Fair use of a copyrighted work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
17 U.S.C. 107
This is the law. This is not how the Postal Service used his copyrighted work. As an aside, this is also not what Tenenbaum et al. did when they downloaded music.
We shouldn't complain when judges use restraint and don't bastardize statutes.
Right, obviously they make the money through advertising. But you were trying to argue that "search" isn't a market, and that Google has thousands of competitors since thousands of people sell advertising. The point is that only a handful of people sell sponsored links in their searches; it is a distinct market.
Yahoo CEO Bartz in a statement. "Yahoo gets to do what we do best: combine our science and technology with compelling content to build personally relevant online experiences for our users and customers."
"Science"? I think Yahoo! took the "Google Labs" thing a little too literally
Admittedly, I'm only a third-year law student, so I don't claim to have the knowledge and wisdom of someone with decades of experience. That being said, dishonestly is a lot easier to allege than it is to demonstrate, sir.
You know how whenever Fox News is mentioned, a common response is "How can people watch that? It's just telling conservatives what they want to hear?"
Look, we all want the RIAA to die an awful, fiery death. But deluding ourselves about the chances of a given case is not going to help the situation.
In fact, one might even call it "completely dishonest."
The alternative is writing articles entitled "Defendants submit a very persuasive brief to the court detailing why the RIAA is wrong" instead of making these outlandish predictions about this being the "nail in the coffin," which is going to be proven false in three months.
Re-reading this, it sounds like I have an axe to grind. This isn't really the case, it just bothers me that we keep getting into this cycle:
Everyone is told that some legal theory is the best thing since sliced bread, and the RIAA and DoJ are shaking in their boots
Three months later the court rules for the RIAA and we all post angry comments about the justice system works, but nobody ever brings up the fact that we were totally mislead three months ago
Anyway, end rant. Mod me down as Flamebait and all that.
Considering that virtually every single one of NewYorkCountryLawyer's predictions has been wrong, at some point Slashdot should just admit that it needs a less biased legal reporter.
... I was just wondering if there were plans to move the default color scheme away from burnt orange.
It just seems that if Ubuntu wants to appeal to more mainstream users, a good approach would be to have a color scheme that doesn't look like a desert wasteland.
I see the authors are using the phrase "Microsoft to get" to mean the less-common "Microsoft may get if a bill proposed by one Representative is passed by both Congressional bodies in its current form which is not going to happen."
I think we should stop and give thanks to the author of the article for couching the story with "this is likely not the first DoS attack, but here's a neat story anyway."
It's so refreshing to see Internet writers not making outlandish, unverifiable claims about things like this.
they'll become liable for any copyright infringement going on their network because they're showing that they are actively monitoring and controlling data, instead of acting as a neutral data routing service
Some people simply say that they are not a lawyer, rather than feeling the need to prove it dramatically.
Yeah, Obama totally screwed up by not spending on healthcare reform in the 1960s.
The deficit is getting out of control. While everyone here of course favors cutting things like defense spending over science funding, at least you have to acknowledge that if you're going to cut some science funding, going to the moon is a pretty decent place to start.
Indeed. I would love to see a ground-up rewrite of Windows. But the point is that backwards compatibility is really important; perhaps even worth having age-old bugs surface from time to time.
It was actually a response to the suggestion that steadfast support for backwards compatibility will "break" Microsoft. I think it's one of their major advantages over competitors.
Slashdot Mirror
So Canonical are trying something different, for better or worse.
Yeah, the only problem is that the controls and icons still look like they were drawn by programmers in GIMP.
That the prospective jail time is from contempt of court and that it is not actually a criminal offense to cover your yard in woodchips..
Right? Right?
Fair use of a copyrighted work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
17 U.S.C. 107
This is the law. This is not how the Postal Service used his copyrighted work. As an aside, this is also not what Tenenbaum et al. did when they downloaded music.
We shouldn't complain when judges use restraint and don't bastardize statutes.
Right, obviously they make the money through advertising. But you were trying to argue that "search" isn't a market, and that Google has thousands of competitors since thousands of people sell advertising. The point is that only a handful of people sell sponsored links in their searches; it is a distinct market.
"Search" isn't a product
Google makes lots of money selling sponsored links on search results.
Yahoo CEO Bartz in a statement. "Yahoo gets to do what we do best: combine our science and technology with compelling content to build personally relevant online experiences for our users and customers."
"Science"? I think Yahoo! took the "Google Labs" thing a little too literally
I think I support this... I mean, Yahoo and Microsoft of course both suck, but Google needs some legitimate competition in the search market...
That's not what I was saying at all; re-read the post.
The first was a prediction you made, i.e. that fair-use was likely to prevail as a legal theory for file sharing.
The second was the first of many cases in which fair-use was dismissed as a legal defense.
Look, it's okay to be wrong. But when you describe something as a "nail in the coffin" even though it clearly isn't, that's when I must take issue.
Admittedly, I'm only a third-year law student, so I don't claim to have the knowledge and wisdom of someone with decades of experience. That being said, dishonestly is a lot easier to allege than it is to demonstrate, sir.
You know how whenever Fox News is mentioned, a common response is "How can people watch that? It's just telling conservatives what they want to hear?"
Look, we all want the RIAA to die an awful, fiery death. But deluding ourselves about the chances of a given case is not going to help the situation.
In fact, one might even call it "completely dishonest."
The alternative is writing articles entitled "Defendants submit a very persuasive brief to the court detailing why the RIAA is wrong" instead of making these outlandish predictions about this being the "nail in the coffin," which is going to be proven false in three months.
Anyway, end rant. Mod me down as Flamebait and all that.
Thank you for calling him out on this.
Considering that virtually every single one of NewYorkCountryLawyer's predictions has been wrong, at some point Slashdot should just admit that it needs a less biased legal reporter.
I would try to refute your claims using quotes from the article, BUT THERE ISN'T ONE
Apple’s latest round of sticking an “i” in front of a word
Wow, that's some pretty edgy writing.
I fully agree with your post if you remove everything before "I prefer".
Compiz should run by default, and they should have a nice, blue theme such as the one you suggest.
... I was just wondering if there were plans to move the default color scheme away from burnt orange.
It just seems that if Ubuntu wants to appeal to more mainstream users, a good approach would be to have a color scheme that doesn't look like a desert wasteland.
I see the authors are using the phrase "Microsoft to get" to mean the less-common "Microsoft may get if a bill proposed by one Representative is passed by both Congressional bodies in its current form which is not going to happen."
Scintillating!
I think we should stop and give thanks to the author of the article for couching the story with "this is likely not the first DoS attack, but here's a neat story anyway."
It's so refreshing to see Internet writers not making outlandish, unverifiable claims about things like this.
So, props.
they'll become liable for any copyright infringement going on their network because they're showing that they are actively monitoring and controlling data, instead of acting as a neutral data routing service
Some people simply say that they are not a lawyer, rather than feeling the need to prove it dramatically.
The summary seems to create the assumption that the same developers which are abandoning the Wii are moving to the iPhone
It creates no such assumption. The summary never says that the same developers are migrating.
5) goto 1
6) profit!
You're probably going to want to keep the profit within the scope of the loop...
Yeah, Obama totally screwed up by not spending on healthcare reform in the 1960s.
The deficit is getting out of control. While everyone here of course favors cutting things like defense spending over science funding, at least you have to acknowledge that if you're going to cut some science funding, going to the moon is a pretty decent place to start.
It would be far better to create and use a new and actually gender-neutral third-person singular pronoun
I suggest "e" - it has all the benefits of he/she, plus it rhymes so that porting existing music would not be difficult!
"no e can't read my poker face"
P-p-p-poker face p-p-poker face...
Indeed. I would love to see a ground-up rewrite of Windows. But the point is that backwards compatibility is really important; perhaps even worth having age-old bugs surface from time to time.
It was actually a response to the suggestion that steadfast support for backwards compatibility will "break" Microsoft. I think it's one of their major advantages over competitors.
Forgive me for being too subtle.