I've made no deal with them. If they use advertizers which hijack the screen and make the reading experience impossible, they've only got themselves to blame.
People (sellers) have gone on record as saying they never saw any business because of these methods, yet when they employed Googles addwords the could register a big change almost at once. Because Googles adds are mostly relevant and never annoying.
If you ever mature you may realise that what others thing is irrelevant. Be they rabid fans or emenies. The merit of something should not be dependant on who likes or hates it and how they behave.
Now perhaps we'll get to see Lexa Doig (Rommie) on Stargate SG1, she's married to Michael Shanks who plays Dr. Jackson on that show - (damn him) - he's done a guest show on Andromeda, so there was talk about her doing the opposite.
None what so ever. You pay to borrow a bracelet, don't want it - don't rent it. And you hand it over when you leave. Only thing someone can do is track the kid while in the park, and usually most of the kids are with their parents. There are hardly anything underhanded you can do in an amusement park anyway.
(1) I don't personally believe in copying CDs illegally-- but I think we should avoid using unkind words like "piracy" to describe those that do -- instead, we should describe it as an "infringement", much like a parking infringement.
Its not that its "unkind", its that its semantically wrong, and only someone with a bad education (or immoral intent) would use it to twist the meaning, possibly with the intent to deceive. Piracy is robbery on the high seas, and that is not some 17th century nonsense with Johnny Depp, this is a fact - happening TODAY not only can things be really stolen, but sailors can loose their lives (and have). These widows probably don't take kindly to the term piracy being used for something as irrelevant as downloading of music from the internet. Especially since a study from Harward business school proves that it doesn't really harm sales.
Downloading music from the internet is (if you don't have a license) copyright INFRINGEMENT, it is not stealing. Stealing requires (by law) that someone is deprived of something physical. If someone downloads a track with Madonna, some of her dollars doesn't suddenly go missing - nor do they return if said mp3 is deleted. That is why it is infringement, not theft. If you take someones car they have lost the car and can't use it. Nothing needs be lost by the download of a song (still currently illegal though)
(2) I don't believe in the record companies emotively abusing the word "theft,"...
Well I do. They clearly do that to try and manipulate the politicians and people who are not burdened with intelligence.
(3) I believe that piracy is driven by "overpriced CDs" even though CDs have dropped in price over the years.
Piracy is robbery on the seas, downloading music is called copyright infringement. They are vastly overpriced, presumably to finance a basically corrupt and immoral business model, and that may motivate some. Though the was majority of people use download like they use the radio, they listen to something which is good enough to pass the time but which really isn't good enough to buy (though as the study shows if something of quality comes along people do go out and buy it)
(4) I believe that piracy is driven by overly long copyright duration, even though most pirated works are recent releases.
Piracy is robbery on the seas, downloading music is called copyright infringement. The copyright duration is of course vastly too long , not only should it only last for a few years, but it shouldn't be transferable and certainly not last beyond someones lifetime, however it is very doubtful this has any influence on the copyright infringement as whole, though some few may do it for political reasons, which is silly since it has no demonstrable effect.
(5) I believe that illegitimately downloading music is giving the author "free advertising".
Well, that's what intelligent people believe, especially after the study from Business Hardward School proved has no effect.
I don't buy any of the music I download, of course --but lots of other people probably do.
I don't download music. However studies show that others do, infact they are making millions from it.
And now I've already spent and hour writing this, time I'll never get back, and i doubt you'll wish to enlighten yourself, especially considering the nonsense in most of the rest of the post, i shall end it here then.
So when 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000001% of the worlds population by these over expensive items, that's selling like crazy?
Slashdot Mirror
I thought the UK was part of the US? ;)
Noo, sweden is not part of Europe - don't be silly ;)
Anyway, yes, you've made no deal with them. That's exactly the point!
Yep, if i don't wanna see their adds i block them - my choice.
Good for you :)
Tsk tsk
I've made no deal with them. If they use advertizers which hijack the screen and make the reading experience impossible, they've only got themselves to blame.
Are you influenced by commercials on the TV? Of course you are.
Of course i am - i make sure never to buy anything for which i can remember a commercial.
Almost everyone hates telemarketing, yet if nobody ever bought anything from a telemarketer, it would not be profitable and nobody would do it.
Ah, to live in civilized Europe where it IS ILLEGAL to telemarket.
People (sellers) have gone on record as saying they never saw any business because of these methods, yet when they employed Googles addwords the could register a big change almost at once. Because Googles adds are mostly relevant and never annoying.
Andromeda WAS good
I disagree. It never was.
If you ever mature you may realise that what others thing is irrelevant. Be they rabid fans or emenies. The merit of something should not be dependant on who likes or hates it and how they behave.
Now perhaps we'll get to see Lexa Doig (Rommie) on Stargate SG1, she's married to Michael Shanks who plays Dr. Jackson on that show - (damn him) - he's done a guest show on Andromeda, so there was talk about her doing the opposite.
Often when i search for one thing i get adds for something else. Not that i care that much, but its just a bit silly :)
Tivoli Gardens in Copenhagen has already installed that a month ago, and before them another park in Jutland - so they are a bit late :)
Privacy concerns, anybody?
None what so ever. You pay to borrow a bracelet, don't want it - don't rent it. And you hand it over when you leave. Only thing someone can do is track the kid while in the park, and usually most of the kids are with their parents. There are hardly anything underhanded you can do in an amusement park anyway.
America considers as its right to interfer in the affairs of all countries on the planet, yet refuse everyone else the right to do the opposite.
... is a search engine in a free country? ;)
Oh well :)
... can it fly?
This is not a troll, but the truth
Actually its mostly braindead rubbish.
(1) I don't personally believe in copying CDs illegally-- but I think we should avoid using unkind words like "piracy" to describe those that do -- instead, we should describe it as an "infringement", much like a parking infringement.
Its not that its "unkind", its that its semantically wrong, and only someone with a bad education (or immoral intent) would use it to twist the meaning, possibly with the intent to deceive. Piracy is robbery on the high seas, and that is not some 17th century nonsense with Johnny Depp, this is a fact - happening TODAY not only can things be really stolen, but sailors can loose their lives (and have). These widows probably don't take kindly to the term piracy being used for something as irrelevant as downloading of music from the internet. Especially since a study from Harward business school proves that it doesn't really harm sales.
Downloading music from the internet is (if you don't have a license) copyright INFRINGEMENT, it is not stealing. Stealing requires (by law) that someone is deprived of something physical. If someone downloads a track with Madonna, some of her dollars doesn't suddenly go missing - nor do they return if said mp3 is deleted. That is why it is infringement, not theft. If you take someones car they have lost the car and can't use it. Nothing needs be lost by the download of a song (still currently illegal though)
(2) I don't believe in the record companies emotively abusing the word "theft,"...
Well I do. They clearly do that to try and manipulate the politicians and people who are not burdened with intelligence.
(3) I believe that piracy is driven by "overpriced CDs" even though CDs have dropped in price over the years.
Piracy is robbery on the seas, downloading music is called copyright infringement.
They are vastly overpriced, presumably to finance a basically corrupt and immoral business model, and that may motivate some. Though the was majority of people use download like they use the radio, they listen to something which is good enough to pass the time but which really isn't good enough to buy (though as the study shows if something of quality comes along people do go out and buy it)
(4) I believe that piracy is driven by overly long copyright duration, even though most pirated works are recent releases.
Piracy is robbery on the seas, downloading music is called copyright infringement. The copyright duration is of course vastly too long , not only should it only last for a few years, but it shouldn't be transferable and certainly not last beyond someones lifetime, however it is very doubtful this has any influence on the copyright infringement as whole, though some few may do it for political reasons, which is silly since it has no demonstrable effect.
(5) I believe that illegitimately downloading music is giving the author "free advertising".
Well, that's what intelligent people believe, especially after the study from Business Hardward School proved has no effect.
I don't buy any of the music I download, of course --but lots of other people probably do.
I don't download music. However studies show that others do, infact they are making millions from it.
And now I've already spent and hour writing this, time I'll never get back, and i doubt you'll wish to enlighten yourself, especially considering the nonsense in most of the rest of the post, i shall end it here then.
That's because you are kids. Perhaps you'll feel like supporting a couple of artists you like.
So when 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000001% of the worlds population by these over expensive items, that's selling like crazy?
And they'll cost 500% more than other products..
And they'll cost 500% more than other products.
You made a typo there "They just can't see that the DRM ISN'T the future"