds weights up to 300 lbs, and it breaks while I'm sitting in it and I break my tailbone, guess who is liable? Thats right, the manufacturer, wholesaler, and retailer. It doesn't matter if I receive it as a gift from my grandmother or if I buy it on the subway (except that neither of them are a merchant, so I could only sue the manufacturer and wholesaler). Here's the fun part: Since you are knowingly releasing a product that is designed to be damaging to a consumer in a specific way (after all, you programmed it to do so), while the customer is relying on it to work in a specifically different way (and remember, the price of your product is irrelevant), you have committed a fraudulent tort. This opens you up to punitive damages beyond that of reasonably expected damages resulting from the use of such software.
Then again, you want to be in a wonderful magical mystery world where retribution attacks dont exist.
Legal issues aside,
"it is 100% certain that those who download pirated versions will never become legitimate customers."
This isnt even remotely relevent from a legal stance, only from an ethical one, and quite frankly, who gives a fuck. Who are you punishing if pirating users will never purchase your software? Do you really believe that people who download the malware versions released by your company will become legitimate users? If not, why bother at all?
"As you can see by the responses here to this article, many slashdotters have abandoned even the pretense of soome pseudophilosophical justification for their piracy and are just concentrating on the technical tricks involved in being better pirates ("virtual machines, baby", etc.)"
While I can agree that most/.ers might focus on the technical tricks involved in piracy, I would think that most/.ers would focus on the technical tricks of most things. 'As you can see by the responses to this article, many/.ers have abandoned even the pretense of some psuedophilosophical justification for reading the article or summary and are just concentrating on the technical tricks involved in writing better trojans.' See, this makes the same point yet without even resorting to an offtopic tagline.
If you pay the university to learn how to use a lawnmower, and in the process you get to borrow the university's lawn mower, so that you can practice lawn mowing techniques, you dont own the universitie's lawn afterwards. In fact, if you discover a new method of mowing a lawn using their lawnmower, they get to patent the idea, not you.
If you want to develop on your own, you might have to buy your own lawnmower.
If you write a program on a rented laptop, program is owned by you so long as you dont enter into an agreement whereby anything produced on the laptop becomes property of the rental company. Its certainly not a given.
Responding because modding you down wont have the correct effect (too many idiots think you are insightful).
Not in the least bit possible.
R&D is ALWAYS a direct expense, not an asset. R&D is done with the hope that something will come out of it, but hope is not an asset. Since there is no reasonable basis to assume that IP with value can come from R&D, it is by definition an expense.
If investors see R&D as a profit center, they dont know how to invest.
This is much like how a shovel and pick do not discover or create minerals. R&D can help create/discover minerals, and once they are found, a shovel and pick can be used to deplete the mineral source that has already been obtained.
The only way that IP is treated as an asset is when the actual value of the patent can be determined (patent #74839274982349 gives us the right to be the only company that uses method x, which from an actuarial calculation has a value of y). Y is amortized over the useful life of the patent. Once ammortized, the Intangible Asset no longer creates value. In fact, the value of an Intangible asset is more to attract top R&D talent, rather than to create long term value for a company.
Its not like eating your seed corn to lock away knowledge; rather its like developing a new plant from seed corn and not letting anyone else grow it until you bring a product to market that no one else has. You then get the marketing bump from being first and can charge a higher price than the knockoffs that inevitably come (who will have to reverse engineer the plant and determine its uses, that you have already to paid to create). This is reasonable since you took the risk of putting all that money into R&D and eventually came up with something useful.
No, its only the main language in 1 of the 12 districts (as you might expect, in Cataluna [anyone know how to make the ~n in slashdot forums?]). Despite a similiar base, the languages are quite distinct however. If you understand spanish, you will have a lot of difficulty speaking with someone who only speaks catalan (and not spanish). Catalan is actually not spoken very widely (at least in public areas; it is much more prevelant among private citizens). To be honest, almost every mainstream area spoke at least tourist english; enough to sell you something, but not enough to have a real conversation.
I was lucky; I lived in an apartment complex outside of Horta-Guinardo along with a lot of college age locals who were studying english (among other things); so it was good practice for all of us to have conversations (although it was difficult initially with me speaking broken spanish and they speaking broken english:) ).
At Georgia Tech I completed a study abroad in Barcelona (combination CS and architecture). Of my courses, only 1 was entirely in spanish (which happened to be spanish, which was very helpful in the immersion process).
The thing to remember is that a study abroad isnt about the classes you take, but rather about learning the culture and getting a new perspective on how the world works.
Not to mention that if you manage to learn something tangible from the experience, its a great conversation starter in your interviews later. Suddenly, you are the guy who went to Spain, not the guy who spent the summer playing WOW.
Slashdot Mirror
This is an all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares issue.
IP is intangible property. An original trademarked name, an original concept, an unoriginal trademarked name and a stolen concept are all IP.
Since you probably missed the point the first 2 times I stated in this post, all original trademarked names and concepts are IP, but not all IP is original concepts or trademarked names.
I was in a gamestop recently, looking for a copy of Chrono Trigger for the DS. Turns out, the new version was $30, and the used version was $34.99.
I have absolutely no idea how this is possible. Needless to say, I ended up buying it new off craigslist fro $20.
If you want it to be easy, get a ton of money, and buy it.
If you want it to be (relatively) cheap, build it yourself.
You are so wishy-washy that there isn't a solution for you.
Syousef is right. If you had any idea what you were looking for, the /. community would be able to help you. Instead, I wasted time posting this response.
At that point, the job of a human will be to build a better robot burger maker, or to find a way for people to make a better / cheaper / unique yet beneficial in ways the robot is not burger.
Likewise, car repair, once all vehicles go electric in about 150 years (I'll get my flying car too :) ), will be about repairing the electronic systems when they break down.
More likely, a socialist regime will create a world in which people choose not to work because they can do things they want without working. This will drive up prices of everything, because less people will be working, so less will be produced, and some people who arent working will have to work to survive. At some point we will reach equilibrium, either through appropriate supply / demand or through people dying off due to not working.
I wasn't, but I'm not sensitive to their plight now after reading about it. I sure as hell don't blame google maps for it.
If you buy a car and it arrives with a license plate, you should assume that the car is stolen. Generally, license plates deal with the driver, not the car (its to show ownership of the vehicle, not license to operate).
You will find that a dealership will give you a temporary license plate, that states the date by which you have to register the car in your home state /county. Sometimes it will include the dealership name.
If you find a state that will let you get a potentially offensive vanity plate, thats another issue entiretly. If I can't get "SuperJew", you probably can't get "nigger".
Why is this a when question, rather than an if question?
Because its an ethical question with an infinite time frame, not a binary question in a case study.
Hang on one second...what the hell is a college grad with 50k in debt doing working at a 7-11?
Secondly, why would "mom" download a $2500 adobe master suite when the features she gets from her free copy of photoshop that was installed for her on her windows box from Dell (thus driving up the profits for the manufacturer) provide all the picture amusement she wants?
Now for a long rant. To ignore the rant, read outside the brackets.
[Begin Rant]
If adobe thought they could make more money by lowering their price on proprietary software, they would. In reality, nothing else comes close to the value provided by their $2500 software packaage, and those who can afford it, buy it. Those who can't afford it, probably don't need it. There isnt a situation where a legitimate user of the software for commerical purposes would have a client that would ask them to work without appropriate tools.
If you find yourself in the position where a client wants you to complete work that requires software that you dont have, you either get the client to pay for it, pony up the money yourself because multiple clients will need you to use it, or you turn them down for the position.
A home user of photoshop will at some point work with 100MB images. They certainly don't today, but 3-5 MB images are common. A 10 Megapixel point and shoot camera sells for under $200 today. A quick craigslist search in my area (atlanta) shows a Sony 60 GB internal hard drive camcorder available for sale for under $500. Its even easier to use than the one my mother does.
The line between professional and home user is shrinking every day, and quite honestly, the difference doesn't matter to the vast majority of users. Breaking software into professional and home makes less sense over time. The difference between consumer piracy and commercial piracy is that the consumer has more assets at stake when caught and the commericial is more likely to be caught.
I don't know where the concept of a lost sale comes from, but it isnt from piracy. Consumers either purchase things or they dont. It is the purpose of the business to produce things that consumers want to buy. Not to produce things that consumers want to use. With software, the only thing you are really selling is the promise to continue to sell and back up that product. A copy of software has no intrinsic value.
[Hey look, a car analogy!] A car, in contrast, has intrinsic value. It serves a purpose, of transportation of people, goods, and creation of ability for service involving the transportation of people and goods. Over time, the value of a car decreases, as newer models are produced that complete the same function with less upkeep, higher safety features, and improved functions. Software, quite similiarly, gets updated, gets improved, and becomes more functional and useful over time. If I tweak my car, and make it faster, or more fuel efficient, or safer, or upgrade it from automatic to manual for better handling, or paint it a ridiculous color that matches your favorite sports team, I can sell it for more than I bought it. If I buy software, and I tweak it to perform better, or improve the skin, or actually work with my alternate operating system, I can't resell it. This makes sense. There is no value added when I tweak software, because infinite copies can be made at no marginal cost.
When you buy software, you are buying the next upgrade. You are paying salary, and R&D, and education for future software engineers, and updates, and upgrades, and maybe even a small/large profit to create incentive for the software creators to keep creating. With professional software, this is a business. If you create software as a hobby, you aren't going to be better than a business. By definition, there is no guarantee that future software or upgrades or improvements or service will be provided, and businesses need these things to remain competitive.
[End Rant]
Getting slightly on topic, I don't believe that DRM beneficial to businesses. Its a c
That isnt how a signature works.
What matters is that you signed it, not what you signed.
If you sign your mortgage with your mother's name, you are still liable, not her.
RE post rated PG for offensive language
"I know some voice mail systems already allow speeding up the message, but it's not very intuitive and you still get those awful menus. Plus, the voice on the menus speaks So. Fucking. Slowly. When. They. Tell. You. What. Time. The. Person. Who. Left. The. Message. Called."
I think its for the use of fucking...
Really? Outlook?
Nothing to see here.
Move along
No, not quite.
A troll is someone who posts explicitly to gather a reaction, often a specific one.
To simplify, if you post something with the intention getting a response that you dont actually agree with, as opposed to furthering real discussion, then you are a troll.
Staying on topic, the function of the UN is not to limit the voice of the strongest powers, after all, this would have no discernible effect (See US, China, Russia, Israel).
Instead, rather than sharing power, the UN is simply a global voice that says "bad dog, no soup for you." It has absolutely no effect on what anyone can or will do, and quite frankly, regardless of where you go, anyone who is not specifically a member of the UN will have no idea of anything that the UN pushes through.
If you disagree, you are wrong. Not due to my opinion, but rather due to the fact that that the UN hasnt just done nothing for the US since inception, but rather that it hasnt done anything for anyone since inception.
It is nice to know that taxes in multiple countries fund it anyway.
UK gov. clueless
Do you make it yourself? You do have to boil the tea before you ice it...
Actually, in that case, loose or lose are both appropriate.
(sarcasm)Thanks for taking everything out of context (sarcasm)
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt when I first responded to you, but clearly you are just a troll.
Obligatory: http://www.xkcd.com/169/
Don't bother responding to anything on /. in the future; it is clear that you don't know how to debate. Here is a hint: it starts with being objective, and ends with responses that are rational and have actual thought put into them, because they are in context. It does not involve parsing words and then insulting whoever you are responding to.
Of course this needs an answer.
If I were in a situation where a sorerign nation's military had justifiably defended itself and had in this process killed members of my family, I would not take action by firing back at civilians. Instead, I would either join my countries military, or if I was a refugee, implore my home country to take appropriate military action.
Now looking at reality, Israel is providing foreign aid into the area. They are correctly attempting to prohibit transfer of items into the area that hamas has claimed and in the past used to attack both civilian and military targets. This is under the pretext of defense. Hamas, on the other hand, is not distibuting the aid properly, which results in some members obtaining what they need, while others are starving to death.
If I were a palestinian, I would blame the arab nations for my situation, and would any irrational action against them. In their defense, the palestinians elected hamas to lead them, with the stated goal of destruction of Israel, so I can't blame Egypt for not accepting refugees when they have a truce with Israel.
As for the 13 years olds death, she entered into a zone that she reasonably should have known was off limits to her, and that if she were to do so, in the manner that she did (carrying a backpack, which was interperated as possibly carrying a bomb), that she was taking the risk of being misconstrued as a terrorist. Israel was correct to shoot her, whether you agree with it or not. Since you are tying to personalize this, my daughter certainly by the time she she can travel without being at my side, will know not to travel into a war zone, with or without something that looks like a bomb. That "asshole" made a judgement call that her age had nothing to do with the fact that her death was justifiable compared to risking mulitple innocent lives, or mulitple military lives. Then again, I actually read your linked article.
Personally, I don't live in the UK at the moment. When I did, I watched tv news long enough to realize that news in the UK doesnt report the truth, but rather reports an interpratation of facts that misconstrue reality to whatever will incite hatred towards the actually correct party. See UK coverage of any military action and they will show the legally correct side as something to demonize.
"The famous case often replayed on the TV in the UK and Israel never apologises for cases where it was pretty obvious after investigations and watching live TV footage that they had shot people for the sheer enjoyment of it"
Clearly, that is your misinterpretation. No Israeli soldier is happy that they have to kill people. Obviously, the only thing Israel wants is peace. I, for one, am insulted that you would insinuate otherwise.
"I am sure you can remember that Israel used to impose the death penalty without trial for Palestinian children throwing stones."
Actually, I can't, but only because it isnt true.
What I do remember is that palestinian women have dressed up, pretending to be pregnant and in labor, but in reality were carrying homemade bombs, so that they could try to blow up hospitals in Israel.
I am fairly certain that Israel would notice the difference between non-violent protest and rocket attacks.
Now granted, most of those attacks miss. Not the least bit relevant. Israel should not apologize for responding to constant, daily, continuous (yep, repeating this point on purpose) terrorism from the palestinians. Hamas is a terrorist organization, and those who support hamas are supporting terror.
Ghandi may have abhored violence, but his real goal was peace. So is Israel's goal. The palestinians want the destruction of Israel if Jews are to live there. They do not recognize Israel's right to exist. Because of this, you most certainly should condemn violence by palestinians, and be excited that Israel is finally taking real action to stop terrorism.
As a US citizen, I like my freedoms, which come from recognizing all citizens as having basic equal rights. The US supports Israel because Israel shares this view. Any time there is an attack on a US citizen, we fight back. Israel is a sovereign nation, and has both the right and the obligation to protect itself. Shame on you for trying to say otherwise.
I'll bite. You either havent brought this idea to a lawyer (IANAL), or your lawyers are dumb as bricks.
I assume you are throwing the explanation into a EULA, and not into the product title. If you put it in the title, no one is going to bother to download it, much less install it, so you are wasting time and money. However, if you throw it into a EULA, you have changed your offer within the software, without giving me a real option to return if I don't agree with the changes (which in this case most certainly would not be immaterial, and since I'm not a merchant, goods have to conform exactly anyway), which would make this a tort.
"We have no duty of care nor contract with such downloaders"
Yes you do. Your company is a merchant, and therefore is under the UCC. When you are in the business of selling a product, and someone obtains a stolen version of that product, you still have strict product liability. If I weigh 200 lbs, and buy a chair (sorry, this isnt a car analogy) that says it holds weights up to 300 lbs, and it breaks while I'm sitting in it and I break my tailbone, guess who is liable? Thats right, the manufacturer, wholesaler, and retailer. It doesn't matter if I receive it as a gift from my grandmother or if I buy it on the subway (except that neither of them are a merchant, so I could only sue the manufacturer and wholesaler). Here's the fun part: Since you are knowingly releasing a product that is designed to be damaging to a consumer in a specific way (after all, you programmed it to do so), while the customer is relying on it to work in a specifically different way (and remember, the price of your product is irrelevant), you have committed a fraudulent tort. This opens you up to punitive damages beyond that of reasonably expected damages resulting from the use of such software.
Then again, you want to be in a wonderful magical mystery world where retribution attacks dont exist.
Legal issues aside,
"it is 100% certain that those who download pirated versions will never become legitimate customers."
This isnt even remotely relevent from a legal stance, only from an ethical one, and quite frankly, who gives a fuck. Who are you punishing if pirating users will never purchase your software? Do you really believe that people who download the malware versions released by your company will become legitimate users? If not, why bother at all?
"As you can see by the responses here to this article, many slashdotters have abandoned even the pretense of soome pseudophilosophical justification for their piracy and are just concentrating on the technical tricks involved in being better pirates ("virtual machines, baby", etc.)"
While I can agree that most /.ers might focus on the technical tricks involved in piracy, I would think that most /.ers would focus on the technical tricks of most things. 'As you can see by the responses to this article, many /.ers have abandoned even the pretense of some psuedophilosophical justification for reading the article or summary and are just concentrating on the technical tricks involved in writing better trojans.' See, this makes the same point yet without even resorting to an offtopic tagline.
You've got it backwards.
If you pay the university to learn how to use a lawnmower, and in the process you get to borrow the university's lawn mower, so that you can practice lawn mowing techniques, you dont own the universitie's lawn afterwards. In fact, if you discover a new method of mowing a lawn using their lawnmower, they get to patent the idea, not you.
If you want to develop on your own, you might have to buy your own lawnmower.
If you write a program on a rented laptop, program is owned by you so long as you dont enter into an agreement whereby anything produced on the laptop becomes property of the rental company. Its certainly not a given.
Responding because modding you down wont have the correct effect (too many idiots think you are insightful).
Not in the least bit possible.
R&D is ALWAYS a direct expense, not an asset. R&D is done with the hope that something will come out of it, but hope is not an asset. Since there is no reasonable basis to assume that IP with value can come from R&D, it is by definition an expense.
If investors see R&D as a profit center, they dont know how to invest.
This is much like how a shovel and pick do not discover or create minerals. R&D can help create/discover minerals, and once they are found, a shovel and pick can be used to deplete the mineral source that has already been obtained.
The only way that IP is treated as an asset is when the actual value of the patent can be determined (patent #74839274982349 gives us the right to be the only company that uses method x, which from an actuarial calculation has a value of y). Y is amortized over the useful life of the patent. Once ammortized, the Intangible Asset no longer creates value. In fact, the value of an Intangible asset is more to attract top R&D talent, rather than to create long term value for a company.
Its not like eating your seed corn to lock away knowledge; rather its like developing a new plant from seed corn and not letting anyone else grow it until you bring a product to market that no one else has. You then get the marketing bump from being first and can charge a higher price than the knockoffs that inevitably come (who will have to reverse engineer the plant and determine its uses, that you have already to paid to create). This is reasonable since you took the risk of putting all that money into R&D and eventually came up with something useful.
No, its only the main language in 1 of the 12 districts (as you might expect, in Cataluna [anyone know how to make the ~n in slashdot forums?]). Despite a similiar base, the languages are quite distinct however. If you understand spanish, you will have a lot of difficulty speaking with someone who only speaks catalan (and not spanish). Catalan is actually not spoken very widely (at least in public areas; it is much more prevelant among private citizens). To be honest, almost every mainstream area spoke at least tourist english; enough to sell you something, but not enough to have a real conversation.
I was lucky; I lived in an apartment complex outside of Horta-Guinardo along with a lot of college age locals who were studying english (among other things); so it was good practice for all of us to have conversations (although it was difficult initially with me speaking broken spanish and they speaking broken english :) ).
I have to agree.
At Georgia Tech I completed a study abroad in Barcelona (combination CS and architecture). Of my courses, only 1 was entirely in spanish (which happened to be spanish, which was very helpful in the immersion process).
The thing to remember is that a study abroad isnt about the classes you take, but rather about learning the culture and getting a new perspective on how the world works.
Not to mention that if you manage to learn something tangible from the experience, its a great conversation starter in your interviews later. Suddenly, you are the guy who went to Spain, not the guy who spent the summer playing WOW.