He's saying it doesn't count because it is literally a requirement to use any software. There is no other way to run software other than copying it into RAM, and therefore you don't require an exception to copyright law, as such an exception is assumed when you buy it.
You shot down your own argument. Industrial magnets are legal, but storing your mac near one could be considered abuse.
Personally, as a pretty militant anti-smoker whose seen his health improve greatly since not being around any smokers anymore (both parents smoked and my first roommate after high school was a smoker), I still think this exact situation should be spelled out in the warranty since a significant percentage of users could be affected by a currently completely legal activity that isn't immediately obvious. If spelled out as such ion the warranty, I'd have no problem with them enforcing it. Until then, I feel they probably owe these users a replacement computer.
It really depends on what kind of work they do at his place. The last place I worked at was so dependent on really large volumes of data (up to multi-terabyte sized) where any single section didn't take that long to do (less time than copying a portion of the data to a desktop across a Gb network) that if the network went down no one could work anyway. And we used fat clients. It would have been vastly easier for us if we had used some kind of thin client system, but the IT system that was set up before wasn't set up that way, and changing anything felt pointless because management felt they had to be involved, despite not understanding anything about technology manufactured after about 1930.
How much could you get done at your work if the network was down? Some places I've worked it wouldn't matter much, but others, well, the network was the computer to paraphrase it.
And a million dollars might be a bunch to you and me, but for some of these companies it isn't going to cover the lost sales for even a short period of time that people find their competitors. And I'm not sure how Mark expects to make any of that money back. Damn, I wish I had a billion to just throw away.
I was wondering since this sounds like it went through arbitration rather than an actual court, does it set a precedent? I mean a legal precedent? IANAL, so I don't know.
I just read the second article and it appears to me they fell into the common trap of mostly reading the scale. When you are overweight and start working out you are generally doing two things: 1) losing fat and 2) gaining muscle. So while your weight may not go down that much, it doesn't mean you aren't quite a bit fitter. They sort of point this out, but rather indirectly.
The whole story is about internet access. You brought up TV, I never mentioned that portion of it as it has nothing to do with the story. I never said anything about forcing Comcast to allow others to use their lines for TV as that isn't what the article is about, is it?
You seem to be forgetting we aren't talking about just TV channels, we are talking broadband access where communication works two way already. I used to go into the bell of the best for a company working with AT&T for this very sort of service here in Portland (around 2003) so I know it can and has been done already (when they are forced to or find it financially worth while).
Even back then the cable companies weren't saying it was impossible, just that it wasn't fair.
They just have to have access to the network to have customers, same as Comcast (as a specific example). If Comcast can add me as a customer, then the same bandwidth could be handed over to another company in the server room for some fee.
If it was actually full they couldn't add new customers, new channels, or new services without laying their own cable each time, all of which they do all the time.
That's why they should be force to lease their lines out to other companies at some reasonable (let's face it: regulated) cost. Though I suspect you could be right about the first part. Over time I think someone would fire the first shot (actually, probably a new player that shows up with no incentive (read monopoly to protect) to not poach customers, and then it would be a floodgate opening experience.
I think they'd need to study you to find the "Not a hypocrite" gene. Most people I know that have the Troll gene lack the "not a hypocrite" gene and seem perplexed when I point it to them. Even when that person is the one on the other side of the window in my bathroom (that points into a bathroom much like my own, but backwards) who happens to look a little like an older, fatter me.
Are prisons ever privately run in Commonwealth countries? We have such a high incentive here to keep people locked up and to increase "business opportunities" that it isn't too surprising to me that tactics like this get used here, but your post made me wonder if other countries handle who actually runs some prisons differently as well.
I guess they could make a movie about going back in time to Terminate the making of the third and forth. And they could end it with someone finding the remains of the script for the third movie (the one the heroes used to figure out who the producers were, etc) burning in the wreckage of a movie studio, and deciding to make a movie based upon that script.
But since it would be a sort of spoof, I'm not sure you'd actually need the rights to make that movie.
Did I forget my sarcasm tag? I hoped it would be obvious enough, since the person I replied to pointed out how silly the OP bet would be for anyone to take.
I can't completely take credit. I had a history teacher back in college who said he wanted us to know why we felt the way we did about certain events in history. He didn't want to change them, just to make us aware of why, and then we could make a more informed choice about whether it really made sense or not.
From what I can tell, you can't really fix this as it is what the program does (though I could be wrong). It runs the program to find out what libraries it requires. That's why there's a warning that tells you not to run this on an untrusted program (linked to in a post above). It's sort of like saying sudo is a vulnerability because it lets you run untrusted program code.
Slashdot Mirror
He's saying it doesn't count because it is literally a requirement to use any software. There is no other way to run software other than copying it into RAM, and therefore you don't require an exception to copyright law, as such an exception is assumed when you buy it.
Maybe it's a new form of drunk test?
Cop McDonald: What sound does the cow make?
Drunk: Mooooooo.
Cop McDonald: What sound does the Horse make?
Drunk: Tweet! Tweet!
Cop McDonald: Hands behind your back, you're going downtown!
You shot down your own argument. Industrial magnets are legal, but storing your mac near one could be considered abuse.
Personally, as a pretty militant anti-smoker whose seen his health improve greatly since not being around any smokers anymore (both parents smoked and my first roommate after high school was a smoker), I still think this exact situation should be spelled out in the warranty since a significant percentage of users could be affected by a currently completely legal activity that isn't immediately obvious. If spelled out as such ion the warranty, I'd have no problem with them enforcing it. Until then, I feel they probably owe these users a replacement computer.
Google Gears.
It really depends on what kind of work they do at his place. The last place I worked at was so dependent on really large volumes of data (up to multi-terabyte sized) where any single section didn't take that long to do (less time than copying a portion of the data to a desktop across a Gb network) that if the network went down no one could work anyway. And we used fat clients. It would have been vastly easier for us if we had used some kind of thin client system, but the IT system that was set up before wasn't set up that way, and changing anything felt pointless because management felt they had to be involved, despite not understanding anything about technology manufactured after about 1930.
How much could you get done at your work if the network was down? Some places I've worked it wouldn't matter much, but others, well, the network was the computer to paraphrase it.
Rather that they are trying to play an Xbox game on a PS3.
We are talking about government workers here. ;^)
And a million dollars might be a bunch to you and me, but for some of these companies it isn't going to cover the lost sales for even a short period of time that people find their competitors. And I'm not sure how Mark expects to make any of that money back. Damn, I wish I had a billion to just throw away.
I was wondering since this sounds like it went through arbitration rather than an actual court, does it set a precedent? I mean a legal precedent? IANAL, so I don't know.
I just read the second article and it appears to me they fell into the common trap of mostly reading the scale. When you are overweight and start working out you are generally doing two things: 1) losing fat and 2) gaining muscle. So while your weight may not go down that much, it doesn't mean you aren't quite a bit fitter. They sort of point this out, but rather indirectly.
The whole story is about internet access. You brought up TV, I never mentioned that portion of it as it has nothing to do with the story. I never said anything about forcing Comcast to allow others to use their lines for TV as that isn't what the article is about, is it?
You seem to be forgetting we aren't talking about just TV channels, we are talking broadband access where communication works two way already. I used to go into the bell of the best for a company working with AT&T for this very sort of service here in Portland (around 2003) so I know it can and has been done already (when they are forced to or find it financially worth while).
Spoken like a man who doesn't understand networks.
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1040-232210.html&tag=mncol%3Btxt
Even back then the cable companies weren't saying it was impossible, just that it wasn't fair.
They just have to have access to the network to have customers, same as Comcast (as a specific example). If Comcast can add me as a customer, then the same bandwidth could be handed over to another company in the server room for some fee.
If it was actually full they couldn't add new customers, new channels, or new services without laying their own cable each time, all of which they do all the time.
That's why they should be force to lease their lines out to other companies at some reasonable (let's face it: regulated) cost. Though I suspect you could be right about the first part. Over time I think someone would fire the first shot (actually, probably a new player that shows up with no incentive (read monopoly to protect) to not poach customers, and then it would be a floodgate opening experience.
I think they'd need to study you to find the "Not a hypocrite" gene. Most people I know that have the Troll gene lack the "not a hypocrite" gene and seem perplexed when I point it to them. Even when that person is the one on the other side of the window in my bathroom (that points into a bathroom much like my own, but backwards) who happens to look a little like an older, fatter me.
Are prisons ever privately run in Commonwealth countries? We have such a high incentive here to keep people locked up and to increase "business opportunities" that it isn't too surprising to me that tactics like this get used here, but your post made me wonder if other countries handle who actually runs some prisons differently as well.
I guess they could make a movie about going back in time to Terminate the making of the third and forth. And they could end it with someone finding the remains of the script for the third movie (the one the heroes used to figure out who the producers were, etc) burning in the wreckage of a movie studio, and deciding to make a movie based upon that script.
But since it would be a sort of spoof, I'm not sure you'd actually need the rights to make that movie.
but it is on Microsoft.com, so ... /s
Did I forget my sarcasm tag? I hoped it would be obvious enough, since the person I replied to pointed out how silly the OP bet would be for anyone to take.
Maybe he'll pay you now, if you take the bet, and then you pay him back double when the world doesn't end?
I think I know who has proven to be worthy of their geek card and who has to hand theirs in.
And now we know who gets the PHB card.
I can't completely take credit. I had a history teacher back in college who said he wanted us to know why we felt the way we did about certain events in history. He didn't want to change them, just to make us aware of why, and then we could make a more informed choice about whether it really made sense or not.
From what I can tell, you can't really fix this as it is what the program does (though I could be wrong). It runs the program to find out what libraries it requires. That's why there's a warning that tells you not to run this on an untrusted program (linked to in a post above). It's sort of like saying sudo is a vulnerability because it lets you run untrusted program code.
As good as some of the shows are, $2/episode is too much.