They lack money because they have make poor lifestyle decisions that RESULT in a lack of money. Things like failure to get an education (or worse reject the value of knowledge entirely), become a single parent, waste money on substance abuse or Xbox... but I repeat myself.
Or they (or a family member) get sick and have their life savings drained in order to pay the bills. Or they get into some sort of accident and get permanently disabled so they can no longer work. Or they have a mental condition that doesn't manifest till later in life so they lose their job and house and become homeless. Seriously, there are tons of different reasons that people become poor that have nothing to do with buying too many Xboxes.
You seriously want things here to be like Cuba? You can't actually be that stupid, can you?
No, he doesn't and that was precisely his point. If somewhere as shitty as Cuba has a higher life expectancy then those in your own country then there is something majorly wrong going on.
Yeah but Roy and his gang also bash the Gnome project so Novell's contributions to that probably doesn't matter to them. To Roy, Miguel and the Gnome project are worse than any evil ever imagined for *gasp* making free software that happens to do things that Roy doesn't approve of.
If there was really a 54% failure rate of the Xbox 360 you would have heard about it from retailers long before this unscientific, selection-biased poll came out.
Not to mention the fact that there is no verification that the people voting even owned an Xbox or even if they did that they aren't just flat out lying about their experience. This is just another one more of Slashdot's "Bash Microsoft at All Costs" nonsense stories.
Nope, not anti-Pirate Bay at all as I've used it numerous times. I just don't pretend like what was going on between it's users was legal.
As for all TPB downloads being illegal, it shows you do not use it yourself
That's funny cause I downloaded at least 30 things from it just last week.
90% is a bit high to say that all that is there is illegal, where did you come up with this number...might I ask? Pull it out of your thinking cap?
Rough estimate from looking at about 10 pages of torrents for each category. You must be incredibly naive if you actually think more than 10% of the content on The Pirate Bay is actually there with the consent of the copyright holder.
No. The US concept of Fair Use (I don't know if Ireland even has an equivalent) was created by the US Supreme Court in response to First Amendment concerns.
No, before being legally codified, fair use in the US was based on the English common law of "fair abridgment". The Supreme Court didn't create anything. The Folsom v. Marsh ruling just further clarified the guidelines of what was fair use.
The legislature later enshrined the court ruling into law, basically intact and without additional clarification.
And can revoke them whenever it so pleases as I said because it has exclusive domain over copyrights and patents.
Just because you didn't obtain consent doesn't mean it was illegal.
Sure, there are exceptions to copyright for use without a license to the content. None of which cover what was going on at The Pirate Bay.
If I use that piece as a fair use (eg. scientific research or artistry) then in the US it would be legal according to copyright law.
Yeah, because that was what was clearly being done on The Pirate Bay. *rolls eyes* I'm sorry, but sharing cam recordings of movies, DVD rips, ripped full CDs and ISOs of software isn't fair use by any stretch of the imagination and that was what made up the vast, vast, vast, vast majority of the content being shared by its users.
Most civilized countries do not have copyright violations in their penal code and have fair use clauses so it would not be illegal for them to download anything in the first place and it might actually help them complete a task or do their job.
The people being sued were those sharing the content and willfully facilitating copyright infringement. This isn't a fair use right in any country.
AGAIN: IT IS LEGAL - THE RIAA SAYS IT'S ILLEGAL, DOESN'T MEAN IT IS
No, it's not legal. And yes it is not illegal because the RIAA said so but because of the statutory laws of the country and due to the WIPO treaties they have signed.
AND CERTAINLY DOESN'T MEAN IT IS SO EVERYWHERE
Sure, there are some countries that have ignored the WIPO treaties and such, but they are a small minority.
My usage may not be "normal", but I'm sure that it isn't "unusual" either.
Bullshit. Your usage is highly unusual in the grand scheme of things. The amount of seeders/leechers on any given Linux distro ISO torrent is a pittance compared to what you will see with the latest cam of a new blockbuster movie.
That's fine, but the thing is that many people act and have posted nonsense that attempts to claim that such a thing is legal. It's about as hilarious as those disclaimers you used to see on warez FTPs and IRC servers that said that if you were a police officer you couldn't look at the contents of their server. People tend to invent such legalities that don't exist.
No it doesn't. That's Slashdot invention. See NATIONAL CABLE & TELECOMMUNICATIONS
ASSOCIATION et al. v. BRAND X INTERNET
SERVICES et al.
From the majority opinion:
The Commission has historically not subjected non-facilities-based information-service providers to common carrier regulation. That history suggests, in turn, that the Act does not unambiguously classify nonfacilities based ISPs as âoeofferorsâ of telecommunications. If the Act does not unambiguously classify such providers as âoeoffering telecommunications,â it also does not unambiguously so classify facilities-based information-service providers such as cable companies; the relevant definitions do not distinguish the two types of carriers. The Actâ(TM)s silence suggests, instead, that the Commission has the discretion to fill the statutory gap. Pp. 21â"25.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you need some penis pills, sonny?
all businesses in the USA.
Your post is redundant.
And the only thing the dude who spanks it too much in a day is going to cause is maybe the local grocery store runs out of tissues.
Oh and how does your moms cooking taste down in the basement you live in?
It wasn't very good. Your mom makes much better food from what I tasted when I was down with you in your parent's basement.
No, there were both the normal Stormtroopers and the scout troopers. Both were having their asses equally kicked by the twigs and stones.
They likely have enough patent to be a royal PITA to fight if MS decided to hammer on them.
Which is why they have put their patents into the Open Innovation Network for precisely such purposes.
Also, name calling the boycott novel folks is not a sufficient way to prove them wrong. Time will prove either of you wrong.
I can't blame the GP really. Most of Roy's criticisms are nothing but blatant ad hominem against Novell, the Gnome project, and people like Miguel.
But does anybody outside the Windows fanboys looking for a stereotype to wind up pay any attention to them?
Unfortunately, yes. Roy and his ilk have a pretty strong following in some parts of the Linux and free software community at large.
To a very high degree of correlation, the 'poor' aren't living in poverty because of a lack of money.
Really? Isn't the very definition of poverty based on having a lack of money?
: the state of one who lacks a usual or socially acceptable amount of money or material possessions
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poverty
They lack money because they have make poor lifestyle decisions that RESULT in a lack of money. Things like failure to get an education (or worse reject the value of knowledge entirely), become a single parent, waste money on substance abuse or Xbox... but I repeat myself.
Or they (or a family member) get sick and have their life savings drained in order to pay the bills. Or they get into some sort of accident and get permanently disabled so they can no longer work. Or they have a mental condition that doesn't manifest till later in life so they lose their job and house and become homeless. Seriously, there are tons of different reasons that people become poor that have nothing to do with buying too many Xboxes.
You seriously want things here to be like Cuba? You can't actually be that stupid, can you?
No, he doesn't and that was precisely his point. If somewhere as shitty as Cuba has a higher life expectancy then those in your own country then there is something majorly wrong going on.
Well clearly he would have pulled himself by his jackboots and he would have been a multi-trillionaire by age 22!
umm didn't most of us hear about it long before this poll came out anyway?
Where exactly were you hearing that there was a greater than 50% failure rate of Xbox 360s before this poll?
It's not even good troll bait. It's like the worst of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity rolled into some huge conglomerate of even bigger fail.
Money isn't everything.
No, but being able to afford clothing, food and shelter makes it pretty damn important.
Yeah but Roy and his gang also bash the Gnome project so Novell's contributions to that probably doesn't matter to them. To Roy, Miguel and the Gnome project are worse than any evil ever imagined for *gasp* making free software that happens to do things that Roy doesn't approve of.
LLVM and their contributions to Apache.
If there was really a 54% failure rate of the Xbox 360 you would have heard about it from retailers long before this unscientific, selection-biased poll came out.
Yes, but pointing that out just means you're clearly a Microsoft shill.
Not to mention the fact that there is no verification that the people voting even owned an Xbox or even if they did that they aren't just flat out lying about their experience. This is just another one more of Slashdot's "Bash Microsoft at All Costs" nonsense stories.
As for all TPB downloads being illegal, it shows you do not use it yourself
That's funny cause I downloaded at least 30 things from it just last week.
90% is a bit high to say that all that is there is illegal, where did you come up with this number...might I ask? Pull it out of your thinking cap?
Rough estimate from looking at about 10 pages of torrents for each category. You must be incredibly naive if you actually think more than 10% of the content on The Pirate Bay is actually there with the consent of the copyright holder.
No. The US concept of Fair Use (I don't know if Ireland even has an equivalent) was created by the US Supreme Court in response to First Amendment concerns.
No, before being legally codified, fair use in the US was based on the English common law of "fair abridgment". The Supreme Court didn't create anything. The Folsom v. Marsh ruling just further clarified the guidelines of what was fair use.
The legislature later enshrined the court ruling into law, basically intact and without additional clarification.
And can revoke them whenever it so pleases as I said because it has exclusive domain over copyrights and patents.
Just because you didn't obtain consent doesn't mean it was illegal.
Sure, there are exceptions to copyright for use without a license to the content. None of which cover what was going on at The Pirate Bay.
If I use that piece as a fair use (eg. scientific research or artistry) then in the US it would be legal according to copyright law.
Yeah, because that was what was clearly being done on The Pirate Bay. *rolls eyes* I'm sorry, but sharing cam recordings of movies, DVD rips, ripped full CDs and ISOs of software isn't fair use by any stretch of the imagination and that was what made up the vast, vast, vast, vast majority of the content being shared by its users.
Most civilized countries do not have copyright violations in their penal code and have fair use clauses so it would not be illegal for them to download anything in the first place and it might actually help them complete a task or do their job.
The people being sued were those sharing the content and willfully facilitating copyright infringement. This isn't a fair use right in any country.
AGAIN: IT IS LEGAL - THE RIAA SAYS IT'S ILLEGAL, DOESN'T MEAN IT IS
No, it's not legal. And yes it is not illegal because the RIAA said so but because of the statutory laws of the country and due to the WIPO treaties they have signed.
AND CERTAINLY DOESN'T MEAN IT IS SO EVERYWHERE
Sure, there are some countries that have ignored the WIPO treaties and such, but they are a small minority.
My usage may not be "normal", but I'm sure that it isn't "unusual" either.
Bullshit. Your usage is highly unusual in the grand scheme of things. The amount of seeders/leechers on any given Linux distro ISO torrent is a pittance compared to what you will see with the latest cam of a new blockbuster movie.
Did someone never watch Return of the Jedi? They were knocked over by small twigs and tiny stones with that armor on.
That's fine, but the thing is that many people act and have posted nonsense that attempts to claim that such a thing is legal. It's about as hilarious as those disclaimers you used to see on warez FTPs and IRC servers that said that if you were a police officer you couldn't look at the contents of their server. People tend to invent such legalities that don't exist.
In the US it applies to the ISPs as well.
No it doesn't. That's Slashdot invention. See NATIONAL CABLE & TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION et al. v. BRAND X INTERNET SERVICES et al. From the majority opinion:
The Commission has historically not subjected non-facilities-based information-service providers to common carrier regulation. That history suggests, in turn, that the Act does not unambiguously classify nonfacilities based ISPs as âoeofferorsâ of telecommunications. If the Act does not unambiguously classify such providers as âoeoffering telecommunications,â it also does not unambiguously so classify facilities-based information-service providers such as cable companies; the relevant definitions do not distinguish the two types of carriers. The Actâ(TM)s silence suggests, instead, that the Commission has the discretion to fill the statutory gap. Pp. 21â"25.