They can be copyrighted because the ability to do so favors the large corporations that buy the members of the government responsible for enacting and enforcing copyright law. This is also why $150,000 in damages can be awarded for copying a song that can be legally downloaded for $0.99.
In local news, the Super Bowl party at Bill's house has also been canceled. Legal experts on the matter advise everyone watching the Super Bowl to do so in a room by themselves with the door locked to prevent any further violations.
I do feel compelled to note that every time something like this is developed in a movie or TV show, it ends up nearly killing everyone within the scope of the show. Stargate. Star Trek. Terminators 2 & 3. Hell, even Dr. Who had to stop them in the first season of the new series.
So...exactly how large and successful does a company have to become before the government decides that it should have the right to define its policies? Google is not owned by the U.S. government, nor is it at all feasible to regulate the Internet (unless you are in China, it seems). So why is this even a legal issue? The best fix for this is competition in the search engine industry and having people who think Google has somehow wronged them to tell other people why.
There have been several challengers, but so far Google has won out. The human-powered element is cropping up in some of the latest sites trying to get in to the game, like ChaCha.com. My hope is that connecting users with a wide base of human "search experts" will eventually make it much harder for search engines to arbitrarily tamper with their data. Granted, we are still a long way from reaching that ideal, but it sounds like a good direction to go. Especially if you have any control over what search experts you're getting connected to.
Why are the structures we build in cities any 'less natural' than a bird building a nest? Because bird nests don't release poisonous compounds into all air and water that pass near it.
Slashdot Mirror
They can be copyrighted because the ability to do so favors the large corporations that buy the members of the government responsible for enacting and enforcing copyright law. This is also why $150,000 in damages can be awarded for copying a song that can be legally downloaded for $0.99.
In local news, the Super Bowl party at Bill's house has also been canceled. Legal experts on the matter advise everyone watching the Super Bowl to do so in a room by themselves with the door locked to prevent any further violations.
Step 1: legally change name to John Smith ...
Step 2:
Step 3: profit!
I do feel compelled to note that every time something like this is developed in a movie or TV show, it ends up nearly killing everyone within the scope of the show. Stargate. Star Trek. Terminators 2 & 3. Hell, even Dr. Who had to stop them in the first season of the new series.
Also, Uma Thurman
Don't worry, I'm developing PWARWs in my basement :)
Do you really want to throw away $7,200,000,000?
<OK> <Cancel>
So...exactly how large and successful does a company have to become before the government decides that it should have the right to define its policies? Google is not owned by the U.S. government, nor is it at all feasible to regulate the Internet (unless you are in China, it seems). So why is this even a legal issue? The best fix for this is competition in the search engine industry and having people who think Google has somehow wronged them to tell other people why.
There have been several challengers, but so far Google has won out. The human-powered element is cropping up in some of the latest sites trying to get in to the game, like ChaCha.com. My hope is that connecting users with a wide base of human "search experts" will eventually make it much harder for search engines to arbitrarily tamper with their data. Granted, we are still a long way from reaching that ideal, but it sounds like a good direction to go. Especially if you have any control over what search experts you're getting connected to.
I can resolve that...emacs is better :)
Why are the structures we build in cities any 'less natural' than a bird building a nest? Because bird nests don't release poisonous compounds into all air and water that pass near it.