This is less about modding a PS2 to your needs and more about people violating software license agreements. The mod chips exist solely to facilitate the violation of area-coded titles, regardless of what reason - legitimate or otherwise - you have for doing so.
There's a difference between modding to your needs and breaking the law, even if it's a stupid law.
"...a game that is run without permission makes a copy of copyright material in memory, this copy is 'infringing' because it is an unauthorized..."
While I understand the intention behind this statement, isn't it flawed? This statement is given to explain why software licensed in one area is illegal when run in another.
IANAL, but as I see it the truth is this: The license agreement is a (supposedly) legally-binding contract that defines the conditions by which you use the material you've bought. If the license says you can only use it between noon and 3pm then that's what you should, in theory, do. So if a license says "This software is licensed for use in the UK only" then that's the only place the software is legal. Whether we like it or not, that's the law.
The judge's statement tries to find some alternative justification for what should just be a black-and-white case - the law says it's illegal to cross-region, end of story. What Jacob says implies that a non-permanent, volatile copy of data used solely during the active "life" of a media's playback is subject to copyright.
So - as an example - the "copy" of a CD's audio content as it passes from the disc to the speakers by means of decoding and amplification circuitry. Is that a copy of the music? It's as permanent as the data stored in RAM during the execution of software and is no more useful. You can't duplicate the game from the content of the PS's RAM; you'd be lucky to reconstruct all the data & program files from what passes through memory during an execution.
The law says it's wrong. Whether it's to our liking or not, it's black-and-white, as defined in the license. So why try to justify the decision in this way?
There are further-reaching consequences of this ruling, including those applying to other electronic media, that should be considered. The ruling may be right, but the wording is still important.
Lossy compression of data is possible by two methods: dropping data, and recognising specific patterns. All compression routines are specialised for some form of data. That's why JPG and GIF files can vary so much at storing the same picture, both in quality and file size.
Lossless compression of truly random data is impossible. Take a random 5 digit number. You can ONLY represent 100000 different numbers using five digits. If you're using less than five digits then there aren't 100000 discrete combinations and you've lost data.
The only way a five digit number could be compressed is if you had either nonrandom data (EG: a 5 digit number using only even digits) OR if you accepted data loss (EG: round off to nearest 10 - compressing by one digit).
There's no way around this; it can't now - and never will - be done.
I will also show you some 17 (yes 17) year olds that I would prefer to have as my service technicians than some 23 year olds with degrees.
That would be because... a degree isn't real life experience either. The difference a degree makes is not much in the real life stakes unless you count getting drunk and laid.
You're right, it's not how you know something that counts... but if you can show me a 17 year old with the life experience and people/company knowledge of someone who's been working a job well for 20 years, I'll be impressed.
The point of the post you replied to was NOT that you have to be old to be a manager. It was more that you need the experience of working in different jobs - with a wide group of people - using their machines in different situations - in order to properly understand what's required of you. network support is not just about knowing the computers, it's about providing the users with the solutions they need - usually as opposed to what they think they need.
I'm sorry if this has been posted already as a reply to all those people that say the drivers shouldn't be banned because they weren't designed to be cheats, but here it is:
These drivers were designed to be cheats. ASUS promoted them as the thing that'd give you the edge over other gamers.
If this weren't the case, then perhaps I'd be more sympathetic toward them. As it is, I don't think I'd dare post my thoughts on here for fear of being modded a troll.
True... but my first comment applies to being fired, too... "Okay, we don't want you to work for us any more, we don't ned your services... By the way, if you ever take another job in this field, we'll sue you throught the NDA..."
Imagine if it carries on like this, with job interviews and related procedures getting more and more invasive...
Ten years time, you take a job. If you ever want to leave the company, you're going to need complete retraining in a different field. Anyone who takes a job in the same career ends up breaking NDAs. Pretty soon half the workforce is unemployable in any job they're trained for!
This sort of excessive NDA ties you to a contract with a company for life - and the company has no requirement to keep you in employment. Perhaps the workforce should get a "lifetime employment" clause written in to all NDAs... "Use of an NDA guarantees that the company will provide employment for as long as is required by the signee, or until the signee is fully trained in a new career of their choice."
If a jury are dismissed just for the possibility of having seen the site... surely this means that there are no valid jurors, worldwide? Or do we now resort to jurors from countries with no widespread internet access? Or do we just let them go now, since there's apparently no way to try them...?
Personally, I'd say string 'em up... but that's just me...
Considering that the material was available in newspapers, which the jurors are much more likely to have seen, this all seems too much like the typical panic of the ignorant - "The Internet's going to take over the world!!!" I think not...
Slashdot Mirror
This is less about modding a PS2 to your needs and more about people violating software license agreements. The mod chips exist solely to facilitate the violation of area-coded titles, regardless of what reason - legitimate or otherwise - you have for doing so.
There's a difference between modding to your needs and breaking the law, even if it's a stupid law.
"...a game that is run without permission makes a copy of copyright material in memory, this copy is 'infringing' because it is an unauthorized..."
While I understand the intention behind this statement, isn't it flawed? This statement is given to explain why software licensed in one area is illegal when run in another.
IANAL, but as I see it the truth is this: The license agreement is a (supposedly) legally-binding contract that defines the conditions by which you use the material you've bought. If the license says you can only use it between noon and 3pm then that's what you should, in theory, do. So if a license says "This software is licensed for use in the UK only" then that's the only place the software is legal. Whether we like it or not, that's the law.
The judge's statement tries to find some alternative justification for what should just be a black-and-white case - the law says it's illegal to cross-region, end of story. What Jacob says implies that a non-permanent, volatile copy of data used solely during the active "life" of a media's playback is subject to copyright.
So - as an example - the "copy" of a CD's audio content as it passes from the disc to the speakers by means of decoding and amplification circuitry. Is that a copy of the music? It's as permanent as the data stored in RAM during the execution of software and is no more useful. You can't duplicate the game from the content of the PS's RAM; you'd be lucky to reconstruct all the data & program files from what passes through memory during an execution.
The law says it's wrong. Whether it's to our liking or not, it's black-and-white, as defined in the license. So why try to justify the decision in this way?
There are further-reaching consequences of this ruling, including those applying to other electronic media, that should be considered. The ruling may be right, but the wording is still important.
I think that'd be the difference between "asking" and "demanding"...
Lossy compression of data is possible by two methods: dropping data, and recognising specific patterns. All compression routines are specialised for some form of data. That's why JPG and GIF files can vary so much at storing the same picture, both in quality and file size.
Lossless compression of truly random data is impossible. Take a random 5 digit number. You can ONLY represent 100000 different numbers using five digits. If you're using less than five digits then there aren't 100000 discrete combinations and you've lost data.
The only way a five digit number could be compressed is if you had either nonrandom data (EG: a 5 digit number using only even digits) OR if you accepted data loss (EG: round off to nearest 10 - compressing by one digit).
There's no way around this; it can't now - and never will - be done.
I will also show you some 17 (yes 17) year olds that I would prefer to have as my service technicians than some 23 year olds with degrees.
That would be because... a degree isn't real life experience either. The difference a degree makes is not much in the real life stakes unless you count getting drunk and laid.
You're right, it's not how you know something that counts... but if you can show me a 17 year old with the life experience and people/company knowledge of someone who's been working a job well for 20 years, I'll be impressed.
The point of the post you replied to was NOT that you have to be old to be a manager. It was more that you need the experience of working in different jobs - with a wide group of people - using their machines in different situations - in order to properly understand what's required of you. network support is not just about knowing the computers, it's about providing the users with the solutions they need - usually as opposed to what they think they need.
These drivers were designed to be cheats. ASUS promoted them as the thing that'd give you the edge over other gamers.
If this weren't the case, then perhaps I'd be more sympathetic toward them. As it is, I don't think I'd dare post my thoughts on here for fear of being modded a troll.
True... but my first comment applies to being fired, too... "Okay, we don't want you to work for us any more, we don't ned your services... By the way, if you ever take another job in this field, we'll sue you throught the NDA..."
Ten years time, you take a job. If you ever want to leave the company, you're going to need complete retraining in a different field. Anyone who takes a job in the same career ends up breaking NDAs. Pretty soon half the workforce is unemployable in any job they're trained for!
This sort of excessive NDA ties you to a contract with a company for life - and the company has no requirement to keep you in employment. Perhaps the workforce should get a "lifetime employment" clause written in to all NDAs... "Use of an NDA guarantees that the company will provide employment for as long as is required by the signee, or until the signee is fully trained in a new career of their choice."
If a jury are dismissed just for the possibility of having seen the site... surely this means that there are no valid jurors, worldwide? Or do we now resort to jurors from countries with no widespread internet access? Or do we just let them go now, since there's apparently no way to try them...?
Personally, I'd say string 'em up... but that's just me...
Considering that the material was available in newspapers, which the jurors are much more likely to have seen, this all seems too much like the typical panic of the ignorant - "The Internet's going to take over the world!!!" I think not...