Sorry, there's this thing called personal responsibility. At some point people are gong to have to take responsibility for their actions. Fines for illegally distributing, or otherwise violating copyright, are not meant to cover the cost of purchasing the product in the first place, they are based on the inherent value of licensing the works as well as meant to be a deterrent to violating the copyright in the first place. If people knew they would only have to pay the price of the goods should they get caught, there would be even less of an incentive to respect copyright.
Entrapment require some form of inducement on the part of law enforcement. Sting operations often walk a fine line but as long as the police do not try to convince the person to commit an illegal act, in this case clicking on a link to child porn, then there is no entrapment.
You'd think that more people on Slashdot could see the bigger picture here. Sure, one lightbulb might not have an impact on you personally and while these lightbulbs do have a long life span, they will die eventually. When thy do die, they will be disposed of, and given the geenral laziness of the human race, they will be improperly disposed of. If one lightbulb can contaminate 1000 gallons of drinking water, we're in trouble when these lightbulbs begin to die. Why not think ahead and address this major design flaw NOW before it becomes a MUCH bigger problem?
She goes on to cite the fact that the RIAA thinks nothing of jeopardizing a student's college education in order to make their point, as support for the MAFIAA/Mafia analogy.
Of course, it's also true that college students think nothing of violating a copyright holder's rights either. Why should the RIAA respect this attitude?
"Have you ever tried to explain how something works to someone? I mean, I have to use analogies with elves, envelopes, and a giant series of tubes to explain how the interwebs work! I still end-up with a deer in the headlights stare."
Perhaps it's our explanation and the fact that you automatically assume that you are smarter then the person you are talking to? Maybe you hang around people who are dumber than you just to make yourself feel smarter? The sooner you realize that knowing more about a single subject that you have dedicated your life to does NOT make you smarter then everyone else, the sooner we can get over these bullshit Slashbot generalizations and misconceptions and have honest, open discussions. Until then, Slashdot group-think zealots like yourself are no better than the groups or organizations you mock.
The first time I installed CS3 I was upgrading from CS2 and I had no troubles. However, I had to reinstall CS3 and because CS2 was no longer on the system, I believe I ran into the problems others are having with the unregistered.dll's. It was a simple fix that ANYONE can do if they can follow VERY simple instructions so I don't think it's a big deal. However, on Leopard, I can't hide most of my CS3 apps and they crash unexpectedly. CS3 on Tiger has SOME of these issues but by and large, it's about as stable as CS3 on Vista and XP.
CS3 has been a complete annoyance on my Leopard Mac at home. The EXACT same source disc at work works fine on my Tiger system. Adobe has a lot of bugs to fix in CS3 for it to be fully compatible with Leopard. On my Vista system, all I had to do is register a couple.dlls manually to get CS3 to install but it runs perfectly otherwise.
Perhaps you should have kept reading a little further down. I'd also suggest actually reading the laws instead of letting wikipedia try to explain things for you. If you can't fully understand the Berne Convention then perhaps you shouldn't be commenting at all.
Although the Berne Convention states that the copyright law of the country where copyright is claimed shall be applied, article 7.8 states that "unless the legislation of that country otherwise provides, the term shall not exceed the term fixed in the country of origin of the work", i.e. an author is normally not entitled a longer copyright abroad than at home, even if the laws abroad give a longer term. This is commonly known as "the rule of the shorter term". Not all countries have accepted this rule.
Swedish copyright only protects works created in Sweden. The Berne Convention, an international treaty protecting copyright law worldwide which Sweden has agreed to, states that copyrighted works are protected by the laws in the country where they were created. This means that in Sweden it is illegal to distribute a work created in the US unless you have been given a license to do so. This also means that my e-mails are equally as protected as any other work regardless of technical merit.
There's another problem. Far too many people don't know enough about the subject of intellectual property to separate trademark from copyright from and patents. I have read comments by people who honestly believe that if you fail to protect your copyright or patent you lose it. You people need to actually read the laws and not just TorrentFreak or some other site that is intimately connected with the culture of violating intellectual property. If you truly believe you are going to get an honest understanding and education about intellectual property from a site like this then you are a fucking idiot and should really avoid going out or interacting with the public in any way (including the internet).
Copyright does NOT protect ideas, it is CLEARLY defined that copyright protects the EXPRESSION of an idea in a fixed, tangible medium. It's this simple fact that is so often overlooked and if more people understood it then we'd have far fewer people whining about copyright. Well, except for those who are only arguing against copyright because they just want shit for free which seems to be pretty much everybody arguing against copyright in the first place.
Oh, come now. Do you think the FSF, RMS or anyone who benefits from OSS would allow GPL software to be assessed along with everyone else? How naive can one person truly be?
...isn't being used by more people, "Average Joe Computer Newbie". If this is the perception of your target market then you will NEVER get anywhere. Despite all the vitriol and hatred directed towards Microsoft on Slashdot, Microsoft does one thing that NOBODY in the LInux world does, listen to customers. That's right, you hear me, listen to customers. Microsoft spends hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars and man hours with usability testing through things like focus groups and feedback. Linux users simply reply, "if you don't like the way things work, here's the code, fix it yourself." Telling this to anyone is disrespectful. Telling it to someone who doesn't care about computers or to a new Linux user is annoying and the best way to turn them away from using Linux. I know that I've looked at linux since RedHat started making a distro and have given up on it each and every time, regardless of all the glitz and polish they put into the icons and window decoration, for the very same reason each time. There is no good help out there and when I tried to offer my time and services as a designer I was ignored or told to go away and use Windows or MacOS. I've done just that and have not been the less for it either. Keep thinking your users are "Average Joe Computer Newbie" or whatever other degrading name you can think of that makes your virtual penis bigger but Linux will NEVER get any better until you start listening to your users instead of telling them what's best for them.
Even if we went back to the original 14/14 system of copyright, rampant illegal distribution of copyrighted works would be occurring at relatively the same rate as it is now. How many movies and songs do you see on the P2P networks from the years prior to 1980? Most of it is current TV shows, movies that are barely a year old or songs that are playing on the radio now. It's very simple, people want shit for free and they will get it anyway they can and make any number of excuses as to why they do what they do but it all boils down to wanting shit for free. I have no respect for these kids and I truly hope their actions come home to roost one day, leaving them destitute and broken.
Because not every piece of intellectual property is created by "Faceless Megacorp, Inc." and of many independent artists would like to make a living doing something they enjoy without having to resort to living off "tips" and the charity and goodwill of others. Music is not the only creative endeavor and authors and film makers can't just do concerts and live off merchandising.
Creators of intellectual property make up a subset of UK citizens so their voice is being heard as well. Quit thinking of this as Faceless Megacorp v. The People and you might begin to grasp the immediacy of legitimate copyright reform for all parties involved. Unfettered distribution of copyrighted works will eventually force production companies to look towards "Reality TV" as a revenue stream and take fewer chances on riskier shows (think "Firefly" or "Babylon 5"). What really pisses me off is many production companies are now offering these shows on their web sites for free to the user but they support them with ads on the site yet jackasses STILL illegally distribute these shows on YouTube or similar video sharing sites. Watch the show on the companies site and SUPPORT the reasonable distribution model provided instead of trying to take away other people's rights.
...Leopard to be adware as well. My copy came with links to iDisk/.mac and trial versions of iWorks with a few files that default to opening in Pages to get you hooked. While I can get rid of iWeb and iWorks, I cannot get rid of the iDisk link in the connect to menu item. Now that I think of it, iTunes is part of this whole adware strategy as well. Then there's Quicktime. Don't have the Pro version? Apple is going to tell you what you're missing in the menus by ghosting list items and putting a "Pro" tag next to everything. Personally I find this far more deplorable then a few links in what amounts to nothing more than an interactive/context sensitive help "palette". While many rabid anti-MS geeks on Slashdot might not find these links very helpful, some typical office workers will (and I'm sure Microsoft has the user studies to back this position up, unlike the typical Slashbot that has only anecdotal evidence they like to compare to actual data).
Even if copyright terms were brought back to 20 years there would still be MASSIVE violations occurring on P2P networks. People don't pirate movies, music, and software that is 20+ years old, they are illegally distributing works that are barely days or weeks old. In some cases works that have yet to be publicly released wind up on P2P networks. Your advertisement argument, weak as it is, only works for music. How do you suggest movie and TV production companies make a living? TV shows are traded on P2P networks sans advertisements hours after they air and I doubt advertisers are going to continue to dump money on shows that people aren't watching on TV or through an authorized distributor. What about authors? Are you honestly suggesting that authors should live off a tip jar based system? The only way to make copyright work is to maintain the SOLE right of distribution with the cpoyright holder for both commercial and NON-commercial use, period, even if you go to a five year term.
Perhaps you should learn a little more about copyright and fair use before you post again. The NFL owns the rights to all football broadcasts as it is a creation of their organization. This means they have the right to grant permission to public display/performance. Church gatherings are public and therefore they do not have the right to display the NFL games in this manner. The press is still free to show highlights of the game and report the scores because if fair use. Fair use allows for the use of portions of copyrighted information for the purposes, amongst others, of news reporting. There's nothing fraudulent about any of this and copyright works as it always has, nothing in Sonny Bono's copyright extensions or the DMCA changes this.
You have got to be fucking kidding me...Opera Watch?!? Why not point to Red Hat for news about Vista while you're at it? How 'bout you get a little more educated.
And for the record, I'm for regulation when it's necessary and benefits ALL parties involved. I detest the heavy handed use of government to try to regulate fairness when it's not needed and it's clear that it's designed to harm one party only.
Just do a find/replace and put the new META tag just after the tag. It shouldn't affect your pages and if you're pedantic about the order of your META tags you can just make the necessary changes as you actually edit the pages themselves.
How is it underminging standards? The new switch is a fucking META tag you stupid asshat. Microsoft is using META tags for what they were initially designed to do, add META data to a fucking page. This approach allows existing sites to render as they currently do and new sites can be completely standards compliant. But I guess dipshits like you think Microsoft should be regulated by Government to do everything in their power to destroy themselves by harming existing customers. Fucking idiot.
You apparently haven't tried Leopard yet. WTF is with the "new" spotlight search results window? In Tiger everything was neatly organized and offered a clear way to find what you want. In Leopard everything is put into a single Finder window. I was hoping Finder would have learned a thing or two about file organization from Tiger's Spotlight search results and Windows XP. Instead Leopard's search results picked up some bad habits from Finder.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, there's this thing called personal responsibility. At some point people are gong to have to take responsibility for their actions. Fines for illegally distributing, or otherwise violating copyright, are not meant to cover the cost of purchasing the product in the first place, they are based on the inherent value of licensing the works as well as meant to be a deterrent to violating the copyright in the first place. If people knew they would only have to pay the price of the goods should they get caught, there would be even less of an incentive to respect copyright.
Entrapment require some form of inducement on the part of law enforcement. Sting operations often walk a fine line but as long as the police do not try to convince the person to commit an illegal act, in this case clicking on a link to child porn, then there is no entrapment.
You'd think that more people on Slashdot could see the bigger picture here. Sure, one lightbulb might not have an impact on you personally and while these lightbulbs do have a long life span, they will die eventually. When thy do die, they will be disposed of, and given the geenral laziness of the human race, they will be improperly disposed of. If one lightbulb can contaminate 1000 gallons of drinking water, we're in trouble when these lightbulbs begin to die. Why not think ahead and address this major design flaw NOW before it becomes a MUCH bigger problem?
Of course, it's also true that college students think nothing of violating a copyright holder's rights either. Why should the RIAA respect this attitude?
"Have you ever tried to explain how something works to someone? I mean, I have to use analogies with elves, envelopes, and a giant series of tubes to explain how the interwebs work! I still end-up with a deer in the headlights stare."
Perhaps it's our explanation and the fact that you automatically assume that you are smarter then the person you are talking to? Maybe you hang around people who are dumber than you just to make yourself feel smarter? The sooner you realize that knowing more about a single subject that you have dedicated your life to does NOT make you smarter then everyone else, the sooner we can get over these bullshit Slashbot generalizations and misconceptions and have honest, open discussions. Until then, Slashdot group-think zealots like yourself are no better than the groups or organizations you mock.
The first time I installed CS3 I was upgrading from CS2 and I had no troubles. However, I had to reinstall CS3 and because CS2 was no longer on the system, I believe I ran into the problems others are having with the unregistered .dll's. It was a simple fix that ANYONE can do if they can follow VERY simple instructions so I don't think it's a big deal. However, on Leopard, I can't hide most of my CS3 apps and they crash unexpectedly. CS3 on Tiger has SOME of these issues but by and large, it's about as stable as CS3 on Vista and XP.
CS3 has been a complete annoyance on my Leopard Mac at home. The EXACT same source disc at work works fine on my Tiger system. Adobe has a lot of bugs to fix in CS3 for it to be fully compatible with Leopard. On my Vista system, all I had to do is register a couple .dlls manually to get CS3 to install but it runs perfectly otherwise.
Swedish copyright only protects works created in Sweden. The Berne Convention, an international treaty protecting copyright law worldwide which Sweden has agreed to, states that copyrighted works are protected by the laws in the country where they were created. This means that in Sweden it is illegal to distribute a work created in the US unless you have been given a license to do so. This also means that my e-mails are equally as protected as any other work regardless of technical merit.
There's another problem. Far too many people don't know enough about the subject of intellectual property to separate trademark from copyright from and patents. I have read comments by people who honestly believe that if you fail to protect your copyright or patent you lose it. You people need to actually read the laws and not just TorrentFreak or some other site that is intimately connected with the culture of violating intellectual property. If you truly believe you are going to get an honest understanding and education about intellectual property from a site like this then you are a fucking idiot and should really avoid going out or interacting with the public in any way (including the internet).
"...how else can ideas be protected?"
Copyright does NOT protect ideas, it is CLEARLY defined that copyright protects the EXPRESSION of an idea in a fixed, tangible medium. It's this simple fact that is so often overlooked and if more people understood it then we'd have far fewer people whining about copyright. Well, except for those who are only arguing against copyright because they just want shit for free which seems to be pretty much everybody arguing against copyright in the first place.
Oh, come now. Do you think the FSF, RMS or anyone who benefits from OSS would allow GPL software to be assessed along with everyone else? How naive can one person truly be?
"PS: "honest company"? What does that even mean?!!"
It's any company your typical Slashbot has approved for use by the "unwashed masses". You should be thanking our cute little superhero wannabes.
...isn't being used by more people, "Average Joe Computer Newbie". If this is the perception of your target market then you will NEVER get anywhere. Despite all the vitriol and hatred directed towards Microsoft on Slashdot, Microsoft does one thing that NOBODY in the LInux world does, listen to customers. That's right, you hear me, listen to customers. Microsoft spends hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars and man hours with usability testing through things like focus groups and feedback. Linux users simply reply, "if you don't like the way things work, here's the code, fix it yourself." Telling this to anyone is disrespectful. Telling it to someone who doesn't care about computers or to a new Linux user is annoying and the best way to turn them away from using Linux. I know that I've looked at linux since RedHat started making a distro and have given up on it each and every time, regardless of all the glitz and polish they put into the icons and window decoration, for the very same reason each time. There is no good help out there and when I tried to offer my time and services as a designer I was ignored or told to go away and use Windows or MacOS. I've done just that and have not been the less for it either. Keep thinking your users are "Average Joe Computer Newbie" or whatever other degrading name you can think of that makes your virtual penis bigger but Linux will NEVER get any better until you start listening to your users instead of telling them what's best for them.
Even if we went back to the original 14/14 system of copyright, rampant illegal distribution of copyrighted works would be occurring at relatively the same rate as it is now. How many movies and songs do you see on the P2P networks from the years prior to 1980? Most of it is current TV shows, movies that are barely a year old or songs that are playing on the radio now. It's very simple, people want shit for free and they will get it anyway they can and make any number of excuses as to why they do what they do but it all boils down to wanting shit for free. I have no respect for these kids and I truly hope their actions come home to roost one day, leaving them destitute and broken.
Why would I quit thinking of it that way?"
Because not every piece of intellectual property is created by "Faceless Megacorp, Inc." and of many independent artists would like to make a living doing something they enjoy without having to resort to living off "tips" and the charity and goodwill of others. Music is not the only creative endeavor and authors and film makers can't just do concerts and live off merchandising.
Creators of intellectual property make up a subset of UK citizens so their voice is being heard as well. Quit thinking of this as Faceless Megacorp v. The People and you might begin to grasp the immediacy of legitimate copyright reform for all parties involved. Unfettered distribution of copyrighted works will eventually force production companies to look towards "Reality TV" as a revenue stream and take fewer chances on riskier shows (think "Firefly" or "Babylon 5"). What really pisses me off is many production companies are now offering these shows on their web sites for free to the user but they support them with ads on the site yet jackasses STILL illegally distribute these shows on YouTube or similar video sharing sites. Watch the show on the companies site and SUPPORT the reasonable distribution model provided instead of trying to take away other people's rights.
...Leopard to be adware as well. My copy came with links to iDisk/.mac and trial versions of iWorks with a few files that default to opening in Pages to get you hooked. While I can get rid of iWeb and iWorks, I cannot get rid of the iDisk link in the connect to menu item. Now that I think of it, iTunes is part of this whole adware strategy as well. Then there's Quicktime. Don't have the Pro version? Apple is going to tell you what you're missing in the menus by ghosting list items and putting a "Pro" tag next to everything. Personally I find this far more deplorable then a few links in what amounts to nothing more than an interactive/context sensitive help "palette". While many rabid anti-MS geeks on Slashdot might not find these links very helpful, some typical office workers will (and I'm sure Microsoft has the user studies to back this position up, unlike the typical Slashbot that has only anecdotal evidence they like to compare to actual data).
Even if copyright terms were brought back to 20 years there would still be MASSIVE violations occurring on P2P networks. People don't pirate movies, music, and software that is 20+ years old, they are illegally distributing works that are barely days or weeks old. In some cases works that have yet to be publicly released wind up on P2P networks. Your advertisement argument, weak as it is, only works for music. How do you suggest movie and TV production companies make a living? TV shows are traded on P2P networks sans advertisements hours after they air and I doubt advertisers are going to continue to dump money on shows that people aren't watching on TV or through an authorized distributor. What about authors? Are you honestly suggesting that authors should live off a tip jar based system? The only way to make copyright work is to maintain the SOLE right of distribution with the cpoyright holder for both commercial and NON-commercial use, period, even if you go to a five year term.
Perhaps you should learn a little more about copyright and fair use before you post again. The NFL owns the rights to all football broadcasts as it is a creation of their organization. This means they have the right to grant permission to public display/performance. Church gatherings are public and therefore they do not have the right to display the NFL games in this manner. The press is still free to show highlights of the game and report the scores because if fair use. Fair use allows for the use of portions of copyrighted information for the purposes, amongst others, of news reporting. There's nothing fraudulent about any of this and copyright works as it always has, nothing in Sonny Bono's copyright extensions or the DMCA changes this.
You have got to be fucking kidding me...Opera Watch?!? Why not point to Red Hat for news about Vista while you're at it? How 'bout you get a little more educated.
And for the record, I'm for regulation when it's necessary and benefits ALL parties involved. I detest the heavy handed use of government to try to regulate fairness when it's not needed and it's clear that it's designed to harm one party only.
Just do a find/replace and put the new META tag just after the tag. It shouldn't affect your pages and if you're pedantic about the order of your META tags you can just make the necessary changes as you actually edit the pages themselves.
How is it underminging standards? The new switch is a fucking META tag you stupid asshat. Microsoft is using META tags for what they were initially designed to do, add META data to a fucking page. This approach allows existing sites to render as they currently do and new sites can be completely standards compliant. But I guess dipshits like you think Microsoft should be regulated by Government to do everything in their power to destroy themselves by harming existing customers. Fucking idiot.
yeah, because adding "META=use IE8 rendering engine" adds hundreds of thousands of dollars to a web site development project.
You apparently haven't tried Leopard yet. WTF is with the "new" spotlight search results window? In Tiger everything was neatly organized and offered a clear way to find what you want. In Leopard everything is put into a single Finder window. I was hoping Finder would have learned a thing or two about file organization from Tiger's Spotlight search results and Windows XP. Instead Leopard's search results picked up some bad habits from Finder.