Ear buds have taught me that my ears aren't shaped exactly the same. And I many (most?) people have arms that are different lengths. So it might be possible that differences in ear shape lead to different qualities of earing.
You're right, I should have phrased that better. Being homosexual isn't a choice but illegally downloading music is. You can argue that the law that says you can download music is flawed, but you're supposed to fight that in court and/or take it up with the government not just do it anyway since you don't agree.
As someone else pointed out Kazaa makes it pretty clear that people can download from you what you download from other people unless you make the appropriate changes. And her trying to cover the thing up and lying about isn't going to scream innocent to a jury either. As a civil matter there's definitely enough evidence to suggest she knew she was distributing, though the millions of copies is a whole other ball game.
Rather then reading the summary you could read the actual blog post in which he first states that the there was no iota of evidence for either reproduction or distribution. NYCL says they should have had a directed verdict (the judge throws out the plaintiffs case when they finished instead of having the defense present). So the original suggestion is that in the "real world" the case is dismissed.
That's not the way the law is written. That's like committing mail fraud and saying "But I've been using the USPS since the 90s!" Using a service that can be used for an illegal purpose before using it illegally is not a get out of jail free card.
The real flaw in the logic here is that any record company may have put out a song before registering the copyright. Unless someone made a big mistake I doubt any company puts songs out into the media without already having the secured copyright, so it's probably very rare that you could file share a song without it being copyrighted (assuming it's not free to begin with).
I don't think saying that an act "has been performed billions upon billions of times" is really an excuse. If that argument holds true is it okay if I murder someone? How many times has that happened since the dawn of time? And it sure seems to be a more natural act than file sharing.
I have to admit I'm really curious as to how The Sims 3 plays on the iPhone. I don't really ever play the game for a few minutes and I'm not sure I'd enjoy it on such a small screen. Also, on that size screen it seems like it would be hard to select the correct items for the Sims to use. But I actually haven't played it, so I'm curious to know what anyone that has it thinks of it.
Exactly. Having Twitter open also helps supporters of the current regime that may wish to explain why they believe the current election results are correct an outlet to communicate with people inside and outside the country. This would be more like the Chinese cellphone maker having the phones blurt out "Vote! Vote!".
So if I rob you it's fine as long as I use the money to feed my family? If the police were going around residential neighborhoods using this as an excuse to search people's houses I'd be upset. But are you really bothered by the fact that they arrested a large pirating operation that is making pirated CDs to be sold for profit. I don't really care if the pirates were trying to pay their mortgage, just like I don't care if that's why that guy broke into my house last night.
I foresee that going something like "What's a Ubuntu? Why is it only $1? It must be absolutely terrible. I'll go with Microsoft. I know what that is and what it does."
It is not Microsoft's fault if people don't care enough to switch browsers and that isn't how we got into this mess. They dictated what the OEM could put on the machine BEFORE it was given to the customer, not which browser could be used after.
How is that you ask for a citation when someone claims that a majority of people running custom firmware do it to pirate games, but then you go ahead and say "Yes, there will be people who will never pay for anything, but there will be far more people who will use it as a demo service" without anything to back that up? If these guys need to demo games before buying them can't they rent them first?
Despite whether or not you agree that Google is to blame, I don't think that this is the case of a slow news day. The article talks about the unintended consequences of techonlogy, so I still think it counts as/. worthy.
But that fails to take other information in account, such as the fact that white people in the US tend to have more money and thus have less of a need to kill/steal.
And did you even look at the criticisms in the Wikipedia article you linked? One of the guys saying the information was manipulated was the person whose data the writer was using!
I posted several AC comments before finally deciding to sign up for an account. I find it funny that you don't think there's any other possible reason they would post AC than to hide the truth.
It sucks that our court system favors who has the better lawyers and not what's actually in the law books, but that's life.
I think you need to define what you mean by "better" because I certainly hope that the court system favors the better lawyer. Shouldn't the guy that's better at his job beat out the guy that isn't as good?
Also, it also seems to me like it's better for the court system to listen to the party with the better lawyer rather than what's written down as law in some cases. Wouldn't you rather have the court system listen to a lawyer that made a great argument that separate but equal is fundamentally unequal than have them ignore it because Congress has already passed a law saying separate but equal is okay?
I think the courts are the lesser problem in these instances, the real problem is who's funding/endorsing the congressmen making laws against net neutrality.
Slashdot Mirror
Wouldn't that be them planning to flood Yahoo! and Bing headquarters?
Ear buds have taught me that my ears aren't shaped exactly the same. And I many (most?) people have arms that are different lengths. So it might be possible that differences in ear shape lead to different qualities of earing.
So Google stole the plot from Superman?
You're right, I should have phrased that better. Being homosexual isn't a choice but illegally downloading music is. You can argue that the law that says you can download music is flawed, but you're supposed to fight that in court and/or take it up with the government not just do it anyway since you don't agree.
As someone else pointed out Kazaa makes it pretty clear that people can download from you what you download from other people unless you make the appropriate changes. And her trying to cover the thing up and lying about isn't going to scream innocent to a jury either. As a civil matter there's definitely enough evidence to suggest she knew she was distributing, though the millions of copies is a whole other ball game.
Rather then reading the summary you could read the actual blog post in which he first states that the there was no iota of evidence for either reproduction or distribution. NYCL says they should have had a directed verdict (the judge throws out the plaintiffs case when they finished instead of having the defense present). So the original suggestion is that in the "real world" the case is dismissed.
Not defending the Capitol Records here but that could be because being homosexual isn't a choice and breaking the law is. Not really a good example.
That's not the way the law is written. That's like committing mail fraud and saying "But I've been using the USPS since the 90s!" Using a service that can be used for an illegal purpose before using it illegally is not a get out of jail free card. The real flaw in the logic here is that any record company may have put out a song before registering the copyright. Unless someone made a big mistake I doubt any company puts songs out into the media without already having the secured copyright, so it's probably very rare that you could file share a song without it being copyrighted (assuming it's not free to begin with).
I don't think saying that an act "has been performed billions upon billions of times" is really an excuse. If that argument holds true is it okay if I murder someone? How many times has that happened since the dawn of time? And it sure seems to be a more natural act than file sharing.
I have to admit I'm really curious as to how The Sims 3 plays on the iPhone. I don't really ever play the game for a few minutes and I'm not sure I'd enjoy it on such a small screen. Also, on that size screen it seems like it would be hard to select the correct items for the Sims to use. But I actually haven't played it, so I'm curious to know what anyone that has it thinks of it.
There are three major operating systems? This is bigger news than the elections!
Exactly. Having Twitter open also helps supporters of the current regime that may wish to explain why they believe the current election results are correct an outlet to communicate with people inside and outside the country. This would be more like the Chinese cellphone maker having the phones blurt out "Vote! Vote!".
Do Not Call really only works with legitimate businesses. But I agree that two years to arrest con artists doing this volume of calling is ridiculous.
The only problem I have with your theory is that I've gotten many calls from them and I don't own a car (nor have I in the past).
So if I rob you it's fine as long as I use the money to feed my family? If the police were going around residential neighborhoods using this as an excuse to search people's houses I'd be upset. But are you really bothered by the fact that they arrested a large pirating operation that is making pirated CDs to be sold for profit. I don't really care if the pirates were trying to pay their mortgage, just like I don't care if that's why that guy broke into my house last night.
I foresee that going something like "What's a Ubuntu? Why is it only $1? It must be absolutely terrible. I'll go with Microsoft. I know what that is and what it does."
It is not Microsoft's fault if people don't care enough to switch browsers and that isn't how we got into this mess. They dictated what the OEM could put on the machine BEFORE it was given to the customer, not which browser could be used after.
How is that you ask for a citation when someone claims that a majority of people running custom firmware do it to pirate games, but then you go ahead and say "Yes, there will be people who will never pay for anything, but there will be far more people who will use it as a demo service" without anything to back that up? If these guys need to demo games before buying them can't they rent them first?
Yeah, asking for a citation. What a dick.
Despite whether or not you agree that Google is to blame, I don't think that this is the case of a slow news day. The article talks about the unintended consequences of techonlogy, so I still think it counts as /. worthy.
I think last year's Olympics might make you have to start rethinking that athletes comment.
But that fails to take other information in account, such as the fact that white people in the US tend to have more money and thus have less of a need to kill/steal.
And did you even look at the criticisms in the Wikipedia article you linked? One of the guys saying the information was manipulated was the person whose data the writer was using!
I posted several AC comments before finally deciding to sign up for an account. I find it funny that you don't think there's any other possible reason they would post AC than to hide the truth.
It sucks that our court system favors who has the better lawyers and not what's actually in the law books, but that's life.
I think you need to define what you mean by "better" because I certainly hope that the court system favors the better lawyer. Shouldn't the guy that's better at his job beat out the guy that isn't as good?
Also, it also seems to me like it's better for the court system to listen to the party with the better lawyer rather than what's written down as law in some cases. Wouldn't you rather have the court system listen to a lawyer that made a great argument that separate but equal is fundamentally unequal than have them ignore it because Congress has already passed a law saying separate but equal is okay?
I think the courts are the lesser problem in these instances, the real problem is who's funding/endorsing the congressmen making laws against net neutrality.
PS> Would hate to die of Swine Flu, just because of what it's called... and all that it would imply if I caught it...
What do you think the assumption would be? "You hear Ray died of Swine Flu?" "Ew! What'd he do make out with a pig?"