I read it was $750 million, and would cost $1.5 billion today.
That is a lot, but with (I estimate here) 100 million taxpayers in the US, we are looking at $15 a head.
A small price to pay to help show the world we will not be cowed by terrorism.
Many people (Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, and others) could even actually pay for such a thing with their own personal funds, as mind boggling as that may seem.
It can be done.
We might also want to consider sending a few billion dollars to Israel.
That's part of the reason there is the DMCA and the possibly-soon-to-be SSSCA. To make skipping commercials illegal. (*) Heck, with DVDs it is illegal to make a player that lets you skip unskippable ads - you either have to violate the CSS license or implement CSS yourself, which is a DMCA violation.
(*) It won't strictly be illegal - that would raise an outcry. Just that getting around the technology that stops you would be an illegal "act of circumvention". That way anyone that tries to give you control could be painted as an "evil hacker", likewise for anyone using any circumvention methods.
After all, only "evil people" try to make the computer do anything it isn't designed for, or do anything the computer tries to prohibit. The machine is "always right", since the "nice" corporations made them.
(The above was heavily laced with sarcasm - obviously I am oppossed to DMCA/SSSCA).
Likely some of those were nearby cells which some phones got handed off to in order to deal with the load.
A given location can access more than one given cell site, where I live, I've seen my phone connecting to 4 different ones, right in the same place (debug mode on the phone is cool;)).
So you can't say strictly that any site is part of one and only one cell. A failed site, a bush, etc can cause the loss or degradation of a signal which will cause the phone to look elsewhere.
Often the phone can and does, then work off another site.
That's the whole point, it affects you anyway. You can avoid the DMCA's copy protect provisions (but not their takedown provisions (*)) by avoiding their content.
This law will affect anyone with a computer, or any other "interactive digital device".
Heck, even the thermostat in my home qualifies as such! It is a programmable digital device, most certainly with an embedded microprocessor, it has inputs and outputs and processes digital data (comparing 2 temperatures does count as processing data).
* This is where anyone can get your web page removed - even if it is all your own stuff - by making an allegation. The DMCA says ISPs must act on allegations - or else risk being liable under direct, contributatory and vicarious liability statutes - including monetary damages.
ISPs would rather pull your webpage than face being ORDERED by a court to pay thousands and even millions of dollars in damages which certainly outweight your $25/month (or even $25K/month for very big sites) hosting fees.
Violence against gov't makes sense in a dictatorship, where the will of the people can NOT be effected through peaceful means.
We have NOT reached that point yet.
If our citizens, even 20% would vote libertarian, the politicians would take notice. 50+% would mean that we could change the government completely.
Without any violence.
Let's fight now, *peacefully*, so it doesn't get to the point where one is NOT allowed to vote out their representatives.
The gov't may be wrong, but then so are the people who are re-electing them. We are their bosses - but too many of our fellow citizens don't do their fair share in protecting our freedom - by being an INFORMED VOTER.
ANYONE out there who is in the USA and has the legal right to vote, but hasn't register to do so is PART OF THE PROBLEM. If this describes you, REGISTER TO VOTE. You can even do it an the DMV nowadays.
Software may be considered speech, but not hardware.
So a mandatory hardware standard might survive that Constitutional challenge. Let's say Linux would itself be legal, but not any hardware that can run it. Linux is software, possibly speech, and you might be allowed to have it, but you couldn't legally make use of it (just like the DMCA - you have fair use, see 17 USC 1201(c)(1), you just aren't allowed to exercise it).
The DMCA actually has some (in theory) protections for fair use. See 17 USC 1201(c)(1):
"Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title."
However, since Judge Kaplan in the 2600 case, the FBI in the Sklyarov case, etc, ignore this and also the NUMEROUS exemptions in the DMCA, and still decide to find liability and arrest those that would make fair use of intellectual "property", we can NOT depend on any "savings" clauses in the final legislation.
We have to make sure this bill never becomes law, but that we NEVER forget what they tried to do to us.
This is an act of WAR against us all.
DMCA is bad enough, it gives Disney, et al, complete control of their product even after we buy it.
This (SSSCA) is far worse. It gives them control over our computers (including the right to OUTLAW Linux and Open Source), even if we never consume their content.
Corporate IT shops won't care about this digital rights stuff. They don't stand to lose anything from it. But home users (hopefully) will not go for it.
If it prevents them from restoring/setting up computers from disk images (VERY likely!) it will make things a lot harder (labor intensive, i.e. expensive and time consuming) for companies with a lot of computers. This might help save us - these companies will not be happy having their time and money wasted for Disney, et al.
And the civil penalties include statuatory damages. I.E. you are required to pay money even if it can't be proved any profits or damages occurred, or even if you can prove there were no profits or damages.
Statuatory damages can be assessed no matter what.
$200-$2500 in damages per offense can get very expensive for individuals.
Paypal? I saw a site that asked for a donation with Paypal. I was inclined to contribute, but Paypal wanted SO MUCH personal irrelevent information (well beyond what is needed/customarily used for credit card transactions) and wanted to set up a permanent account that was linked my credit card info and I just said forget it. I was willing to do a one time thing. I didn't want personal info andmy credit card info all stored in one place, long term, with a company I have no reason to trust (my default is to DIStrust companies until proven otherwise).
Anway, it is ironic to mention paypal, considering that part of this case involves the privacy aspects of having to turn over personal info to play a song on a PC. Just as Paypal requires you to give them lots of info they hold on to, just to donate $25 to someone.
Fortunately it won't play in newer CD players is how I would put it.
That is one thing that could really kill off this form of copy "protection" (fair use restriction).
I don't think the makers of high end audio equipment are going to just want to roll over and take it. Same with those that make car CD players (which are often CD-ROM based to avoid skipping - even when driving fast over rough terrain).
If it only affects "geeks" and those that do "unconventional" fair use (e.g. MP3s for portable players), it could succeed.
If it hoses over people seen as "conventional" and uses seen as such, such as high-end audiophiles, it is more likely to fail.
Will you look forward to the day when the gov't can modify your child's genes so she/he doesn't have any "tendencies to oppose the status quo" or "tendencies to favor independent thought over what gov't/business knows is 'best' for us"?
This technology CAN be abused, and that would be a VERY BAD thing. Genetics can be used for great evils - imagine if Adolf Hitler had this kind of knowlege!
Re:Ravages of the new economy
on
HP Buys Compaq
·
· Score: 1, Flamebait
I thought UNISYS was subsisting on money made from the LZW patent?:/
Intel has secret opcodes even. Remember SETALC? Sets every bit in the AL register equal to the carry flag. It is actually supposed to be useful for something, but I forget what exactly.
The best thing that could come of your call for a boycott of the show is that you might get some pale, pasty nerd boys off the sofa and out into the sunlight for a change.
Slashdot Mirror
Either that, or perhaps they CAN break it, but they want people to think that they can't.
If it had to be a successful business, over 90% of the .com's wouldn't qualify.
I read it was $750 million, and would cost $1.5 billion today.
That is a lot, but with (I estimate here) 100 million taxpayers in the US, we are looking at $15 a head.
A small price to pay to help show the world we will not be cowed by terrorism.
Many people (Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, and others) could even actually pay for such a thing with their own personal funds, as mind boggling as that may seem.
It can be done.
We might also want to consider sending a few billion dollars to Israel.
That's part of the reason there is the DMCA and the possibly-soon-to-be SSSCA. To make skipping commercials illegal. (*) Heck, with DVDs it is illegal to make a player that lets you skip unskippable ads - you either have to violate the CSS license or implement CSS yourself, which is a DMCA violation.
(*) It won't strictly be illegal - that would raise an outcry. Just that getting around the technology that stops you would be an illegal "act of circumvention". That way anyone that tries to give you control could be painted as an "evil hacker", likewise for anyone using any circumvention methods.
After all, only "evil people" try to make the computer do anything it isn't designed for, or do anything the computer tries to prohibit. The machine is "always right", since the "nice" corporations made them.
(The above was heavily laced with sarcasm - obviously I am oppossed to DMCA/SSSCA).
Umm, to an extent, it already IS illegal to write (certain) software for computers you own.
DeCSS and the DMCA come to mind.
IP and trademark are protect it or lose it type stuff.
Not completely true. IP consists of, at least: copyrights, trademarks, patents, and trade secrets.
Trademarks and trade secrets are use it or lose it, copyrights and patents ARE NOT.
Which is when you throw the computer out the window because your Java program was so hard to write and now when done it runs like a snail.
Likely some of those were nearby cells which some phones got handed off to in order to deal with the load.
;)).
A given location can access more than one given cell site, where I live, I've seen my phone connecting to 4 different ones, right in the same place (debug mode on the phone is cool
So you can't say strictly that any site is part of one and only one cell. A failed site, a bush, etc can cause the loss or degradation of a signal which will cause the phone to look elsewhere.
Often the phone can and does, then work off another site.
That's the whole point, it affects you anyway. You can avoid the DMCA's copy protect provisions (but not their takedown provisions (*)) by avoiding their content.
This law will affect anyone with a computer, or any other "interactive digital device".
Heck, even the thermostat in my home qualifies as such! It is a programmable digital device, most certainly with an embedded microprocessor, it has inputs and outputs and processes digital data (comparing 2 temperatures does count as processing data).
* This is where anyone can get your web page removed - even if it is all your own stuff - by making an allegation. The DMCA says ISPs must act on allegations - or else risk being liable under direct, contributatory and vicarious liability statutes - including monetary damages.
ISPs would rather pull your webpage than face being ORDERED by a court to pay thousands and even millions of dollars in damages which certainly outweight your $25/month (or even $25K/month for very big sites) hosting fees.
Violence against gov't makes sense in a dictatorship, where the will of the people can NOT be effected through peaceful means.
We have NOT reached that point yet.
If our citizens, even 20% would vote libertarian, the politicians would take notice. 50+% would mean that we could change the government completely.
Without any violence.
Let's fight now, *peacefully*, so it doesn't get to the point where one is NOT allowed to vote out their representatives.
The gov't may be wrong, but then so are the people who are re-electing them. We are their bosses - but too many of our fellow citizens don't do their fair share in protecting our freedom - by being an INFORMED VOTER.
ANYONE out there who is in the USA and has the legal right to vote, but hasn't register to do so is PART OF THE PROBLEM. If this describes you, REGISTER TO VOTE. You can even do it an the DMV nowadays.
Software may be considered speech, but not hardware.
So a mandatory hardware standard might survive that Constitutional challenge. Let's say Linux would itself be legal, but not any hardware that can run it. Linux is software, possibly speech, and you might be allowed to have it, but you couldn't legally make use of it (just like the DMCA - you have fair use, see 17 USC 1201(c)(1), you just aren't allowed to exercise it).
Just don't forget what happened to Sklyarov when he visited Las Vegas. :(
The DMCA actually has some (in theory) protections for fair use. See 17 USC 1201(c)(1):
"Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title."
However, since Judge Kaplan in the 2600 case, the FBI in the Sklyarov case, etc, ignore this and also the NUMEROUS exemptions in the DMCA, and still decide to find liability and arrest those that would make fair use of intellectual "property", we can NOT depend on any "savings" clauses in the final legislation.
We have to make sure this bill never becomes law, but that we NEVER forget what they tried to do to us.
This is an act of WAR against us all.
DMCA is bad enough, it gives Disney, et al, complete control of their product even after we buy it.
This (SSSCA) is far worse. It gives them control over our computers (including the right to OUTLAW Linux and Open Source), even if we never consume their content.
Corporate IT shops won't care about this digital rights stuff. They don't stand to lose anything from it. But home users (hopefully) will not go for it.
If it prevents them from restoring/setting up computers from disk images (VERY likely!) it will make things a lot harder (labor intensive, i.e. expensive and time consuming) for companies with a lot of computers. This might help save us - these companies will not be happy having their time and money wasted for Disney, et al.
All the Department of Commerce needs to do is refuse to certify any security technology that can run on Linux.
Then Linux would be illegal.
And the civil penalties include statuatory damages. I.E. you are required to pay money even if it can't be proved any profits or damages occurred, or even if you can prove there were no profits or damages.
Statuatory damages can be assessed no matter what.
$200-$2500 in damages per offense can get very expensive for individuals.
IBM and Intel both support Linux, but also support fair-use restriction technologies (which subject one to the DMCA) that hurt Linux.
Paypal? I saw a site that asked for a donation with Paypal. I was inclined to contribute, but Paypal wanted SO MUCH personal irrelevent information (well beyond what is needed/customarily used for credit card transactions) and wanted to set up a permanent account that was linked my credit card info and I just said forget it. I was willing to do a one time thing. I didn't want personal info andmy credit card info all stored in one place, long term, with a company I have no reason to trust (my default is to DIStrust companies until proven otherwise).
Anway, it is ironic to mention paypal, considering that part of this case involves the privacy aspects of having to turn over personal info to play a song on a PC. Just as Paypal requires you to give them lots of info they hold on to, just to donate $25 to someone.
Unfortunately?!
Fortunately it won't play in newer CD players is how I would put it.
That is one thing that could really kill off this form of copy "protection" (fair use restriction).
I don't think the makers of high end audio equipment are going to just want to roll over and take it. Same with those that make car CD players (which are often CD-ROM based to avoid skipping - even when driving fast over rough terrain).
If it only affects "geeks" and those that do "unconventional" fair use (e.g. MP3s for portable players), it could succeed.
If it hoses over people seen as "conventional" and uses seen as such, such as high-end audiophiles, it is more likely to fail.
I wish I could use the calender that they are using myself.
"Yeah, I'll pay that bill - when I'm ready."
Uh-huh. No definite release date is a bad thing. This reduces the acceptability of open source to business.
Mozilla needs to catch up and fast. Netscape, IE, and/or Konqueror will crush them if they don't
Will you look forward to the day when the gov't can modify your child's genes so she/he doesn't have any "tendencies to oppose the status quo" or "tendencies to favor independent thought over what gov't/business knows is 'best' for us"?
This technology CAN be abused, and that would be a VERY BAD thing. Genetics can be used for great evils - imagine if Adolf Hitler had this kind of knowlege!
I thought UNISYS was subsisting on money made from the LZW patent? :/
Intel has secret opcodes even. Remember SETALC? Sets every bit in the AL register equal to the carry flag. It is actually supposed to be useful for something, but I forget what exactly.
The best thing that could come of your call for a boycott of the show is that you might get some pale, pasty nerd boys off the sofa and out into the sunlight for a change.
Now THAT is something that will NEVER happen. :/
Well but Microsoft could count you in their userbase once for each component you buy. Imagine the marketing spin they could get then:
"We have over 1 billion users of Microsoft products in the USA alone!"