We think it's wrong for private companies to spy on your Internet traffic and that copyright infringement should not render prison sentences. From this follows that it becomes impossible to enforce the copyright monopoly unless of course someone starts copying to sell - it's always much easier to follow the money. The obvious corollary to this is of course that it becomes legal to download songs and movies off the Internet. Like it already is in Spain, for example. And somehow, the Spanish movie industry flourishes. Coincidentally, a continued rise in file-sharing happens to correspond to increased sales of music and film in Sweden while movie theatres scored yet another record year. Obviously, they still get paid so your basic premise is flawed.
So, please tell me why we would give up our civil liberties because Hollywood wants to control how and when we watch movies?
We're not hosting TPB, we're just routing traffic to them. Just like an ISP. Serious Tubes routes traffic to the Pirate Party, so they're even more removed. But, last night, Portlane, one of the ISPs that routes traffic to Serious Tubes, was pressured into cutting their transit to ST, even if they were just a provider to a provider to a provider to TPB.
One other commonality is going for the reason that the copyright lobby can keep buying legislation - the corrupting influence of the lobbyist system and the way government keep stuff hidden. Ie following in Lessig's footprints.
I think you're mixing copyright, patents and trademarks. They are actually quite different in scope, subject matter and duration so please try to keep them apart. From your description, I'd guess that your story concerned a trademark. The USPTO can very well deny a trademark application for a name that can be mistaken for a name already registered in a different, but similar, category. Or grant it, as you say it's a bit of a crapshoot.
One real-world example: Apple Records could not keep Apple Computer from trademarking their name until Apple Computer went into the music business with iTunes. It's still not the same category (record company/recording vs music distribution/sales) but close enough to possibly cause confusion and a court date.
Nazism was powerful and kept getting more powerful. if you're going to post that it sucks, please post a link to a regime you have built so we can compare.
I've done this at a small (~70 room) hotel/conference center with three Linksys WRTG54Ls, one master and two repeaters plus three sets of high gain antennas.
Of course. But to be effective, I'd have to be able to move USD quickly between the markets, not just bitcoins. Or deposit them there beforehand. This time, I was way too late to benefit from the swings.
Even though MtGox is the largest BTC exchange, this dip in value seems to have affected only that one exchange. Tradehill for example was completely unaffected. Bitcoin is still a pretty small currency so these kind of events should be expected until more people buy into it to create stability. If nothing else, it may attract daytraders.:-)
The #1 reason people upgrade is not because the old software was buggy or ran too slow, quite the opposite. Instead, the vendors keep changing the file formats to force upgrades. How is that an obsessive-compulsive problem with customers? Is it an obsession, wanting to be able to actually read the files that people send you? Perhaps being a control-freak dictating what everybody else is using is a lesser evil?
The real story seems to be that PD trumped trademarks. Which is good, since trademarks can run for ever, while copyrights expire. If you could leverage eternal trademarks to prolong copyrights, that would defeat the spirit of copyright law.
I'm re-posting one of the comments from TFA here, as it seems to clear up some of the confusion.
David Gerstein says: 02/27/11 9:01pm
Rough analysis (could be wrong):
The Betty Boop character is a Fleischer trademark.
But—Betty Boop 1930s movie posters were not copyrighted (or not renewed?) as standalone items, so are public domain. Fleischer tried to use its active trademark on the character to stop a third party’s use of the ancient PD art. Judge said this was a no-go.
What I take from the judge’s ruling is that the trademark only applies to new, modern uses of the character. It can’t be used to stop people from redistributing old PD Betty images/items. Fleischer tried to say trademark trumped copyright; the judge is saying that it doesn’t.
This is actually pretty major. In recent years, Warner has used the active trademarks on Looney Tunes characters to quash third parties’ reissues of PD 1930s/40s Looney Tunes content (of which there is a lot). If the Betty decision is not reversed on appeal, then Warner is stripped of its strongest weapon against the public domain. It can use the trademark against those who would create new Bugs Bunny items, but not against those who would exploit old PD material that Warner failed to protect.
The issue of whether Paramount legitimately sold the active Betty trademark to Harvey appears to be entirely separate, though very interesting.
Slashdot Mirror
Apparently, Microsoft thought the cost of licenses for all the code on GitHub was included in the price.
No, we're a party of civil rights.
We think it's wrong for private companies to spy on your Internet traffic and that copyright infringement should not render prison sentences. From this follows that it becomes impossible to enforce the copyright monopoly unless of course someone starts copying to sell - it's always much easier to follow the money. The obvious corollary to this is of course that it becomes legal to download songs and movies off the Internet. Like it already is in Spain, for example. And somehow, the Spanish movie industry flourishes. Coincidentally, a continued rise in file-sharing happens to correspond to increased sales of music and film in Sweden while movie theatres scored yet another record year. Obviously, they still get paid so your basic premise is flawed.
So, please tell me why we would give up our civil liberties because Hollywood wants to control how and when we watch movies?
No, it's true. Two seats.
We used to have human rights. Now we just have...
Well, quite a lot of snow. And reality shows on TV. And snow. Yeah, that's about it.
We're not hosting TPB, we're just routing traffic to them. Just like an ISP. Serious Tubes routes traffic to the Pirate Party, so they're even more removed. But, last night, Portlane, one of the ISPs that routes traffic to Serious Tubes, was pressured into cutting their transit to ST, even if they were just a provider to a provider to a provider to TPB.
One other commonality is going for the reason that the copyright lobby can keep buying legislation - the corrupting influence of the lobbyist system and the way government keep stuff hidden. Ie following in Lessig's footprints.
the printer’s fuser – which is designed to dry the ink once it’s applied to paper
Stupid submitter makes my head hurt.
There is no ink in laser printers. There is toner, a bone-dry powder that is fused to the paper by the fuser, generally a very warm cylinder.
Ink-jet printers use ink, but those droplets are so small they dry into the paper without having to be heated.
Facts, use them.
I think you're mixing copyright, patents and trademarks. They are actually quite different in scope, subject matter and duration so please try to keep them apart. From your description, I'd guess that your story concerned a trademark. The USPTO can very well deny a trademark application for a name that can be mistaken for a name already registered in a different, but similar, category. Or grant it, as you say it's a bit of a crapshoot.
One real-world example: Apple Records could not keep Apple Computer from trademarking their name until Apple Computer went into the music business with iTunes. It's still not the same category (record company/recording vs music distribution/sales) but close enough to possibly cause confusion and a court date.
Bear. The world is bear.
Word. The word is word.
Nazism was powerful and kept getting more powerful. if you're going to post that it sucks, please post a link to a regime you have built so we can compare.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ (which incidentally runs on Drupal)
He who has all the batteries, has all the power.
Ahh, photography... ... Weasel words for "kidnapping".
Hey! I can see my house from here!
I've done this at a small (~70 room) hotel/conference center with three Linksys WRTG54Ls, one master and two repeaters plus three sets of high gain antennas.
I think some hacker redefined Mozilla's $version as an INT.
Ever heard the word "arbitrage"?
Of course. But to be effective, I'd have to be able to move USD quickly between the markets, not just bitcoins. Or deposit them there beforehand. This time, I was way too late to benefit from the swings.
Even though MtGox is the largest BTC exchange, this dip in value seems to have affected only that one exchange. Tradehill for example was completely unaffected. Bitcoin is still a pretty small currency so these kind of events should be expected until more people buy into it to create stability. If nothing else, it may attract daytraders. :-)
The MPAA and RIAA would beg to differ. they apparently own both laws and congressmen.
The #1 reason people upgrade is not because the old software was buggy or ran too slow, quite the opposite. Instead, the vendors keep changing the file formats to force upgrades. How is that an obsessive-compulsive problem with customers? Is it an obsession, wanting to be able to actually read the files that people send you? Perhaps being a control-freak dictating what everybody else is using is a lesser evil?
I always thought the Excel menu option "terrorist cell" was a bit suspect.
Sokath, his eyes uncovered.
Google Beenz. :-D
I am a time traveller... I am moving into the future at a speed of one second per second.
I shall have you know that I am travelling into the future at the astounding rate of no less than sixty seconds every minute.
The real story seems to be that PD trumped trademarks. Which is good, since trademarks can run for ever, while copyrights expire. If you could leverage eternal trademarks to prolong copyrights, that would defeat the spirit of copyright law.
I'm re-posting one of the comments from TFA here, as it seems to clear up some of the confusion.