Owning specific artists and their records is way too broad to be a monopoly. That's just their product, which of course they don't let anyone else sell. That would be like calling Apple a monopoly because they own the iPhone and don't let Microsoft sell it also.
The problem with that is that you can still end up making someone that didn't do anything wrong suffer. What happens to the people that get hit by a cellphone user that can't cover the damage?
Even if that site turns out to be better and it's only 2 minutes of commercials per hour? Shouldn't the site come out before we start saying it's not as good as what's out there already?
According to Radiohead most people paid nothing for the CD and that seems to be directly from them, so that doesn't take into account all the people that pirated it.
Actually, I think the fastest way to see a change would be if a senator's/governor's/etc. son/daughter was caught pirating their favorite song/movie/whatever.
and NOT to protect the inventor from other people stealing their ideas
Then quoted:
by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries
It was meant to protect inventors from having their ideas copied, that's the method used for helping scientific progress. Thus what you said was not entirely true.
Well that's not entirely true. It helped the progress of science and useful arts by protecting the inventor from being copied for a reasonable period of time.
I've played Silent Scope and while a cool concept, it's nothing like firing a rifle with a scope. The game had no kickback, there's all just aim and fire.
Just because your sights are set in the right place doesn't mean that's where the bullet is gonna go. Games don't account for kickback, bullets drop over long distances, and if you're shooting a lot the barrel heats up which can change the shape of a rifle and how you have to sight it.
I'm not saying I want all those features in a game, I'm just saying if you buy a Silent Scope machine and practice constantly then fire a real rifle you're gonna be in for a big surprise when you can't hit anything.
Your sarcasm isn't appreciated. This doesn't fix the cracks, that's stupid.
If someone can't pick up your iPhone, they can't steal it. Just because you don't understand the brilliance of this anti-theft system doesn't mean you should mock it.
I don't think violent video games are training anybody to become more effective killers because I don't know of a single video game that actually trains you to use a weapon. Sure we have Metal Gear Solid and Grand Theft Auto were you can pick up a nice armory of firearms and go around murdering people if you want. But if you think that learning to target an enemy solider in a Metal Gear is anything like handling an actual rifle then you've clearly never used one.
However, I don't disagree that school level shooting aren't the result of violent video games. But I think they have a very important second component, and that's bad parenting. If you have a son or daughter that's showing violent tendencies and enjoys spending hours and hours beating up hookers and policemen in GTA, then maybe you should reevaluate what type of games you're going to buy them. Also, why is your handgun in a place where a child can get to without your permission to begin with? I don't think anyone's going to argue that violent video games probably don't affect violent children, but then it's up to a parent either make sure their children aren't playing those games or they're seeing some type of counselor about whatever is causing those feelings.
I was actually watching NewsRadio on Hulu the other week and was wondering why that is. The only thing I could think of was it may have something to due with it being cancelled and then restored before that season. Though it was on the same network so I'm not sure why that would affect it.
I'm guessing "From The Article". Though I have to admit that since we're talking about a legal matter and possible lawsuits, appeals, and/or mistrials I originally read it as "Failure To Appear" and thought I'd missed something.
Slashdot Mirror
Owning specific artists and their records is way too broad to be a monopoly. That's just their product, which of course they don't let anyone else sell. That would be like calling Apple a monopoly because they own the iPhone and don't let Microsoft sell it also.
The problem with that is that you can still end up making someone that didn't do anything wrong suffer. What happens to the people that get hit by a cellphone user that can't cover the damage?
I'd imagine only against dig.
Even if that site turns out to be better and it's only 2 minutes of commercials per hour? Shouldn't the site come out before we start saying it's not as good as what's out there already?
...apparently, most slashdotters don't have a clue...
You must be new here...
Fixed that.
Wait? It was actually built by Time Lords?
According to Radiohead most people paid nothing for the CD and that seems to be directly from them, so that doesn't take into account all the people that pirated it.
Didn't the Radiohead Experiment teach us that most people don't care about cost or RIAA business tactics? They just want stuff for free.
Actually, I think the fastest way to see a change would be if a senator's/governor's/etc. son/daughter was caught pirating their favorite song/movie/whatever.
and NOT to protect the inventor from other people stealing their ideas
Then quoted:
by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries
It was meant to protect inventors from having their ideas copied, that's the method used for helping scientific progress. Thus what you said was not entirely true.
ideas and works that they create
I could be entirely wrong, but I took the word "create" at the end of the sentence to mean exactly what you listed under something useful.
You could see about forming one?
Well that's not entirely true. It helped the progress of science and useful arts by protecting the inventor from being copied for a reasonable period of time.
But that doesn't take into account the local movie/music shop owner that could be selling you the CD/DVD.
I was thinking less real life application and more it worked on Mars in Zak McKracken and the Alien Mindbenders.
Actually all you need is a fishbowl, oxygen tank, and a wetsuit.
20 rabbits = 5 hares
I know people will think I'm crazy, but this was totally better than the acronym comment above!
I've played Silent Scope and while a cool concept, it's nothing like firing a rifle with a scope. The game had no kickback, there's all just aim and fire. Just because your sights are set in the right place doesn't mean that's where the bullet is gonna go. Games don't account for kickback, bullets drop over long distances, and if you're shooting a lot the barrel heats up which can change the shape of a rifle and how you have to sight it. I'm not saying I want all those features in a game, I'm just saying if you buy a Silent Scope machine and practice constantly then fire a real rifle you're gonna be in for a big surprise when you can't hit anything.
Your sarcasm isn't appreciated. This doesn't fix the cracks, that's stupid. If someone can't pick up your iPhone, they can't steal it. Just because you don't understand the brilliance of this anti-theft system doesn't mean you should mock it.
I don't think violent video games are training anybody to become more effective killers because I don't know of a single video game that actually trains you to use a weapon. Sure we have Metal Gear Solid and Grand Theft Auto were you can pick up a nice armory of firearms and go around murdering people if you want. But if you think that learning to target an enemy solider in a Metal Gear is anything like handling an actual rifle then you've clearly never used one. However, I don't disagree that school level shooting aren't the result of violent video games. But I think they have a very important second component, and that's bad parenting. If you have a son or daughter that's showing violent tendencies and enjoys spending hours and hours beating up hookers and policemen in GTA, then maybe you should reevaluate what type of games you're going to buy them. Also, why is your handgun in a place where a child can get to without your permission to begin with? I don't think anyone's going to argue that violent video games probably don't affect violent children, but then it's up to a parent either make sure their children aren't playing those games or they're seeing some type of counselor about whatever is causing those feelings.
I was actually watching NewsRadio on Hulu the other week and was wondering why that is. The only thing I could think of was it may have something to due with it being cancelled and then restored before that season. Though it was on the same network so I'm not sure why that would affect it.
Cheaper cheese.
I believe he is actually using hyperbole to explain what he finds silly about the situation.
I'm guessing "From The Article". Though I have to admit that since we're talking about a legal matter and possible lawsuits, appeals, and/or mistrials I originally read it as "Failure To Appear" and thought I'd missed something.