The DMCA, when implemented properly by the hosting provider, is a minimally troubling procedure. It's basically a form letter version of exactly what you're suggesting. It also provides him and the hosting provider with legal protections as well as formalizing a response procedure by the uploader. GoDaddy's the one that kicked it into overdrive by taking down all sites associated with the user rather than just the one file that was being infringed.
I'm not saying it's perfect and I don't think it should be shotgunned against every file returned by a query of "guns roses" on Google. But it perfectly fits the case where someone doesn't want to go through the trouble of having personal correspondence with the possibly hundreds of people who have infringed upon his copyright.
The DMCA, when properly used, is a pretty good process: 1. File DMCA to hosting provider 2. Hosting provider removes access to offensive file and informs uploader 3. Uploader can respond 4. Purported owner and uploader resolve situation if necessary
The key here is that you have to be sure you have the right file before starting at step 1, which Jay Lee did. This all went tits-up when GoDaddy decided to shut down all of the related sites instead of just that one resource, but that's not the DMCA or Jay Lee's fault.
Now the big problem with the DMCA is that it's very easy to abuse. But that's not what Mr. Lee was doing with it since he only targeted exactly what belonged to him.
As for RICO, if an individual qualified as a "criminal organization" then hell yes I'd want RICO used against him.
Because he's not a douche. She does do nonprofit work for disabled children and he doesn't want to prevent that.
Also, he's protecting himself in case she does decide to sue. However, if I were in his place I'd seriously be considering a defamation/libel countersuit at this point.
I agree. I don't think/she/ was being reasonable; I was just saying that what Jay Lee did here was the "good-guy Greg" alternative to saying "Go ahead and sue me."
I don't know about the submitter but Jay Lee doesn't seem to be doing photography as his main work. Also, the RIAA is an unnecessary middle-man. Jay Lee is an actual content producer. He/should/ be/fairly/ compensated for his work if people want to use it.
I feel I have to address this one: Jay Lee/was/ being a good guy about it. He did the legally correct move (file a DMCA) and worked with those that responded to find mutually agreeable terms. In this specific case someone responded that she felt harmed and he quickly told GoDaddy to reinstate her sites while he worked it out with her.
So you're mad at him for doing things as the law suggests and then going beyond the law to provide that which he wasn't required to? I mean, he/could/ have started by individually contacting the admin of each site but why should he be required to spend even/more/ resources to help those who had/broken/ the law from suffering for it?
Well, from what I gather of the ordeal, Jay Lee didn't want to cost Shwagger a lot of money, he just wanted to assert his copyright. He quickly realized that she does seem to do non-profit work for disabled children and he told GoDaddy to reinstate her sites while he worked it out with her.
In other words, he went through the established legal means, was informed of a situation where someone felt unduly harmed, and did his level best to resolve the situation quickly and fairly. All in all, I like this guy -- asserting his rights without being a douche about it.
To be fair, quality should go/up/ with the acquisitions so long as you buy drives that were made at the formerly Samsung/Hitachi plants. They didn't buy out those companies then raze all their manufacturing resources and there's no immediate reason to refit the plants and thus reduce reliability. Now, if five years down the line they're not maintaining the plants and they let tolerances slip that'd be a problem.
Granted, I am unsure how the floods affected individual plants, so if it's primarily the high quality plants that were scrapped and they are not rebuilt or rebuilt to a lower standard that would be a problem.
Halon 1301 total flooding systems are typically used at concentrations no higher than 7% v/v in air, and can suppress many fires at 2.9% v/v.... Halon 1301 causes only slight giddiness at its effective concentration of 5%, and even at 15% persons remain conscious but impaired and suffer no long term effects.
However, I did ready why halon is/not/ in use on these boats in that same section:
[Halon is] totally unsuitable for Class D (metal) fires, as they will not only produce toxic gas and fail to halt the fire, but in some cases pose a risk of explosion.
So I don't know the material makeup of Los Angeles class submarines but there are plenty of metals that can burn once you get them hot enough. Aluminum and magnesium are popular candidates since they're very light weight for their strength -- I wouldn't be surprised if there was a lot of that in the boat. Also, since this was in retrofit, there's a good chance there was welding going on, which would easily be able to get the ignition temperatures necessary to start it up, especially if they were using any oxyacetylene torches for the welding or cutting.
However, if there were Halon suppression systems installed and active they should have fired them off because Halon isn't actually that dangerous, all things considered.
Yes, I apparently have been brain-wormed by the media since I was using "pirates" with the media definition rather than the more accurate, geeky definition. Stupid brain worms.
Maybe MS doesn't see a lot of click-through on those links and can actually do the calculus. I wouldn't be surprised if most pirates use Google since most people use Google. Or maybe the people in charge of this (since this does take MS resources to issue the takedowns) are just too brain-dead to search Bing as well. Or maybe Bing's takedown procedure is far more arcane and costly than Google's?
Because "educational software" and "children's oriented flash websites" are not the target. The target is to get kids using Python and C. You know, computer science, not computer consumerism.
I addition to other points, it could be valuable to scrap the current program, even if it's positive, if its cost to benefit ratio is bad enough. Think of it like this: If you have a used car and it costs $500 a month to keep it repaired but you don't have the $3000 for a down payment on a new car it could be worth it to take the bus for four or five months over the late spring through early autumn while you save up for a new car. Instead of a constant $500 a month and being late to work because it's never running right you endure the pain of public transit for a little while so that at the end you'll be on more secure footing for a more reliable and beneficial result.
Same thing. Instead of pouring resources into a failing program scrap it, research a good replacement, reassign saved resources to that program.
These do Python and C as well as GPIO. Those are far more valuable in a Computer Science course than an office suite would be. We don't want to train kids to be secretaries, we want to train them to be engineers.
I've actually been invited into the queue twice so far, but haven't bit. I'm getting ready to move house so I don't want to be getting packages that'll get lost in the move. I'm also seriously considering waiting for the A model anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
The DMCA, when implemented properly by the hosting provider, is a minimally troubling procedure. It's basically a form letter version of exactly what you're suggesting. It also provides him and the hosting provider with legal protections as well as formalizing a response procedure by the uploader. GoDaddy's the one that kicked it into overdrive by taking down all sites associated with the user rather than just the one file that was being infringed.
I'm not saying it's perfect and I don't think it should be shotgunned against every file returned by a query of "guns roses" on Google. But it perfectly fits the case where someone doesn't want to go through the trouble of having personal correspondence with the possibly hundreds of people who have infringed upon his copyright.
The DMCA, when properly used, is a pretty good process:
1. File DMCA to hosting provider
2. Hosting provider removes access to offensive file and informs uploader
3. Uploader can respond
4. Purported owner and uploader resolve situation if necessary
The key here is that you have to be sure you have the right file before starting at step 1, which Jay Lee did. This all went tits-up when GoDaddy decided to shut down all of the related sites instead of just that one resource, but that's not the DMCA or Jay Lee's fault.
Now the big problem with the DMCA is that it's very easy to abuse. But that's not what Mr. Lee was doing with it since he only targeted exactly what belonged to him.
As for RICO, if an individual qualified as a "criminal organization" then hell yes I'd want RICO used against him.
Because he's not a douche. She does do nonprofit work for disabled children and he doesn't want to prevent that.
Also, he's protecting himself in case she does decide to sue. However, if I were in his place I'd seriously be considering a defamation/libel countersuit at this point.
I agree. I don't think /she/ was being reasonable; I was just saying that what Jay Lee did here was the "good-guy Greg" alternative to saying "Go ahead and sue me."
I don't know about the submitter but Jay Lee doesn't seem to be doing photography as his main work. Also, the RIAA is an unnecessary middle-man. Jay Lee is an actual content producer. He /should/ be /fairly/ compensated for his work if people want to use it.
I feel I have to address this one: Jay Lee /was/ being a good guy about it. He did the legally correct move (file a DMCA) and worked with those that responded to find mutually agreeable terms. In this specific case someone responded that she felt harmed and he quickly told GoDaddy to reinstate her sites while he worked it out with her.
So you're mad at him for doing things as the law suggests and then going beyond the law to provide that which he wasn't required to? I mean, he /could/ have started by individually contacting the admin of each site but why should he be required to spend even /more/ resources to help those who had /broken/ the law from suffering for it?
Well, from what I gather of the ordeal, Jay Lee didn't want to cost Shwagger a lot of money, he just wanted to assert his copyright. He quickly realized that she does seem to do non-profit work for disabled children and he told GoDaddy to reinstate her sites while he worked it out with her.
In other words, he went through the established legal means, was informed of a situation where someone felt unduly harmed, and did his level best to resolve the situation quickly and fairly. All in all, I like this guy -- asserting his rights without being a douche about it.
To be fair, quality should go /up/ with the acquisitions so long as you buy drives that were made at the formerly Samsung/Hitachi plants. They didn't buy out those companies then raze all their manufacturing resources and there's no immediate reason to refit the plants and thus reduce reliability. Now, if five years down the line they're not maintaining the plants and they let tolerances slip that'd be a problem.
Granted, I am unsure how the floods affected individual plants, so if it's primarily the high quality plants that were scrapped and they are not rebuilt or rebuilt to a lower standard that would be a problem.
From Wikipedia, Halomethane, Fire extinguishing
Halon 1301 total flooding systems are typically used at concentrations no higher than 7% v/v in air, and can suppress many fires at 2.9% v/v. ... Halon 1301 causes only slight giddiness at its effective concentration of 5%, and even at 15% persons remain conscious but impaired and suffer no long term effects.
However, I did ready why halon is /not/ in use on these boats in that same section:
[Halon is] totally unsuitable for Class D (metal) fires, as they will not only produce toxic gas and fail to halt the fire, but in some cases pose a risk of explosion.
TIL.
Preferably by ending behavior that causes sarcastic shock.
Because people want /floating/ data centers, not /sunk/ data center.
So I don't know the material makeup of Los Angeles class submarines but there are plenty of metals that can burn once you get them hot enough. Aluminum and magnesium are popular candidates since they're very light weight for their strength -- I wouldn't be surprised if there was a lot of that in the boat. Also, since this was in retrofit, there's a good chance there was welding going on, which would easily be able to get the ignition temperatures necessary to start it up, especially if they were using any oxyacetylene torches for the welding or cutting.
However, if there were Halon suppression systems installed and active they should have fired them off because Halon isn't actually that dangerous, all things considered.
Yes, I apparently have been brain-wormed by the media since I was using "pirates" with the media definition rather than the more accurate, geeky definition. Stupid brain worms.
Damn, I am corrected by some insightful posters who have noticed that I misread the parent's comment. I apologize!
Maybe MS doesn't see a lot of click-through on those links and can actually do the calculus. I wouldn't be surprised if most pirates use Google since most people use Google. Or maybe the people in charge of this (since this does take MS resources to issue the takedowns) are just too brain-dead to search Bing as well. Or maybe Bing's takedown procedure is far more arcane and costly than Google's?
Hanlon's razor, people. Use it.
Yeah, no, not just you that I want to stab in the throat.
+1, funny! I appreciate.
He's talking Mars, you trolls.
Pshh. Set it to 1x1 monochrome and adapt. Everything's just 1s and 0s, right?
At $35 a piece it's not that big a risk to send it home with the kids. Those textbooks they take home are $100 jobbies.
Just like teaching math doesn't require a pencil and paper. Or a graphing calculator.
(And just so it doesn't go over your head, here's my point explicitly: Some concepts are easier to teach with proper tools.)
Because "educational software" and "children's oriented flash websites" are not the target. The target is to get kids using Python and C. You know, computer science, not computer consumerism.
I addition to other points, it could be valuable to scrap the current program, even if it's positive, if its cost to benefit ratio is bad enough. Think of it like this: If you have a used car and it costs $500 a month to keep it repaired but you don't have the $3000 for a down payment on a new car it could be worth it to take the bus for four or five months over the late spring through early autumn while you save up for a new car. Instead of a constant $500 a month and being late to work because it's never running right you endure the pain of public transit for a little while so that at the end you'll be on more secure footing for a more reliable and beneficial result.
Same thing. Instead of pouring resources into a failing program scrap it, research a good replacement, reassign saved resources to that program.
These do Python and C as well as GPIO. Those are far more valuable in a Computer Science course than an office suite would be. We don't want to train kids to be secretaries, we want to train them to be engineers.
I've actually been invited into the queue twice so far, but haven't bit. I'm getting ready to move house so I don't want to be getting packages that'll get lost in the move. I'm also seriously considering waiting for the A model anyway.