Why should I price software that I create at anything other than the price that I want.
Because you want to sell it?
If you can't afford it, then tough, don't use it.
People use a different approach. They use it. But since they can't afford it, you haven't lost any money.
Nobody has a god given right to software.
Not that i have talked to God, but you are probably right. But then nobody has a god given right to get money either, that's a convention invented by some people, and some people don't agree.
Though the vast masses who copy programs don't generaly steal anything else, they just reason, that since they can't afford the program nothing will be lost if they do make a program.
Me? The only adobe program on my machines is their free pdf reader, i can't stand their products, their interfaces are too damn small.
Then I said, and this really surprised myself: "I would like to be a DVD/CD pirate. No, not to make lots of money, but it seems like the right thing to do."
Christ, what kind of ego-driven self-serving comment is that? Yeah, you wouldn't make money off of it, you'd just do it out of the kindness of your heart. It's comments like these that tell not only your age, but your maturity.
They do no such thing. People of all ages and "maturity" levels feel that way. Just because you don't understand or agree with someone doesn't make them inferior to you.
Instead of paying the studios and filmmakers for their work you'd rather rip them off. If actors/directors/writers/etc don't sell units, don't sell tickets, don't move these products, they're out of jobs.
They do get payed, over and over and over - that is why some people are objecting. Right or wrong, they feel that the greater moral wrong is to keep wanting money ("oh you thought you bought that movie? Oh no, you payed for a LICENSE to watch it")
You can yell from the mountaintops how great it is to steal from people but the fact remains:
...that its not stealing. Stealing is taking a physical object. Copying a movie is not stealing, its a copyright violation, but its not stealing.
Its not stealing because you are not taking something from the other party - wether you copy or not they have lost nothing. Sure, they (and you) argue that if you didn't copy something, then you would buy it instead and they would get some money and now they have lost that money! It's a specious argument, and following that kind of logic you could go to a job interview, fail to get the job and then sue the company for all the salaries you now won't be getting!
Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back won't be released in Australian theaters until March. The Region 1 DVD comes out in February. Now if all those Australians get pirated copies of that great (and hilarious) film, who gets paid and who gets the shaft?
And who is to blame? The movie companies of course! Their customers have repeatedly shown that they want to see things NOW, not weeks, months or years from now, for many reasons (talking about a movie on the internet is one of them for instance) And if they can't figure it out people have started to turn to the net for that - and not just dorm kids either, look at say Morpheus - more than half a million people on around the clock, and going up.
But perhaps they ARE figuring it out, one reason that Lord Of The Rings opened all over the world at once is probably because they knew that it would leak over the internet, and so they headed the pirates off at the pass as it were.
People can complain about region coding all they want, but the solid evidence supporting the practice is right here.
Where? You failed to demonstrate that. On the contrary the opposite is the case, if they DO not put region coding on DVD's people are more inclined to buy a genuine version - its one less reason to get a fake one. Though in many european countries they shops selling DVD players have started to region modify the players before putting them on sale.
Region coding was a stupid scheme to begin with and its dying out, if not in practice then certainly in effect.
The problem with all of the arguments here on/. is that these companies are literaly fighting for their existence. If Napster continued in existance and gained a few orders of magnitude in popularity it could quite realistincally put many of these music producers out of business.
Perhaps, but then so be it. Its evolution, the wheel turns. Look at history, other professions have died out for various reasons. You could argue that this is not a "fair" way to go, but then when was life fair.
The irony of that would be that there'd be no new music left to trade since the over produced modern pop crap is always the most popular.
Nonsense. That's like saying there would be now free software, because if its free why would people make it?
It will probably be different from what it is now, but I doubt it will die out. People made music long before the CD's, or even records were invented - they had the drive. They will still have that drive, the path will just be somewhat different. Initially many will supply free mp3s to music sites, and suddenly some artists will be popular enough to give performances - and concerts must be payed for. Admmitance fees would probably be much greater than now - but everything else would be promotion.
I just check at some cd's at the mall, none of them had the logo (not where i could see it), but they were legal cd's and compilations. That's not stopping anybody from buying them it seems.
As i wrote, when i submitted this story two weeks ago.. , a spokesperson from Philips said that they expected music companies to clearly LABLE their copyprotected CD's. Indicating that the CD had a much shorter lifespan than a "real" CD, and that it was in fact NOT a real CD.
Apparently the can't prevent people from making small round discs, but they can prevent them from calling them CD's.
Somewhat related, is the fact that a spokesperson for Philips, interviewed in a german trade publication says that copy protected CD's are not according to the specs laid down by Philips, and as such are not real CD's, they will be less functional and have a shorter lifespan. And Philips expect all future CD's to be specifically labled to this effect ("This disk is not a real CD, will not play in most equipment and will have a much shorter lifespand" *snicker*)
If Id released the source for RtCW today, they wouldn't make a penny on their retail sales. Somone would get the source code, edit one line, stick it on an FTP server, and make it available to the world free (as in beer), and most people would get it from there. There would be no legal reason to stop them, and every financial reason for them to do so.
No you are wrong. Of the people who buy RtCW, how many would be able to compile it? 0.001% probably. And its only the source that is released, none of the graphics,sound, models etc. So even if someone compiled the source, people would only get the game engine legally, if someone game them the graphics files that would be illegal and the cops could kick their butts.
Search results are only retained for a limited amount of time.Your search results have either been deleted, or the file has been updated with new information.
I see a real use in this. My wife is a highschool history teacher. There are many movies that she would like to be able to show, but because of some bad language, nudity, or violence, she is not able to use the films. Community standards are a bitch. If she could pop a DVD in, hit the PG rating and let it roll, that would be great.
Except the people who get scared over nothing ends up censoring the world even more - which will make the wakeup call when someone plants a plane on your house that much more abrupt...
Nudity is not dangerous, langauge is not dangerous, and violence is only dangerous in real life (often because you have repressed to much)
... that's your support staff right there! It isn't just Polaroid - its anything it seems.
I was asking Westwood about their "Dune" game, something like 15 ! mails back and forth, and NOT ONCE did they answer my question, only gave me a slew of pretype nonsense... now, on the one had i think its nice of them to hire some mentally handicapped people, give them a chance to make a little money, on the other hand its very annoying.. oh well.
Slashdot Mirror
Why should I price software that I create at anything other than the price that I want.
Because you want to sell it?
If you can't afford it, then tough, don't use it.
People use a different approach. They use it. But since they can't afford it, you haven't lost any money.
Nobody has a god given right to software.
Not that i have talked to God, but you are probably right. But then nobody has a god given right to get money either, that's a convention invented by some people, and some people don't agree.
Though the vast masses who copy programs don't generaly steal anything else, they just reason, that since they can't afford the program nothing will be lost if they do make a program.
Me? The only adobe program on my machines is their free pdf reader, i can't stand their products, their interfaces are too damn small.
Actually, it is illegal to own an unlicensed copy of that CD in the U.S.
Has this license stuff been laid down in law? I think it's the greatest fraud ever.
Christ, what kind of ego-driven self-serving comment is that? Yeah, you wouldn't make money off of it, you'd just do it out of the kindness of your heart. It's comments like these that tell not only your age, but your maturity.
They do no such thing. People of all ages and "maturity" levels feel that way. Just because you don't understand or agree with someone doesn't make them inferior to you.
Instead of paying the studios and filmmakers for their work you'd rather rip them off. If actors/directors/writers/etc don't sell units, don't sell tickets, don't move these products, they're out of jobs.
They do get payed, over and over and over - that is why some people are objecting. Right or wrong, they feel that the greater moral wrong is to keep wanting money ("oh you thought you bought that movie? Oh no, you payed for a LICENSE to watch it")
You can yell from the mountaintops how great it is to steal from people but the fact remains:
...that its not stealing. Stealing is taking a physical object. Copying a movie is not stealing, its a copyright violation, but its not stealing.
Its not stealing because you are not taking something from the other party - wether you copy or not they have lost nothing. Sure, they (and you) argue that if you didn't copy something, then you would buy it instead and they would get some money and now they have lost that money! It's a specious argument, and following that kind of logic you could go to a job interview, fail to get the job and then sue the company for all the salaries you now won't be getting!
Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back won't be released in Australian theaters until March. The Region 1 DVD comes out in February. Now if all those Australians get pirated copies of that great (and hilarious) film, who gets paid and who gets the shaft?
And who is to blame? The movie companies of course! Their customers have repeatedly shown that they want to see things NOW, not weeks, months or years from now, for many reasons (talking about a movie on the internet is one of them for instance) And if they can't figure it out people have started to turn to the net for that - and not just dorm kids either, look at say Morpheus - more than half a million people on around the clock, and going up.
But perhaps they ARE figuring it out, one reason that Lord Of The Rings opened all over the world at once is probably because they knew that it would leak over the internet, and so they headed the pirates off at the pass as it were.
People can complain about region coding all they want, but the solid evidence supporting the practice is right here.
Where? You failed to demonstrate that. On the contrary the opposite is the case, if they DO not put region coding on DVD's people are more inclined to buy a genuine version - its one less reason to get a fake one. Though in many european countries they shops selling DVD players have started to region modify the players before putting them on sale.
Region coding was a stupid scheme to begin with and its dying out, if not in practice then certainly in effect.
No matter how reviled M$ is... the term Lindows DOES infringe on the name Windows...
If it does, the law clearly needs to be changed...
Perhaps, but then so be it. Its evolution, the wheel turns. Look at history, other professions have died out for various reasons. You could argue that this is not a "fair" way to go, but then when was life fair.
The irony of that would be that there'd be no new music left to trade since the over produced modern pop crap is always the most popular.
Nonsense. That's like saying there would be now free software, because if its free why would people make it?
It will probably be different from what it is now, but I doubt it will die out. People made music long before the CD's, or even records were invented - they had the drive. They will still have that drive, the path will just be somewhat different. Initially many will supply free mp3s to music sites, and suddenly some artists will be popular enough to give performances - and concerts must be payed for. Admmitance fees would probably be much greater than now - but everything else would be promotion.
I just check at some cd's at the mall, none of them had the logo (not where i could see it), but they were legal cd's and compilations. That's not stopping anybody from buying them it seems.
So in the end does it matter?
As i wrote, when i submitted this story two weeks ago.. , a spokesperson from Philips said that they expected music companies to clearly LABLE their copyprotected CD's. Indicating that the CD had a much shorter lifespan than a "real" CD, and that it was in fact NOT a real CD.
Apparently the can't prevent people from making small round discs, but they can prevent them from calling them CD's.
read the stories, they were posing thousands of messages. One of the guys had posted more than 35000 messages - that sounds like spam to me..
Somewhat related, is the fact that a spokesperson for Philips, interviewed in a german trade publication says that copy protected CD's are not according to the specs laid down by Philips, and as such are not real CD's, they will be less functional and have a shorter lifespan. And Philips expect all future CD's to be specifically labled to this effect ("This disk is not a real CD, will not play in most equipment and will have a much shorter lifespand" *snicker*)
German Yahoo has the story:
Or maybe the movies ARE getting dumber...
Gates is right! This open source moment is out to get windows!
So we can expect a sequel to ttyquake
:)
I just hope someone will port ttyquake to windows
Try this one - the movie is a danger to your soul!
LOL
but this is an amazing accomplishment for a fantasy movie.
:)
Its still mostly nerds on the internet, they seem to like that kinda stuff
No you are wrong. Of the people who buy RtCW, how many would be able to compile it? 0.001% probably. And its only the source that is released, none of the graphics,sound, models etc. So even if someone compiled the source, people would only get the game engine legally, if someone game them the graphics files that would be illegal and the cops could kick their butts.
>A good way to convince BMW to sell cars for $100 is to steal them?
Stealing is the act of physically removing something. Copying an mp3 might be copyright infringement, but its not stealing.
nt
Please resubmit your search
Search results are only retained for a limited amount of time.Your search results have either been deleted, or the file has been updated with new information.
OOh, cool!
... it lends legitmacy to spam... oh well
Insurrection was one of the few of the movies which actually stayed fairly true to the spirit of real(tm) trek.
...and i don't think it is.
You can't re-animate Bruce Lee, period.
That's what you hope. Hope doesn't make it so.
You acknowledge that a man can have talent, yet you don't think animators can have talent.
They can.
The producers may not have the money to hire them this time.. but eventually...
Except the people who get scared over nothing ends up censoring the world even more - which will make the wakeup call when someone plants a plane on your house that much more abrupt...
Nudity is not dangerous, langauge is not dangerous, and violence is only dangerous in real life (often because you have repressed to much)
He certainly has posted, that's who i found his website :)
... that's your support staff right there! It isn't just Polaroid - its anything it seems. .. oh well.
I was asking Westwood about their "Dune" game, something like 15 ! mails back and forth, and NOT ONCE did they answer my question, only gave me a slew of pretype nonsense... now, on the one had i think its nice of them to hire some mentally handicapped people, give them a chance to make a little money, on the other hand its very annoying