I like the Twain reference, in regards to the GPU specs. Slight shift in phrasing, and it could be a fairly prophetic assessment of the X-box itself.:P
That said, anyone else notice that more people are speaking of this as a real product, instead of quite-likely-vaporware as it was originally (vehemently) denounced? I see a handful of posts talking about how it hasn't shipped yet ("for the record," I think is the phrase being used), but as time goes on, it seems MS marketing is getting this notion into heads all around.
...considered vandalism at the least, and potentially terrorism at worst(depending upon presentation, interpretation, etc). And Katz is celebrating this guy? Scott
When the ISPs are contacted by the MPAA's lawyers, invoking the DCMA, they have no choice but to pull the site immediately. The DCMA mandates a procedure for accusing someone of violating copyright on the 'net, and the first part of the procedure is that, upon accusation, to pull the site.
That sounds an awful lot like what happened to etoy.com at the behest of a certain toy vendor by everyone's favorite, NSI. The only problem with that comparison is, in the case of using the DMCA against sites linking to DeCSS or information about said stuff, there are a hell of a lot more gophers to whack with the rubber mallet, to use a really, really bad metaphor.
The sites will get pulled. Then the person whose site it is gets to ask for clarification, which must be supplied by the MPAA lawyers. Basically, proof of the copyright violation must be presented to the ISP. At that point, the ISP will either put the pages back up or keep them down permanently.
I'd liken this to, say, a publisher shutting down some periodical or cutting off all printing and distribution of some book or other because there's simply the question of its legality - the only difference here is that our lawmakers passed too restrictive a law. They'd have never allowed such measures for printed material, but somehow, they fail to understand that the 'Net is just another medium, albeit a newer and potentially more powerful one.
The other thing that bothers me about that, though, is that it would seem that all this could happen outside the view (subsequent jurisdiction) of a court. Am I wrong on that count?
The DCMA is a draconian instrument; designed exactly for this kind of suppression of speech.
"Draconian" is damned right - although given time, I think the courts will take care of the constitutionality of the various icky sections of the DMCA for us - assuming, of course, that they don't make the same old-fashioned assumptions. It'll suck in the meantime, though...
He hasn't given NSI any money yet, as such, so they have no money to give back to him. Should they reimburse him for what he paid the original owner of the domain? I'd think so, yeah. Are they gonna? Since they're not legally obligated by contract, then I betcha they won't. The Bottom Line here - for the poor guy who's out some serious cash - is that any agreement that says anything about lack of liability, non-warranty, no service guaranteed, etc., is not an agreement on which you want any real assets riding.
Slashdot Mirror
I like the Twain reference, in regards to the GPU specs. Slight shift in phrasing, and it could be a fairly prophetic assessment of the X-box itself.:P
That said, anyone else notice that more people are speaking of this as a real product, instead of quite-likely-vaporware as it was originally (vehemently) denounced? I see a handful of posts talking about how it hasn't shipped yet ("for the record," I think is the phrase being used), but as time goes on, it seems MS marketing is getting this notion into heads all around.
My (arbitrary fraction of a dollar).:)
they have no choice but to pull the site immediately. The DCMA mandates a procedure
for accusing someone of violating copyright on the 'net, and the first part of
the procedure is that, upon accusation, to pull the site.
That sounds an awful lot like what happened to etoy.com at the behest of a certain toy vendor by everyone's favorite, NSI. The only problem with that comparison is, in the case of using the DMCA against sites linking to DeCSS or information about said stuff, there are a hell of a lot more gophers to whack with the rubber mallet, to use a really, really bad metaphor.
The sites will get pulled. Then the person whose site it is gets to ask forclarification, which must be supplied by the MPAA lawyers. Basically, proof of the
copyright violation must be presented to the ISP. At that point, the ISP will either
put the pages back up or keep them down permanently.
I'd liken this to, say, a publisher shutting down some periodical or cutting off all printing and distribution of some book or other because there's simply the question of its legality - the only difference here is that our lawmakers passed too restrictive a law. They'd have never allowed such measures for printed material, but somehow, they fail to understand that the 'Net is just another medium, albeit a newer and potentially more powerful one.
The other thing that bothers me about that, though, is that it would seem that all this could happen outside the view (subsequent jurisdiction) of a court. Am I wrong on that count?
The DCMA is a draconian instrument; designed exactly for this kind of suppression of speech."Draconian" is damned right - although given time, I think the courts will take care of the constitutionality of the various icky sections of the DMCA for us - assuming, of course, that they don't make the same old-fashioned assumptions. It'll suck in the meantime, though...
He hasn't given NSI any money yet, as such, so they have no money to give back to him. Should they reimburse him for what he paid the original owner of the domain? I'd think so, yeah. Are they gonna? Since they're not legally obligated by contract, then I betcha they won't. The Bottom Line here - for the poor guy who's out some serious cash - is that any agreement that says anything about lack of liability, non-warranty, no service guaranteed, etc., is not an agreement on which you want any real assets riding.