But it's up to the company to decide whether or not to use viral marketing techniques or not. If they die off because they failed to allow pirating of their material, so be it. It is not up to the consumer to break the law, even if it helps in the long run, and take matters into their own hands. Laws are the foundation of our civilization, whether they are enshirined in a document such as the US Constitution or passed on orally, from generation to generation of tribesman by simple clicks of the tongue. With out laws and consequences, civiliation would cease. If this is the attitude we as a society start taking, where does it end? Can I go around killing stupid people because I feel in the long run the human gene pool will benefit by having less of a chance of propgating stupidity within the human species?
Actually, technically speaking you do license the DVD. Well, you license the content anyway. Copyright lawy allows for you to view the copy you own but you may not distribute the content (P2P violates this one big time), make copies of the content (beyond backups and once again P2P facilitates this sort of copyright infringement), manage a public performance of the work (summer film festivals, etc.), or make derivatves of the work (beyond parody). Copyright is simply a license between the copyright holder and the public. You only truly own the media the content is on, not the content itself.
The rights are still guaranteed regardless of the case being civil or criminal. The difference between the two is the burden of proof. I shoud have clarified that a bit more, but you're right, we do have a moral and ethical responsibility to not assume guilt, regardless of who's on trial. Guilt is for 12 jurors and/or a judge to decide, not internet forums or the news media.
I keep hearing on/. about this thing called a Constitution which guarantees one to be innocent until proven guilty. I guess that only applies selectively according to the whims of geeks? Rights exist to protect ALL whether you agree with or even like others. I guess all the whining is really the releasing of a bunch of hot air from people with no life.
What did you expect IN THE FILING FROM SENDO?!?!?! "Microsoft treated us with the utmost respect, w screwed up and lost a bunch of money but we're going to use anti-Microsoft sentiment to push this case along and get a crack at the 40+ billion dollars they have sitting around just itching to be plundered by a bunch of lawyers."
The filing is Sendo's side of the case but since it's a lawsuit against Microsoft and/. doesn't like Microsoft, ANY lawsuit, regardless of merits, is a good thing. Until the judge rules, neither side is guilty, PERIOD.
You are an ignorant fucktard. Bach didn't copy his symphonies from some other musician/composer and rearrange them himself, to his liking. He wrote them by learning the techniques of those before him.
Michaelaneglo didn't paint by numbers when he painted the Sistine Chapel. He learned the techniques of painting then expressed himself through this medium. While the concepts in teh Sistine Chapel might not be completely original, his work most certtainly was.
Thats the point of art, and by extension copyright. Copyright only protects the expression of an idea, not the idea itself. If you want to write original pieces for the cello you are more than welcome to. If you want to take some of Yo-yo ma's cello work and rearrange it for yourself, you're going to have to go ask Yo-yo ma for permission.
This in no way lessens the works available to the public. To believe otherwise is ridiculous which is why I state again, no matter how famous Lawrence Lessig might be, he's a fucking moron if he thinks he's doing the public any favors.
You apparently are not a creative individual. Copying or using another's work does not foster creativity. Learning from another's technique, using common themes from literature, creating a new medium to express yourself are wasy to foster creativity.
Lessig is only pandering to a small group of cheap bastards who don't want to pay for shit. He's really a pathetic excuse for a human being if he believes he's making a difference.
Yes, but for the very same reason there is no need to act as if every possible exploit will bring about World War III. Often times Microsoft is placed under a microscope when it comes to security and the smallest mountains are made into mountains that dwarf Everest. I read the security notices and the series of events that must occur for most of these exploits to be effective are so remote to be near impossible to happen.
...this is a preliminary injunction. This means for the time being, at least the duartion of the trial, Microsoft will be forced to comply with this ruling. However, they can always appeal this decision and the final judgement could always allow Microsoft drop Java in compliance with the ruling from a year or so ago where MS was ordered to pay Sun $20m and phase out Java from their OS over the next 7 years. The fact that MS dropped Java much earlier was not in violation of the agreement.
It doesn't matter how it's marketed, it only matters how it's used. If the presecution can show that its' primary use is STILL warez then it can be deemed illegal. Ever wonder why you can't buy those handy lock jimmys the cops use? They can be marketed as an alternative method fo ropening your car when you have a brain fart and lock the keys inside it. They could also, and most likely will be, used mainly for stealing cars, hence their not being made avialable on the open market.
But that's my point. The way we deal with information on the system needs to change. With the current system, metadata is next to useless. With a system relying heavily on metadata, it becomes more important to save the fiel with metadata instead of a file name.
Look at something like Avid's Media Composer. The file names are cryptic as hell. This is because MC handles all the file naming and metadata associated with the movie clips transparently.
WIMP is still required to initiate file saving, opening, applicaitons, saved queries, whatever. We're still stuck with a mouse and keyboard (stylus if you use a Wacom tablet or a Tablet PC). When people say we nee to change, they forget this part. Until we develop a new, widely used method for user input, WIMP is never going to go away and it's not likely that the mouse/ stylus and keyboard are going anywhere anytime soon.
I disagree with this comment. WIMP is just fine and still has quite a bit of life left in it. What needs to change is the way information is organized, stored and retrieved on computers. Microsoft, if they can pull it off, is on the right track with their new SQL server based file system. The concept of partitions and drives needs to go. I'd even go as far as saying that the concept of the computer in relation to the network needs to go. At least this needs to go as far as the user is concerned. The guts can be as ugly as they need to be but the front end needs to be transparent.
I don't give a rat's ass where I stored last month's sales figures, I just want to be able to tell my computer that I want the sales figures for last month and it will be smart enough to retrieve, based on metadata I gave the file when I saved it last, the file I want.
You want to see all the music files you have from a particular artist that are less than 3:00 so you can make a quick CD compilation of short songs? Why can't the system do this leg work for you?
Corporations can't dop that. Since corporations can't die in the sense that people can, Congress limits a corporations copyright term to 96 years. Now, someone can sell their copyright to a corporation for a limited time, in which case the IP reverts back to the original author and it protected as if it were the copyright of a person. However, in either case the copyright duration is still fixed from the date of creation.
Are you a US citizen? Are you a citizen of a country which protects intellectual property through copyright laws? That's the point at which you agreed. The license is on the outside of the package and it looks like a C with a circle around it.
Lars' comment has long been taken out of context. His complaint was "no one asked me if I want to participate", in reference to file trading online. Sure, Metallica allowed fans to trade music early on in their career, but METALLICA made this choice, not the fans.
Something lost in this tiresome debate between the RIAA and geeks worldwide, too fucking cheap to buy a CD but spend ungodly amounts of money on computer gear, is what do the artists want? Phish seems to want to let fans download their music online, with limitations of course. Does this mean every musician wants this? Does Phish speak for an entire industry? No, they do not. They merely speak for their own little band and their own little band doesn't mind a little file trading of their concerts.
Many seem to think they can do whatever the fuck they want but let's spin this in a way many here can understand. What if I took some GPL'ed code and built a proprietary app with it. Say, for instance, I took GIMP and made it usable by the print industry and fixed the horrible UI. Then I went to sell the application online and made millions on my new Photoshop killer and I refused to relinquish the source code despite the incessant whining of the geek community over violating their license.
When you copy music you have done the exact same thing. You have violated a license, an agreement between you and the copyright holder. Phish allows for more lenient terms in licensing of their copyrights. Other bands aren't as amenable to these terms and stick with the standard copyright license as set forth in US and foreign law.
In my opinion, you have absolutely no fucking right to cry foul when your rights are being violated if you willfully violate the rights of others.
...I keep getting RH Network alerts in my e-mail inbox even though I no longer use RedHat. I've tried to unsubscribe on the RedHat site but it keeps resetting my preferences to "send e-mail to...". I've tried asking politely to have redhat support to remove my e-mail address from their list and/or kill the RHN account. I've threatened them with lawsuits under anti-spam laws (by the way, I knew this would not work if they called my bluff. I had no intention of pursuing legal action, I had only hoped that the possibility of legal action might get someone's attntion). Nothing, nada, zip. I keep getting their alerts and I can't get off the list no matter how hard I try. Why don't poeple think about these things when they design their systems?
Tell them to set up a simple, cheap, 2-speaker audio system and then they can play all the CDs they want. Others have already pointed out that ASCAP and BMI handle the licneses for this, not the RIAA but no one has mentioned that it is legal to play audio CDs over a low quality audio system for the purpose of entertainment. THe minute you place a high-quality audio system in the restaraunt it is considered public performance and you the restaraunt or store owner will need to purchase a license from ASCAP and/or BMI to do so. And before anyone asks, yes people do go around to the hundreds of thousands of restaraunts and stores across America checking up on this stuff.
Why do mocerators insist on modding up comments solely based on their contreversial nature? It took me all of two seconds to find this:
The electronic version is now covered by the Creative Common's license permitting non-commerical distribution of complete copies. (To be specific: Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial License)
on the "Free for All" website. Come on. Not only was the parent an idiot, at least one moderator has propegated this bullshit.
If they are as uncsrupulous as you claim, they could do this anyway, TIA be damned. I agree, though somewhat less vehemently, with the parent poster. We need to allow the government a little more lattitude then we are giving them. You want the government to "become connected" to server your needs but you don't want them to "become connected" to for use in criminal investigations. You expect them to use out dated methods, ones which criminals know all about and circumvent easily, of investigation to hunt down criminals.
Here's the solution. Let the government have TIA, BUT fight to ensure there is a system of checks and balances in place to protect innocent people from unreasonable actions by the government. Let the government collect all the data they want and run ultra-sophisticated analysis software to profile, BUT don't let them have access to the information UNTIL a judge approves. Abuses to a system are no reason to not allow it to exist. If this were the case, we might as well scrap the US Constitution and start all over.
The RIAA math actually makes sense if you average out the speeds of the burners. Since some burners could copy 2,3,4 or even more in the time it took the slower burners to finish one, it was as if there were more burners working for them to keep up with production at the quantities they were able to.
What really annoyed me about this article though was this comment, "The other curious aspect of yesterday's release is the use of Secret Service agents in the bust. The Secret Service, we naively presumed, was employed to protect high-ranking elected officials[*]. Perhaps this is a further indication of who's really in charge.®"
What the fuck's up with that? Is the author so stupid they couldn't be bothered to check out the The United States Secret Service? A quick check of their Mission Statement would have revealed this little tidbit of information making their comment childish and unnecessary.
"The Secret Service is also responsible for the enforcement of laws relating to counterfeiting of obligations and securities of the United States, investigation of financial crimes including, but not limited to access device fraud, financial institution fraud, identity theft, computer fraud, telecommunications fraud, and computer based attacks on our nation's financial, banking, and telecommunications infrastructure."
I'd say that copyright violations on this mass scale fall well within the jurisdiction of their powers.
Yeah, I'm one of them. I think I'm going to wait for the next gen of the TabletPCs though. My brother bought one and while he said it's very cool he doesn't think the power and battery life are enough to run something like Photoshop for an extended period of time. Alias|Waverfront's Sketchbook Pro might be a bit better because it was designed to run on the TabletPC and it might consume less power but I think I'll wait all the same.
Apple should say tough shit to Quark. They've been holding Apple's release of OS X for far too long. Adobe has had OS X native versions fo their apps, including InDesign 2.0 (IMHO a far better DTP application than Quark), for over a year now. In fact, users of Quark Xpress should say screw Quark too as Quarj has heldp back the adoption of OS X by designers and the publishing industry. I know lots of designer who want to move to OS X but can't because of Quark and I tell them to do themselves a favor by dumping Quark and getting InDesign.
"You can see the the report graphs here."...and reports and graphs are always so honest, you can believe them without any corroborating evidence or other reports.;)
Slashdot Mirror
But it's up to the company to decide whether or not to use viral marketing techniques or not. If they die off because they failed to allow pirating of their material, so be it. It is not up to the consumer to break the law, even if it helps in the long run, and take matters into their own hands. Laws are the foundation of our civilization, whether they are enshirined in a document such as the US Constitution or passed on orally, from generation to generation of tribesman by simple clicks of the tongue. With out laws and consequences, civiliation would cease. If this is the attitude we as a society start taking, where does it end? Can I go around killing stupid people because I feel in the long run the human gene pool will benefit by having less of a chance of propgating stupidity within the human species?
Actually, technically speaking you do license the DVD. Well, you license the content anyway. Copyright lawy allows for you to view the copy you own but you may not distribute the content (P2P violates this one big time), make copies of the content (beyond backups and once again P2P facilitates this sort of copyright infringement), manage a public performance of the work (summer film festivals, etc.), or make derivatves of the work (beyond parody). Copyright is simply a license between the copyright holder and the public. You only truly own the media the content is on, not the content itself.
They were proven guilty of using their monopoly illegally, not of violating Sendo's intellectual property. Until they are, they are innocent.
The rights are still guaranteed regardless of the case being civil or criminal. The difference between the two is the burden of proof. I shoud have clarified that a bit more, but you're right, we do have a moral and ethical responsibility to not assume guilt, regardless of who's on trial. Guilt is for 12 jurors and/or a judge to decide, not internet forums or the news media.
I keep hearing on /. about this thing called a Constitution which guarantees one to be innocent until proven guilty. I guess that only applies selectively according to the whims of geeks? Rights exist to protect ALL whether you agree with or even like others. I guess all the whining is really the releasing of a bunch of hot air from people with no life.
/. doesn't like Microsoft, ANY lawsuit, regardless of merits, is a good thing. Until the judge rules, neither side is guilty, PERIOD.
What did you expect IN THE FILING FROM SENDO?!?!?! "Microsoft treated us with the utmost respect, w screwed up and lost a bunch of money but we're going to use anti-Microsoft sentiment to push this case along and get a crack at the 40+ billion dollars they have sitting around just itching to be plundered by a bunch of lawyers."
The filing is Sendo's side of the case but since it's a lawsuit against Microsoft and
You are an ignorant fucktard. Bach didn't copy his symphonies from some other musician/composer and rearrange them himself, to his liking. He wrote them by learning the techniques of those before him.
Michaelaneglo didn't paint by numbers when he painted the Sistine Chapel. He learned the techniques of painting then expressed himself through this medium. While the concepts in teh Sistine Chapel might not be completely original, his work most certtainly was.
Thats the point of art, and by extension copyright. Copyright only protects the expression of an idea, not the idea itself. If you want to write original pieces for the cello you are more than welcome to. If you want to take some of Yo-yo ma's cello work and rearrange it for yourself, you're going to have to go ask Yo-yo ma for permission.
This in no way lessens the works available to the public. To believe otherwise is ridiculous which is why I state again, no matter how famous Lawrence Lessig might be, he's a fucking moron if he thinks he's doing the public any favors.
You apparently are not a creative individual. Copying or using another's work does not foster creativity. Learning from another's technique, using common themes from literature, creating a new medium to express yourself are wasy to foster creativity.
Lessig is only pandering to a small group of cheap bastards who don't want to pay for shit. He's really a pathetic excuse for a human being if he believes he's making a difference.
Yes, but for the very same reason there is no need to act as if every possible exploit will bring about World War III. Often times Microsoft is placed under a microscope when it comes to security and the smallest mountains are made into mountains that dwarf Everest. I read the security notices and the series of events that must occur for most of these exploits to be effective are so remote to be near impossible to happen.
...this is a preliminary injunction. This means for the time being, at least the duartion of the trial, Microsoft will be forced to comply with this ruling. However, they can always appeal this decision and the final judgement could always allow Microsoft drop Java in compliance with the ruling from a year or so ago where MS was ordered to pay Sun $20m and phase out Java from their OS over the next 7 years. The fact that MS dropped Java much earlier was not in violation of the agreement.
It doesn't matter how it's marketed, it only matters how it's used. If the presecution can show that its' primary use is STILL warez then it can be deemed illegal. Ever wonder why you can't buy those handy lock jimmys the cops use? They can be marketed as an alternative method fo ropening your car when you have a brain fart and lock the keys inside it. They could also, and most likely will be, used mainly for stealing cars, hence their not being made avialable on the open market.
But that's my point. The way we deal with information on the system needs to change. With the current system, metadata is next to useless. With a system relying heavily on metadata, it becomes more important to save the fiel with metadata instead of a file name.
Look at something like Avid's Media Composer. The file names are cryptic as hell. This is because MC handles all the file naming and metadata associated with the movie clips transparently.
WIMP is still required to initiate file saving, opening, applicaitons, saved queries, whatever. We're still stuck with a mouse and keyboard (stylus if you use a Wacom tablet or a Tablet PC). When people say we nee to change, they forget this part. Until we develop a new, widely used method for user input, WIMP is never going to go away and it's not likely that the mouse/ stylus and keyboard are going anywhere anytime soon.
I disagree with this comment. WIMP is just fine and still has quite a bit of life left in it. What needs to change is the way information is organized, stored and retrieved on computers. Microsoft, if they can pull it off, is on the right track with their new SQL server based file system. The concept of partitions and drives needs to go. I'd even go as far as saying that the concept of the computer in relation to the network needs to go. At least this needs to go as far as the user is concerned. The guts can be as ugly as they need to be but the front end needs to be transparent.
I don't give a rat's ass where I stored last month's sales figures, I just want to be able to tell my computer that I want the sales figures for last month and it will be smart enough to retrieve, based on metadata I gave the file when I saved it last, the file I want.
You want to see all the music files you have from a particular artist that are less than 3:00 so you can make a quick CD compilation of short songs? Why can't the system do this leg work for you?
WIMP works. The way we work with WIMPs doesn't.
Corporations can't dop that. Since corporations can't die in the sense that people can, Congress limits a corporations copyright term to 96 years. Now, someone can sell their copyright to a corporation for a limited time, in which case the IP reverts back to the original author and it protected as if it were the copyright of a person. However, in either case the copyright duration is still fixed from the date of creation.
Are you a US citizen? Are you a citizen of a country which protects intellectual property through copyright laws? That's the point at which you agreed. The license is on the outside of the package and it looks like a C with a circle around it.
Lars' comment has long been taken out of context. His complaint was "no one asked me if I want to participate", in reference to file trading online. Sure, Metallica allowed fans to trade music early on in their career, but METALLICA made this choice, not the fans.
Something lost in this tiresome debate between the RIAA and geeks worldwide, too fucking cheap to buy a CD but spend ungodly amounts of money on computer gear, is what do the artists want? Phish seems to want to let fans download their music online, with limitations of course. Does this mean every musician wants this? Does Phish speak for an entire industry? No, they do not. They merely speak for their own little band and their own little band doesn't mind a little file trading of their concerts.
Many seem to think they can do whatever the fuck they want but let's spin this in a way many here can understand. What if I took some GPL'ed code and built a proprietary app with it. Say, for instance, I took GIMP and made it usable by the print industry and fixed the horrible UI. Then I went to sell the application online and made millions on my new Photoshop killer and I refused to relinquish the source code despite the incessant whining of the geek community over violating their license.
When you copy music you have done the exact same thing. You have violated a license, an agreement between you and the copyright holder. Phish allows for more lenient terms in licensing of their copyrights. Other bands aren't as amenable to these terms and stick with the standard copyright license as set forth in US and foreign law.
In my opinion, you have absolutely no fucking right to cry foul when your rights are being violated if you willfully violate the rights of others.
...I keep getting RH Network alerts in my e-mail inbox even though I no longer use RedHat. I've tried to unsubscribe on the RedHat site but it keeps resetting my preferences to "send e-mail to...". I've tried asking politely to have redhat support to remove my e-mail address from their list and/or kill the RHN account. I've threatened them with lawsuits under anti-spam laws (by the way, I knew this would not work if they called my bluff. I had no intention of pursuing legal action, I had only hoped that the possibility of legal action might get someone's attntion). Nothing, nada, zip. I keep getting their alerts and I can't get off the list no matter how hard I try. Why don't poeple think about these things when they design their systems?
Tell them to set up a simple, cheap, 2-speaker audio system and then they can play all the CDs they want. Others have already pointed out that ASCAP and BMI handle the licneses for this, not the RIAA but no one has mentioned that it is legal to play audio CDs over a low quality audio system for the purpose of entertainment. THe minute you place a high-quality audio system in the restaraunt it is considered public performance and you the restaraunt or store owner will need to purchase a license from ASCAP and/or BMI to do so. And before anyone asks, yes people do go around to the hundreds of thousands of restaraunts and stores across America checking up on this stuff.
on the "Free for All" website. Come on. Not only was the parent an idiot, at least one moderator has propegated this bullshit.
If they are as uncsrupulous as you claim, they could do this anyway, TIA be damned. I agree, though somewhat less vehemently, with the parent poster. We need to allow the government a little more lattitude then we are giving them. You want the government to "become connected" to server your needs but you don't want them to "become connected" to for use in criminal investigations. You expect them to use out dated methods, ones which criminals know all about and circumvent easily, of investigation to hunt down criminals.
Here's the solution. Let the government have TIA, BUT fight to ensure there is a system of checks and balances in place to protect innocent people from unreasonable actions by the government. Let the government collect all the data they want and run ultra-sophisticated analysis software to profile, BUT don't let them have access to the information UNTIL a judge approves. Abuses to a system are no reason to not allow it to exist. If this were the case, we might as well scrap the US Constitution and start all over.
What really annoyed me about this article though was this comment, "The other curious aspect of yesterday's release is the use of Secret Service agents in the bust. The Secret Service, we naively presumed, was employed to protect high-ranking elected officials[*]. Perhaps this is a further indication of who's really in charge.®"
What the fuck's up with that? Is the author so stupid they couldn't be bothered to check out the The United States Secret Service? A quick check of their Mission Statement would have revealed this little tidbit of information making their comment childish and unnecessary.
I'd say that copyright violations on this mass scale fall well within the jurisdiction of their powers.
Yeah, I'm one of them. I think I'm going to wait for the next gen of the TabletPCs though. My brother bought one and while he said it's very cool he doesn't think the power and battery life are enough to run something like Photoshop for an extended period of time. Alias|Waverfront's Sketchbook Pro might be a bit better because it was designed to run on the TabletPC and it might consume less power but I think I'll wait all the same.
Wacom doesn't have a TabletPC, they developed the Pen input for Windows XP Tablet PC Edition (hardware and software).
Why do you think the moderators modded it as "Insightful"? You didn't actually think the comment was "Insightful" did you?
Apple should say tough shit to Quark. They've been holding Apple's release of OS X for far too long. Adobe has had OS X native versions fo their apps, including InDesign 2.0 (IMHO a far better DTP application than Quark), for over a year now. In fact, users of Quark Xpress should say screw Quark too as Quarj has heldp back the adoption of OS X by designers and the publishing industry. I know lots of designer who want to move to OS X but can't because of Quark and I tell them to do themselves a favor by dumping Quark and getting InDesign.
"You can see the the report graphs here." ...and reports and graphs are always so honest, you can believe them without any corroborating evidence or other reports. ;)