Right back at you. How is culture and education being locked up? Perhaps you should learn a lot more about copyright and what it actually covers instead of believing everything you read on Slashdot. You are free to mine the public domain for previous works to turn into animmated movies just as Disney has done. You are then free to distribute them as you see fit. You cannot, however, distribute Disney's works without their consent. Disney isn't locking these works up either. You can go to any video store and rent them at your leisure or purchase them at your favorite store and watch them as many times as you'd like. You can even be inspired by the particular artistic styles, color palettes, sense of motion and editing techniques used in these films, using similar ideas in your own movie. I'd wager that you are not a creative professional or you would already know this. If you claim to be a creative professional, I'd bet that you aren't very good at your job. Most creatives know how to be inspired by works of art without violating copyright law. Personally I'm sick and tired of reading whiny little asshat geek postings about how they think culture being locked up when it really isn't. Talk about "big bad wolf" scare tactics. If the best argument you can come back with is DJs and their crappy little mixes, don't bother. Our civilization, and culture with it, won't come crashing down upon us if they aren't allowed to make their little CDs.
Mor eon point, my argument is, because you apparently have reading comprehension problems, that the more people argue that they can hide behind IP addresses that are not tracable back to their owners in a completely reliable way, the more likely governments will simply legislate requirements to map IPs to owners and keep records for lengthy periods of time. Similar legislation is already working its way through the Senate and House, making ISPs responsible for maintaining records for extended periods of time. The only missing step is establishing who can access this information and for what purposes. Germany's "solution" won't fly here because it will not allow legal recourse for content creators and that woudl be unconstitutional. Perhaps you're OK with things being unconstitutional for parties you do not agree with, however, I am not.
I never said it was dead, I'm just pissed off that I have to watch those stupid ads, while the TV shows is still on, that sit within the lower third of the screen. These were a direct result of people illegally distributing files via P2P networks after stripping the ads between the show. That and all the BS product placement now.
...to thank all you "information wants to be free" asshats when the shit hits the fan and anonymity on the internet is eliminated. I don't know what part about unauthorized distribution of intellectual property you find so difficult to comprehend. And don't come back to me with bullshit arguments about the length of copyright, blah, blah, blah, blah. You know as well as I do that most of the files on P2P networks are well within even the original 14 year protection terms. You've already killed network TV. I'd love to kick a couple of you asshats right in the nuts for those stupid ads that take up the lower third of the screen I now have to deal with because you wanted to illegally distribute TV shows on P2P networks sans ads (there's a pretty thick fucking line between time-shifting for personal use and unauthorized distribution). Please, for the love of god, quit now before anonymity is on the internet is dead.
The problem colleges are facing is a government who doesn't like snarky little asshats and is willing to allow lobbyists to assist in writing laws to close loopholes they missed the first time around or when something alters the playing field.
..they were already fractured. Microsoft just gave them enough rope to hang themselves with. If you're going to compete with Microsoft, you had better bring your A game.
Personally I'm tired of hearing OSS zealots whine about not being able to distribute and pass around word processing documents. First of all, why are you distributing word processing documents at all? Create a PDF and your formatting is maintained regardless of platform, etc. Unless you're working in a collaborative writing environment where others are going to be editing your work, there is no reason why you should be distributing a.doc or.odf file at all.
Reading comprehension 101. The article suggested, and rightfully so, that it is up to a judge and jury to determine whether or not this use of the video clip is fair use or not, not a theater manager.
Why is this comment moderated insightful? Whoever moderated this insightful did so because they agreed with the comment but nowhere is it insightful. "Probably not" means the commenter has some deep desire to have this legal issue considered not legally binding but at no time have EULAs or ToS contracts been deemed NOT legally binding. Until such a time as they are tested in court, they most certainly ARE legally binding. Will a company enforce them? Well, you might get a "probably not" for that question but again, until research into the issue has been done, one should not try to answer the question at all, stating instead "no one knows for sure, however, I am...[fill in your position here]."
Moderators, please quit moderating comments insightful simply because you agree with the comment. Make sure the comment is actually insightful first.
You're assuming he hosts his own blog and you know what they say about assuming. Beyond that, why is his message less credible? if he can prove the worm works, the message is still the same, even if his blog is hacked. Perhaps the person responsible for hacking his blog is simply a much better hacker? There are so many variables to consider that your comment seems ridiculous when you even begin to look at even a tiny fraction of them.
"...and they have Office program managers patrolling cyberspace looking for any negative comments?"
They aren't replying to negative comments, they are correcting or expanding upon incomplete or erroneous information. Nowehre in hsis comments did he say you were wrong, he mentioned that Microsoft ahs a way around this and porvided a link to your readers so they can decide for themselves if you're telling the truth or just a fucking idiot.
That only covers half the problem. How do you keep others from profitting from your work? Why shoudl another sit ebe allowed to sell ad space on their site and generate revenue from content I produced without sharing that revenue with me?
...bug fixes and updates do not necessarily cover license upgrades without referring to this part of the agreement, quoted in the article as well,
"If the final version of GPLv3 contains terms or conditions that interfere with our agreement with Microsoft or our ability to distribute GPLv3 code, Microsoft may cease to distribute SUSE Linux coupons in order to avoid the extension of its patent covenants to a broader range of GPLv3 software recipients, we may need to modify our relationship with Microsoft under less advantageous terms than our current agreement, or we may be restricted in our ability to include GPLv3 code in our products, any of which could adversely affect our business and our operating results. In such a case, we would likely explore alternatives to remedy the conflict, but there is no assurance that we would be successful in these efforts."
Microsoft will likely ocntend that a relicensing is not a part of the definiton of an upgrade,
"1.21 "Upgrades" mean any corrections, improvements, bug fixes, revisions, enhancements, localizations, updates, upgrades or other modifications made commercially available by either party."
You're forgetting that Sony owns stakes in both the content and delivery systems. Any movie distributed through one of the many Sony film production studios will NEVER be released on HD-DVD, thus removing consumer choice before it even had a chance.
MSFT Lawyer: We have this list of patents you're violating. All your base are belong to us... Linus: I asked for the list when you made it five years ago. You wouldn't give it to me. How am I supposed to proceed? Judge: Here's the link to the USPTO Mr. Torvalds. Do your homework BEFORE writing your code.
"Is Microsoft terrified of a world where Windows can be virtualized and forced to take a back seat to Mac OS X or Linux?"...afraid of a world where anyone can obtain a copy of OSX and run it on a white box system instead of the "blessed" Jobsian hardware. Microsoft doesn't want users to virtualize Windows on other operating systems and Apple doesn't want users to run copies of OSX on white box systems. Stalemate.
...until it's uncompressed CD quality audio, I don't care if it's protected by DRM to disallow sharing, as long as I can rip the files to AAC, WMA, or whatever other format I choose and copy them to digital audio players I have authorized for my personal use. Until then I'll only buy CDs.
Of course they did, because they know that anyone will be able to dump their contracts with AT&T and Verizon will be there to offer ex AT&T iPhone customers with a competitive deal without having to make any concessions to Apple.
Why does crap like this continuously get modded insightful? Windows Desktop Search is a service and services can be turned off, PERMENANTLY if so desired. I doubt that it would be difficult at all for Google to add an option in the setup script to allow users to disable Windows Desktop Search, or at least notify that if they install Google Desktop Search it will disable Windows Desktop Search. It doesn't take a whole lot of effort to discover this information; in fact I'm sure you can Google it if you want. Here's the thing moderators, actually learn something before claiming a comment is insightful, especially if it isn't.
...because the slashmonkeys are arguing that technology that can be abused is now considered to be bad. Tomorrow there will be ab article about how the RIAA/MPAA are trying to shut down P2P networks and he sheep will graze on the other side of the field once more.
Slashdot Mirror
Right back at you. How is culture and education being locked up? Perhaps you should learn a lot more about copyright and what it actually covers instead of believing everything you read on Slashdot. You are free to mine the public domain for previous works to turn into animmated movies just as Disney has done. You are then free to distribute them as you see fit. You cannot, however, distribute Disney's works without their consent. Disney isn't locking these works up either. You can go to any video store and rent them at your leisure or purchase them at your favorite store and watch them as many times as you'd like. You can even be inspired by the particular artistic styles, color palettes, sense of motion and editing techniques used in these films, using similar ideas in your own movie. I'd wager that you are not a creative professional or you would already know this. If you claim to be a creative professional, I'd bet that you aren't very good at your job. Most creatives know how to be inspired by works of art without violating copyright law. Personally I'm sick and tired of reading whiny little asshat geek postings about how they think culture being locked up when it really isn't. Talk about "big bad wolf" scare tactics. If the best argument you can come back with is DJs and their crappy little mixes, don't bother. Our civilization, and culture with it, won't come crashing down upon us if they aren't allowed to make their little CDs.
Mor eon point, my argument is, because you apparently have reading comprehension problems, that the more people argue that they can hide behind IP addresses that are not tracable back to their owners in a completely reliable way, the more likely governments will simply legislate requirements to map IPs to owners and keep records for lengthy periods of time. Similar legislation is already working its way through the Senate and House, making ISPs responsible for maintaining records for extended periods of time. The only missing step is establishing who can access this information and for what purposes. Germany's "solution" won't fly here because it will not allow legal recourse for content creators and that woudl be unconstitutional. Perhaps you're OK with things being unconstitutional for parties you do not agree with, however, I am not.
I never said it was dead, I'm just pissed off that I have to watch those stupid ads, while the TV shows is still on, that sit within the lower third of the screen. These were a direct result of people illegally distributing files via P2P networks after stripping the ads between the show. That and all the BS product placement now.
...to thank all you "information wants to be free" asshats when the shit hits the fan and anonymity on the internet is eliminated. I don't know what part about unauthorized distribution of intellectual property you find so difficult to comprehend. And don't come back to me with bullshit arguments about the length of copyright, blah, blah, blah, blah. You know as well as I do that most of the files on P2P networks are well within even the original 14 year protection terms. You've already killed network TV. I'd love to kick a couple of you asshats right in the nuts for those stupid ads that take up the lower third of the screen I now have to deal with because you wanted to illegally distribute TV shows on P2P networks sans ads (there's a pretty thick fucking line between time-shifting for personal use and unauthorized distribution). Please, for the love of god, quit now before anonymity is on the internet is dead.
The problem colleges are facing is a government who doesn't like snarky little asshats and is willing to allow lobbyists to assist in writing laws to close loopholes they missed the first time around or when something alters the playing field.
..they were already fractured. Microsoft just gave them enough rope to hang themselves with. If you're going to compete with Microsoft, you had better bring your A game.
Personally I'm tired of hearing OSS zealots whine about not being able to distribute and pass around word processing documents. First of all, why are you distributing word processing documents at all? Create a PDF and your formatting is maintained regardless of platform, etc. Unless you're working in a collaborative writing environment where others are going to be editing your work, there is no reason why you should be distributing a .doc or .odf file at all.
Reading comprehension 101. The article suggested, and rightfully so, that it is up to a judge and jury to determine whether or not this use of the video clip is fair use or not, not a theater manager.
Why is this comment moderated insightful? Whoever moderated this insightful did so because they agreed with the comment but nowhere is it insightful. "Probably not" means the commenter has some deep desire to have this legal issue considered not legally binding but at no time have EULAs or ToS contracts been deemed NOT legally binding. Until such a time as they are tested in court, they most certainly ARE legally binding. Will a company enforce them? Well, you might get a "probably not" for that question but again, until research into the issue has been done, one should not try to answer the question at all, stating instead "no one knows for sure, however, I am...[fill in your position here]."
Moderators, please quit moderating comments insightful simply because you agree with the comment. Make sure the comment is actually insightful first.
You're assuming he hosts his own blog and you know what they say about assuming. Beyond that, why is his message less credible? if he can prove the worm works, the message is still the same, even if his blog is hacked. Perhaps the person responsible for hacking his blog is simply a much better hacker? There are so many variables to consider that your comment seems ridiculous when you even begin to look at even a tiny fraction of them.
And you have a link to prove that Microsoft themselves said the demos were all fakes?
"...and they have Office program managers patrolling cyberspace looking for any negative comments?"
They aren't replying to negative comments, they are correcting or expanding upon incomplete or erroneous information. Nowehre in hsis comments did he say you were wrong, he mentioned that Microsoft ahs a way around this and porvided a link to your readers so they can decide for themselves if you're telling the truth or just a fucking idiot.
...Beethoven's scores, it's not the score itself, it's the arrangement and/or the actual performance or recording that's copyrighted.
That only covers half the problem. How do you keep others from profitting from your work? Why shoudl another sit ebe allowed to sell ad space on their site and generate revenue from content I produced without sharing that revenue with me?
You can put lipstick on a pig but in the end, you still have a pig.
...they fired the dumbass who thought placing the speakers on the bottom, facing down?!?!?, of the enclosure was a good idea.
You're forgetting that Sony owns stakes in both the content and delivery systems. Any movie distributed through one of the many Sony film production studios will NEVER be released on HD-DVD, thus removing consumer choice before it even had a chance.
MSFT Lawyer: We have this list of patents you're violating. All your base are belong to us...
Linus: I asked for the list when you made it five years ago. You wouldn't give it to me. How am I supposed to proceed?
Judge: Here's the link to the USPTO Mr. Torvalds. Do your homework BEFORE writing your code.
There, fixed that for you.
...fucking stupid premise. If you base your vote on this, stop voting from now on, please.
Oh, please. David Pogue and Walt Mossberg are Apple shills. I'd sooner believe Walt Disney then Walt Mossberg on anything technology related.
"Is Microsoft terrified of a world where Windows can be virtualized and forced to take a back seat to Mac OS X or Linux?" ...afraid of a world where anyone can obtain a copy of OSX and run it on a white box system instead of the "blessed" Jobsian hardware. Microsoft doesn't want users to virtualize Windows on other operating systems and Apple doesn't want users to run copies of OSX on white box systems. Stalemate.
...until it's uncompressed CD quality audio, I don't care if it's protected by DRM to disallow sharing, as long as I can rip the files to AAC, WMA, or whatever other format I choose and copy them to digital audio players I have authorized for my personal use. Until then I'll only buy CDs.
"Verizon reportedly passed on the device..."
Of course they did, because they know that anyone will be able to dump their contracts with AT&T and Verizon will be there to offer ex AT&T iPhone customers with a competitive deal without having to make any concessions to Apple.
Why does crap like this continuously get modded insightful? Windows Desktop Search is a service and services can be turned off, PERMENANTLY if so desired. I doubt that it would be difficult at all for Google to add an option in the setup script to allow users to disable Windows Desktop Search, or at least notify that if they install Google Desktop Search it will disable Windows Desktop Search. It doesn't take a whole lot of effort to discover this information; in fact I'm sure you can Google it if you want. Here's the thing moderators, actually learn something before claiming a comment is insightful, especially if it isn't.
...because the slashmonkeys are arguing that technology that can be abused is now considered to be bad. Tomorrow there will be ab article about how the RIAA/MPAA are trying to shut down P2P networks and he sheep will graze on the other side of the field once more.