Here's what a real leftist government would look like.
Heh, let me compare what you said to Norway, which is considered pretty much the most socialist country in a socialist Europe currently under a socialist government.
Immigrants would be given amnesty and a path to citizenship.
No, we have illegal immigrants but there's no general amnesty for them.
The top marginal tax rate would be closer to 90% than the current 35%.
47.8%
Regressive taxes like sales tax and vehicle taxes would be eradicated.
VAT is 25%, vechicle taxes are a complex mix of weight, horsepowers, emissions etc. but highest in the world.
There would be a massive investment in a single payer government run health care system for all.
Yes.
A massive reinvestment in education from bottom up, focusing on leveling the inequality of poor school districts in minority neighborhoods and inner cities.
Yes, though the school system is underfunded it is far more equal than the US.
Wall Street would be heavily regulated and much of what currently goes on would be illegal.
Mostly no, nobody is stupid enough to try a soviet plan economy. The Oslo Stoch Exchange is quite regular.
Housing, food, and a meaningful job would be a right just like speech currently is.
Housing yes. Food yes. Meaningful job? No. Though the government does try to act anti-cyclical creating jobs in downturns unlike California etc. which seem to be cutting adding to the downturn instead.
Workers would collectively own the businesses they work for.
No. But there is a larger public sector and more government ownership interests.
The level of income inequality would be unacceptable.
Yes. Progressive taxes and strong unions have made the income inequality much less.
And the military industrial complex would be dismantled, removing the troops we have stationed over seas. We would also never use our military again in an unprovoked war of aggression.
Norwegian troops are in Afghanistan as well, this is more geopolitics than a left/right policy.
THAT would be a leftist party.
Yes. Far to the left of the Socialist Left party on some areas. The democrats aren't exactly left by my standards but you are setting the bar where any party will fail.
Spotify is funny, it's pretty much the stop gap to prevent copyright reform in Sweden. If Spotify was available world wide it'd be a huge hit, if it wasn't anywhere the Pirate Party would be in parliament changging the law. But instead you keep the Swedes happy enough (bread and circus anyone?) while still making a ton of monay off the other markets. If there was ever proof that piracy will get yyou a better deal, Spotify is it.
I have an open platform, it's the PC and last I checked you needed no signature to run anything on the Mac either. If you think all companies around the world will ever require the sign-off of Steve Jobs to run their custom software you are smoking some really, really good shit. The question is, does everything I own have to be this sort of end user changable thingy? Really, it doesn't. My phone has exactly the features it has and they won't change unless Nokia says so, and while I'm aware of homebrew my Wii is as Nintendo made it. Amd yeah so I own it but I never bought it under the pretense of being anything else than an appliance and it serves the advertised purpose.
Sure, they're almost all computers in drag these days and Turing complete but I already have one of those. And it's running Linux so it's so top to bottom open as possible. It's very neat but as I think all of us know choosing that freedom comes with a price in the selection of hardware, software and online services that don't like your browser or system configuration. I would never put my documents on a closed plaform but when I game on the Wii I want to play here and now, and honestly if I can't run it in 10 years when the hardware is dead and Nintendo has obsoleted the console I will survive. I figure it's the same with Apple and their iGarden.
The PS has only 4 SATA power connectors, but I used 16 Y splitters I got in a bag for $20 that I forgot to mention.
Well, if it works for you... any idea what you're loading the 12V rail with during boot? I would think that is way past the normal load the PS is designed for, particularly since I doubt the 25$ controller cards have staggered boot.
So you're admitting to the whole world you're doing something illegal? You're not making it any harder for the RIAA:)
I wasn't aware that building 10 TB home servers was a crime yet. Anyway, I found more than 12 drives and you start running into special server cases/PSUs/controller cards etc. and it's just not worth it - the backplane you link to is 70 pounds without VAT. I have an Antec 1200 which has 9 spaced HDD bays by default and a cheap 3x5.25" -> 3x3.5" w/fan iCage for 10-15 GBP - simple but works and those that try to pack 3.5" drives tighter often run into heat issues or annoyingly loud fans. With that I have a Mist 600W PSU with modular cables and a 8x SATA motherboard, at least when I bought the difference between 6x and 8x was less than the price of a 2x extension card, as well as a plain 4x SATA controller. The 8x controller cards are all RAID cards and cost an arm and leg and are unnecessary for a home setup. I came out that with my setup I had 12 drive bays for roughly the price of one 4-bay NAS. You couldn't find one with 8 bays and 6 cost 1000$+ without drives.
There simply isn't an easy solution to this. If you abolish software patents, it makes it very difficult for companies to realistically spend millions on development of new concepts and ideas when someone can then just take the ground breaking UI or process etc.
How about the fact that one company will be first to market and develop continously improving iterations staying ahead of the competition? To take for example graphics card as an example, the designs are often started 3-4 years in advance. Let's say they start now with a released card and probably spend the first year reverse engineering it, whatever they learn might be out in 2015. And then they'll be five years behind copying the 2015 models. You have to weigh that against the impact of granting a monopoly for 20 years - why should they continue to invent when they have an essential patent and can basically price gouge the market any way they want? It's really important to understand that software patents will stifle innovation too, and they're only worth it if the good outweigh the bad.
Well, from what I understood there are two modes - one which will give you only time slots so 5 drives each get 1/5th of the time. That's the cheap variety. The other variety is traffic based, you can't exceed 3 Gbps but you can get the cumulative read/write speed up to that point. The SATA spec site has more.
A decent full tower case with a modular PSU A motherboard with 8+ SATA ports (cheap) A 4-port SATA expansion card = 12 SATA slots + 12x SATA power for cheap
Get a cheap bunch of 1.5 TB drives for up to 18TB total. If you say home I assume you don't mean 99.9% redundancy. You can buy a new PSU or motherboard or whatever and have it delivered and that's okay. Softraid two drives in RAID1 for 1.5 TB less storage. If you need more protection then upload it to some offsite backup - any external disk or second machine is still vunerable to theft, fire and whatever. It works for me, though I only have ~10 TB due to due of old low-capacity disks.
In this case only way that Myth could claim copyright is if part of the patch was unrelated to the game (so it wouldn't be a derivative work)
Even though it serves no other purpose than to take an original work and transform it into a derived work, it is highly likely that the patch itself should qualify as its own creative work since it does things that weren't in the original. You could only claim it as a dervative if the original was "in" the patch itself, like say the original story is "in" a translation. Here only the combined work is derivative and copyright eligibility does not flow in reverse from the derivate to the original. For example the instruction to glue page 23 and 24 together is original even though the book with glued pages is derivative. The only question is if it qualifies for copyright at all, but the logo certainly should as it is a stylized picture.
Where I am confused (and plan on researching some more) is surrounding derivative works that don't contain the original. I am having a hard time finding any relevant case law on whether or not a patch that does not include the original is a derivative work. I also don't know whether third parties could legally distribute the patch, derivative work or not. Since the patch doesn't contain the original work, and the patch itself is not protected by copyright, no distribution of copyright covered work it taking place. I don't see anything in copyright code specifically prohibiting the distribution of derivative works.
In general, of course not. If so any patch written for an open source project would be "derived" of the project and the original author couldn't relicense his own code because it's someone else's derivate. There's been some unclarity on whether macros can make your derivative because they pull code defined in external files into your project, but that's an exception. To distribute a compilation or derived work you must fulfill all your license obligations from all the copyright holders, duh. They each hold their own copyright over it, for example for damages each of them can sue not just the one who made the compilation.
Wikipedia has made me hate those two words. Not because citing sources is bad, but Wikipedia has turned it into a parody. If you look at a real encyclopedia, it will contain a rather original text written in encyclopedic style. If you took such an article and pasted into Wikipedia you'd get dozens of [citation needed] because not every other sentence has one. Meanwhile you can pretty much load it with all the bias you want just by using biased sources despite the NPOV policy. I liked it back when you could just contribute some knowledge about a topic you knew about, today that's frowned upon as "original research" even though it isn't very original or research. That and the very questionable concept of Notability, which manages to completely not mention point of view. For example if I study local history of [city], then there's tons of information that might be notable enough for someone to put in a book and thus have decent authoritative sources. Are they then notable from the point of view of wikipedia? Did they have an impact on world history? Hardly, but if so you could delete 98% of wikipedia. How local a notability is notable? The hard questions are really answered by policy, which is why you get the politics.
Oh, I'm sure Redmond is trembling over having lost Dystopian Rebel (714995) and less than 2% of the desktop market in the last two years. They're 3.5% down on web browser stats because users use cell phones to surf the net more but if you look only at the Win/Mac/Linux shares the change is minimal.
1. The network was in fact not open. It was secured with WPA1 and a default password (source, German)
"Somit ist auch noch einmal zu Betonen: Es ging in der Entscheidung nicht um ein vollständig ungesichertes WLAN! Der BGH hat also nicht über ein offenes WLAN verhandelt, wie lange fälschlicherweise berichtet wurde. Vielmehr ging es ganz allgemein um die bedeutsame Frage, welche Sicherungspflichten die Betreiber von WLAN allgemein trifft."
2. The 100 euro is not for copyright infringement, but rather it seems that in Germany the reciever of a DMCA-like notice is liable for up to 100 euro unless they can either a) Point the blame to someone else or b) Pass some standard of having done everything reasonable to avoid damage. That's at least how I read the law:
" 97a Abmahnung
(1) Der Verletzte soll den Verletzer vor Einleitung eines gerichtlichen Verfahrens auf Unterlassung abmahnen und ihm Gelegenheit geben, den Streit durch Abgabe einer mit einer angemessenen Vertragsstrafe bewehrten Unterlassungsverpflichtung beizulegen. Soweit die Abmahnung berechtigt ist, kann der Ersatz der erforderlichen Aufwendungen verlangt werden.
(2) Der Ersatz der erforderlichen Aufwendungen für die Inanspruchnahme anwaltlicher Dienstleistungen für die erstmalige Abmahnung beschränkt sich in einfach gelagerten Fällen mit einer nur unerheblichen Rechtsverletzung außerhalb des geschäftlichen Verkehrs auf 100 Euro."
The key sentence here is "Soweit die Abmahnung berechtigt ist, kann der Ersatz der erforderlichen Aufwendungen verlangt werden." which translates to something like "When the warning is justified, compensation for the relevant expenses can be demanded." The second caps it to 100 euro for simple cases.
Cries phoronix again. It's hardly the first time they've claimed steam is coming to Linux based on some reused cross-platform tools or scripts. There's no official confirmation, there's no certainty that there is a complete Linux version and even if there were it's no certainty that they see a business case for it. For example Telltale recently made Mac versions of their games but there's no Linux version in sight...
The original idea of a united Europe was a peace project. It was not about liberalizing markets,
My history might be off but I understood it that even back from the steel and coal union it was to unite through trade. Basically you can't easily change human nature but if war would send both countries into economic ruin they'd rather solve it peacefully.
and even when a legislative decision is taken, it usually takes time before it gets implemented by the Member States (enshrined in national laws) -- two years is the standard period that EU directives allow for that purpose.
This is the biggest problem with the EU directives, they're not being passed directly into law. What practically happens is that all the criticism is shot down as FUD, that's not what the law will say. And when finally the national law comes and the law is exactly as terrible you get what I call democracy theater - like security theater. All the essential moments are already in the directive, you can only pick your degree and flavor of poison. Oh they may score some cheap political points, they can throw a few temper tantrums and run a round with the EU - but EU always wins and the directive is implemented anyway. That's what the media should report "Too late - directive passed". Then hopefully people would get a clue that it's the directives and the people that pass them that matter. But that'd give away the secret of how much EU decides and how little power the national parliaments have left.
I suppose it's inevitable that Linux distros will be born, reach their peak, decline, and die. Diversity in the Linux ecosystem is a good thing. When (not if!) Ubuntu starts to slack, someone else will step up and replace it with something even better.
Yeah, like Debian (1993), Red Hat (1994) and Suse (1994) all have died. Wait, that didn't happen and they've been around ever since Linux 1.0 was released in 1994. I don't fear that Ubuntu will die, I more fear they'll become a corporate / cloud distro and debrand the way Red Hat did with RHL -> Fedora. Because it's a proven fact there's money there, consumer Linux desktops on the other hand are still marginal in terms of revenue.
Dont know about Canonicals budget, but given their popularity one might expect more kernel patches from their side.
Ah, this old chestnut because I'm sure you DO know. Please do tell in which way the kernel needs patches to run better on a single processor, non-virtualized desktop. Maybe they're a lot more busy trying to fix the desktop environments. Or the actually applications/UI running on top of those environments. But no, keep nagging about not contributing to the engine when what people complain about is the driving comfort of a stock rally car (hint: it's not good).
Any voluntary transaction between two parties with full knowledge (or close enough to full knowledge) is positive-sum.
Of course positive sum may still mean you being royally screwed if the selection is poor like a local Internet monopoly, it just still happens to be a better choice than being completely without. It may simply be that the total sum of living there versus living somewhere else where means you let yourself be voluntarily ripped off.
Well, that's a guesstimate based on number of IP addresses... if you download it from more than one IP your other downloads will count as a "pirate". Plus I suspect that if you tell people they can choose how much to pay, many want to play first and decide afterwards. Like the blog says "25% seems incredible given that you can simply pay $0.01 to be completely legitimate." so why not play first and decide if it deserves a little more. Or maybe nobody at the link site even told them anything about the offer. Does it matter? It just proves that some people really don't want to pay anything, period. I doubt you could have earned anything on them anyway.
Well, imagine the following: You have a soda stand at the end of a long race, and you know thousands of people will be coming through and they'll all be thirsty. That's basically the value why you got the permit, why you set up the stand. Now imagine on race day, there's a huge surprise soda giveaway and nobody buys from you. Would you say you have "lost money" on the giveaway? What about a DDoS on your shopping site, do you lose money on sales never made? Of course you do.
In any normal market, and software is not that abnormal, pulling the free copies flooding the market would increase sales just like stopping the giveaway would improve soda stand sales. Of course holding a giveaway isn't against the law but copyright infringement is. The question is just what those sales would be, but if you say they have lost nothing at all you just come across as looking stupid. If you have never met an opportunistic pirate who will pirate when he can but buy if he really wants it and doesn't find a working pirated copy, then you haven't been looking very hard.
The MAFIAA like to calculate it as all the bottles of the giveaway times the soda stand price, completely disregarding that many people grabbed the bottles because they were free. They'd never even consider stopping at the stand at any price, and probably drank far more than they would have even if they had the money and were inclined to buy. But when you claim that money is pie-in-the-sky like lottery winnings, you made equally unlikely assumptions. To finish the analogy, it's like saying it's not certain anybody at all would be thirsty after the race. It is certain in all but the philosophical "Will gravity be there tomorrow?" sense.
So what kind of logic is that? If I point at your car and say "Give it to me" and you go "Ok" and hand me the keys then there'll be no theft. If all girls always said yes to sex there's be no rapes. Open source software has a license that (almost) always says "Yes", but it's a damn poor analogy to... anything.
In addition: most of the stuff I've seen on Youtube should be covered under Fair Use, especially parodies.
Many people have an exaggerated impression of what that means. Parody is not comedy in general, everything that gives you a cheap laugh on YouTube is not fair use. The reason parody is given as an example of fair use is because parody can be a form of commentary on the original work, which would be covered by the first amendment. If it's just a prop to make fun of something else, it shouldn't be given any more protection than using the clip to create a drama or thriller or action clip. Also, a lof people think setting music to a home video clip or picture slide show is automatically fair use.
On the whole, if I look at most clips on YouTube I find they are according to the four points of fair use: 1. Derivative, not transformative. Most are simply the original song playing to a video, even though it is for personal use = 1/2-1/2 2. Use of creative works like songs and film clips = 0-1 3. Often using whole songs or film clips filling the whole video = 0-1 4. From none to a direct competitor to ad supported Spotify at worst. = 1/2-1/2 on average
I guess you can discuss it back and forth but the requirements for fair use is quite strict. It was mostly placed there because copyright would otherwise create a "black hole" around a copyrighted work where you couldn't talk about it. It was never meant as free non-commercial use, I know many people want that but then the law has to change.
Actually, I think Google is much smarter than the average company. Most companies tend to invest in something then struggle to find how to make money on it. Google does exactly the opposite, it's taking a profitable business model and tries to expand the scope. The more you use online services, and in particular Google services or Google-owned sites like YouTube, the more Google learns about you. That's what Google really sells, being able to target a market and hit it.
For anyone who has worked with marketing (or worse yet, in marketing) knows it's a horribly inaccurate science but none the less incredibly important. Yes, there's the occasional friend to friend recommendation but most products I never bother discussing with anyone, we got better things to do. No matter what people here think of ads, you certainly don't get to hear about the products that don't ad. Trouble is that ads are terribly hard to measure, you basically spend your money and pray for results. That's why you want to hit small, targeted markets and see if your sales projections hold up. Otherwise fail early and fail cheaply, that is an extremely valuable service. Not to mention fighting over identified trendsetters in established markets, equally vital.
Mostly everything Google does builds up under this, they want to pile as many sources of information they can, draw out as fine masked data as at all possible, and that's their business model. There's not going to be one "aha" moment that'll suddenly undercut that. Sure, the peripheral markets might not be making Google money directly but they're all trying to guide you in the same direction. That is why Google would be interested in ChromeOS and not so much local Linux applications. If ChromeOS is not ready, their solution will be to improve ChromeOS. Google won't release it without good response in user testing, and as usual slashdot overestimates users. Just like nobody wants one of those crippled i* things.
From the numbers a lot of people have posted, it would only cost about 3 cents per copy of Firefox.
Neither Firefox nor x264 could be used that way, the GPL requires an essentially limitless sub-licensing rights (technically it could be limited to GPL only software) and that's not part of the license. The closest you could have is a non-free plugin not based on x264, since flash is ok I guess that is too. The best solution would be to simply let the system codecs handle it, and if not fall back to flash. Win7, OS X has it native and most Linux users will install x264 anyway...
Re:MERTON FROM CHATROULETTE SAYS!
on
MythTV 0.23 Released
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I haven't counted the editors but I doubt they have enough to run a 24/7 watch on every story. Not to mention it'd be slightly below first line help desk work in fun level. I don't care much for the mod points, so I usually drop to -1 and spend 15 points blasting trolls quite quickly. I guess if you're serious about moderating, go ahead. If you tend to let them expire (as they usually would for me) then help take out some of the trash instead.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's what a real leftist government would look like.
Heh, let me compare what you said to Norway, which is considered pretty much the most socialist country in a socialist Europe currently under a socialist government.
Immigrants would be given amnesty and a path to citizenship.
No, we have illegal immigrants but there's no general amnesty for them.
The top marginal tax rate would be closer to 90% than the current 35%.
47.8%
Regressive taxes like sales tax and vehicle taxes would be eradicated.
VAT is 25%, vechicle taxes are a complex mix of weight, horsepowers, emissions etc. but highest in the world.
There would be a massive investment in a single payer government run health care system for all.
Yes.
A massive reinvestment in education from bottom up, focusing on leveling the inequality of poor school districts in minority neighborhoods and inner cities.
Yes, though the school system is underfunded it is far more equal than the US.
Wall Street would be heavily regulated and much of what currently goes on would be illegal.
Mostly no, nobody is stupid enough to try a soviet plan economy. The Oslo Stoch Exchange is quite regular.
Housing, food, and a meaningful job would be a right just like speech currently is.
Housing yes. Food yes. Meaningful job? No. Though the government does try to act anti-cyclical creating jobs in downturns unlike California etc. which seem to be cutting adding to the downturn instead.
Workers would collectively own the businesses they work for.
No. But there is a larger public sector and more government ownership interests.
The level of income inequality would be unacceptable.
Yes. Progressive taxes and strong unions have made the income inequality much less.
And the military industrial complex would be dismantled, removing the troops we have stationed over seas. We would also never use our military again in an unprovoked war of aggression.
Norwegian troops are in Afghanistan as well, this is more geopolitics than a left/right policy.
THAT would be a leftist party.
Yes. Far to the left of the Socialist Left party on some areas. The democrats aren't exactly left by my standards but you are setting the bar where any party will fail.
Spotify is funny, it's pretty much the stop gap to prevent copyright reform in Sweden. If Spotify was available world wide it'd be a huge hit, if it wasn't anywhere the Pirate Party would be in parliament changging the law. But instead you keep the Swedes happy enough (bread and circus anyone?) while still making a ton of monay off the other markets. If there was ever proof that piracy will get yyou a better deal, Spotify is it.
I have an open platform, it's the PC and last I checked you needed no signature to run anything on the Mac either. If you think all companies around the world will ever require the sign-off of Steve Jobs to run their custom software you are smoking some really, really good shit. The question is, does everything I own have to be this sort of end user changable thingy? Really, it doesn't. My phone has exactly the features it has and they won't change unless Nokia says so, and while I'm aware of homebrew my Wii is as Nintendo made it. Amd yeah so I own it but I never bought it under the pretense of being anything else than an appliance and it serves the advertised purpose.
Sure, they're almost all computers in drag these days and Turing complete but I already have one of those. And it's running Linux so it's so top to bottom open as possible. It's very neat but as I think all of us know choosing that freedom comes with a price in the selection of hardware, software and online services that don't like your browser or system configuration. I would never put my documents on a closed plaform but when I game on the Wii I want to play here and now, and honestly if I can't run it in 10 years when the hardware is dead and Nintendo has obsoleted the console I will survive. I figure it's the same with Apple and their iGarden.
The PS has only 4 SATA power connectors, but I used 16 Y splitters I got in a bag for $20 that I forgot to mention.
Well, if it works for you... any idea what you're loading the 12V rail with during boot? I would think that is way past the normal load the PS is designed for, particularly since I doubt the 25$ controller cards have staggered boot.
1. Where do you get a 20$ case with 20 drive bays?
2. What 50$ power supply has 20 SATA connectors?
So you're admitting to the whole world you're doing something illegal? You're not making it any harder for the RIAA :)
I wasn't aware that building 10 TB home servers was a crime yet. Anyway, I found more than 12 drives and you start running into special server cases/PSUs/controller cards etc. and it's just not worth it - the backplane you link to is 70 pounds without VAT. I have an Antec 1200 which has 9 spaced HDD bays by default and a cheap 3x5.25" -> 3x3.5" w/fan iCage for 10-15 GBP - simple but works and those that try to pack 3.5" drives tighter often run into heat issues or annoyingly loud fans. With that I have a Mist 600W PSU with modular cables and a 8x SATA motherboard, at least when I bought the difference between 6x and 8x was less than the price of a 2x extension card, as well as a plain 4x SATA controller. The 8x controller cards are all RAID cards and cost an arm and leg and are unnecessary for a home setup. I came out that with my setup I had 12 drive bays for roughly the price of one 4-bay NAS. You couldn't find one with 8 bays and 6 cost 1000$+ without drives.
There simply isn't an easy solution to this. If you abolish software patents, it makes it very difficult for companies to realistically spend millions on development of new concepts and ideas when someone can then just take the ground breaking UI or process etc.
How about the fact that one company will be first to market and develop continously improving iterations staying ahead of the competition? To take for example graphics card as an example, the designs are often started 3-4 years in advance. Let's say they start now with a released card and probably spend the first year reverse engineering it, whatever they learn might be out in 2015. And then they'll be five years behind copying the 2015 models. You have to weigh that against the impact of granting a monopoly for 20 years - why should they continue to invent when they have an essential patent and can basically price gouge the market any way they want? It's really important to understand that software patents will stifle innovation too, and they're only worth it if the good outweigh the bad.
Well, from what I understood there are two modes - one which will give you only time slots so 5 drives each get 1/5th of the time. That's the cheap variety. The other variety is traffic based, you can't exceed 3 Gbps but you can get the cumulative read/write speed up to that point. The SATA spec site has more.
If you want cheap, affordable storage get:
A decent full tower case with a modular PSU
A motherboard with 8+ SATA ports (cheap)
A 4-port SATA expansion card
=
12 SATA slots + 12x SATA power for cheap
Get a cheap bunch of 1.5 TB drives for up to 18TB total. If you say home I assume you don't mean 99.9% redundancy. You can buy a new PSU or motherboard or whatever and have it delivered and that's okay. Softraid two drives in RAID1 for 1.5 TB less storage. If you need more protection then upload it to some offsite backup - any external disk or second machine is still vunerable to theft, fire and whatever. It works for me, though I only have ~10 TB due to due of old low-capacity disks.
In this case only way that Myth could claim copyright is if part of the patch was unrelated to the game (so it wouldn't be a derivative work)
Even though it serves no other purpose than to take an original work and transform it into a derived work, it is highly likely that the patch itself should qualify as its own creative work since it does things that weren't in the original. You could only claim it as a dervative if the original was "in" the patch itself, like say the original story is "in" a translation. Here only the combined work is derivative and copyright eligibility does not flow in reverse from the derivate to the original. For example the instruction to glue page 23 and 24 together is original even though the book with glued pages is derivative. The only question is if it qualifies for copyright at all, but the logo certainly should as it is a stylized picture.
Where I am confused (and plan on researching some more) is surrounding derivative works that don't contain the original. I am having a hard time finding any relevant case law on whether or not a patch that does not include the original is a derivative work. I also don't know whether third parties could legally distribute the patch, derivative work or not. Since the patch doesn't contain the original work, and the patch itself is not protected by copyright, no distribution of copyright covered work it taking place. I don't see anything in copyright code specifically prohibiting the distribution of derivative works.
In general, of course not. If so any patch written for an open source project would be "derived" of the project and the original author couldn't relicense his own code because it's someone else's derivate. There's been some unclarity on whether macros can make your derivative because they pull code defined in external files into your project, but that's an exception. To distribute a compilation or derived work you must fulfill all your license obligations from all the copyright holders, duh. They each hold their own copyright over it, for example for damages each of them can sue not just the one who made the compilation.
[Citation Needed]
Wikipedia has made me hate those two words. Not because citing sources is bad, but Wikipedia has turned it into a parody. If you look at a real encyclopedia, it will contain a rather original text written in encyclopedic style. If you took such an article and pasted into Wikipedia you'd get dozens of [citation needed] because not every other sentence has one. Meanwhile you can pretty much load it with all the bias you want just by using biased sources despite the NPOV policy. I liked it back when you could just contribute some knowledge about a topic you knew about, today that's frowned upon as "original research" even though it isn't very original or research. That and the very questionable concept of Notability, which manages to completely not mention point of view. For example if I study local history of [city], then there's tons of information that might be notable enough for someone to put in a book and thus have decent authoritative sources. Are they then notable from the point of view of wikipedia? Did they have an impact on world history? Hardly, but if so you could delete 98% of wikipedia. How local a notability is notable? The hard questions are really answered by policy, which is why you get the politics.
Oh, I'm sure Redmond is trembling over having lost Dystopian Rebel (714995) and less than 2% of the desktop market in the last two years. They're 3.5% down on web browser stats because users use cell phones to surf the net more but if you look only at the Win/Mac/Linux shares the change is minimal.
1. The network was in fact not open. It was secured with WPA1 and a default password (source, German)
"Somit ist auch noch einmal zu Betonen: Es ging in der Entscheidung nicht um ein vollständig ungesichertes WLAN! Der BGH hat also nicht über ein offenes WLAN verhandelt, wie lange fälschlicherweise berichtet wurde. Vielmehr ging es ganz allgemein um die bedeutsame Frage, welche Sicherungspflichten die Betreiber von WLAN allgemein trifft."
2. The 100 euro is not for copyright infringement, but rather it seems that in Germany the reciever of a DMCA-like notice is liable for up to 100 euro unless they can either a) Point the blame to someone else or b) Pass some standard of having done everything reasonable to avoid damage. That's at least how I read the law:
" 97a Abmahnung
(1) Der Verletzte soll den Verletzer vor Einleitung eines gerichtlichen Verfahrens auf Unterlassung abmahnen und ihm Gelegenheit geben, den Streit durch Abgabe einer mit einer angemessenen Vertragsstrafe bewehrten Unterlassungsverpflichtung beizulegen. Soweit die Abmahnung berechtigt ist, kann der Ersatz der erforderlichen Aufwendungen verlangt werden.
(2) Der Ersatz der erforderlichen Aufwendungen für die Inanspruchnahme anwaltlicher Dienstleistungen für die erstmalige Abmahnung beschränkt sich in einfach gelagerten Fällen mit einer nur unerheblichen Rechtsverletzung außerhalb des geschäftlichen Verkehrs auf 100 Euro."
The key sentence here is "Soweit die Abmahnung berechtigt ist, kann der Ersatz der erforderlichen Aufwendungen verlangt werden." which translates to something like "When the warning is justified, compensation for the relevant expenses can be demanded." The second caps it to 100 euro for simple cases.
Cries phoronix again. It's hardly the first time they've claimed steam is coming to Linux based on some reused cross-platform tools or scripts. There's no official confirmation, there's no certainty that there is a complete Linux version and even if there were it's no certainty that they see a business case for it. For example Telltale recently made Mac versions of their games but there's no Linux version in sight...
The original idea of a united Europe was a peace project. It was not about liberalizing markets,
My history might be off but I understood it that even back from the steel and coal union it was to unite through trade. Basically you can't easily change human nature but if war would send both countries into economic ruin they'd rather solve it peacefully.
and even when a legislative decision is taken, it usually takes time before it gets implemented by the Member States (enshrined in national laws) -- two years is the standard period that EU directives allow for that purpose.
This is the biggest problem with the EU directives, they're not being passed directly into law. What practically happens is that all the criticism is shot down as FUD, that's not what the law will say. And when finally the national law comes and the law is exactly as terrible you get what I call democracy theater - like security theater. All the essential moments are already in the directive, you can only pick your degree and flavor of poison. Oh they may score some cheap political points, they can throw a few temper tantrums and run a round with the EU - but EU always wins and the directive is implemented anyway. That's what the media should report "Too late - directive passed". Then hopefully people would get a clue that it's the directives and the people that pass them that matter. But that'd give away the secret of how much EU decides and how little power the national parliaments have left.
I suppose it's inevitable that Linux distros will be born, reach their peak, decline, and die. Diversity in the Linux ecosystem is a good thing. When (not if!) Ubuntu starts to slack, someone else will step up and replace it with something even better.
Yeah, like Debian (1993), Red Hat (1994) and Suse (1994) all have died. Wait, that didn't happen and they've been around ever since Linux 1.0 was released in 1994. I don't fear that Ubuntu will die, I more fear they'll become a corporate / cloud distro and debrand the way Red Hat did with RHL -> Fedora. Because it's a proven fact there's money there, consumer Linux desktops on the other hand are still marginal in terms of revenue.
Dont know about Canonicals budget, but given their popularity one might expect more kernel patches from their side.
Ah, this old chestnut because I'm sure you DO know. Please do tell in which way the kernel needs patches to run better on a single processor, non-virtualized desktop. Maybe they're a lot more busy trying to fix the desktop environments. Or the actually applications/UI running on top of those environments. But no, keep nagging about not contributing to the engine when what people complain about is the driving comfort of a stock rally car (hint: it's not good).
Any voluntary transaction between two parties with full knowledge (or close enough to full knowledge) is positive-sum.
Of course positive sum may still mean you being royally screwed if the selection is poor like a local Internet monopoly, it just still happens to be a better choice than being completely without. It may simply be that the total sum of living there versus living somewhere else where means you let yourself be voluntarily ripped off.
Well, that's a guesstimate based on number of IP addresses... if you download it from more than one IP your other downloads will count as a "pirate". Plus I suspect that if you tell people they can choose how much to pay, many want to play first and decide afterwards. Like the blog says "25% seems incredible given that you can simply pay $0.01 to be completely legitimate." so why not play first and decide if it deserves a little more. Or maybe nobody at the link site even told them anything about the offer. Does it matter? It just proves that some people really don't want to pay anything, period. I doubt you could have earned anything on them anyway.
Well, imagine the following: You have a soda stand at the end of a long race, and you know thousands of people will be coming through and they'll all be thirsty. That's basically the value why you got the permit, why you set up the stand. Now imagine on race day, there's a huge surprise soda giveaway and nobody buys from you. Would you say you have "lost money" on the giveaway? What about a DDoS on your shopping site, do you lose money on sales never made? Of course you do.
In any normal market, and software is not that abnormal, pulling the free copies flooding the market would increase sales just like stopping the giveaway would improve soda stand sales. Of course holding a giveaway isn't against the law but copyright infringement is. The question is just what those sales would be, but if you say they have lost nothing at all you just come across as looking stupid. If you have never met an opportunistic pirate who will pirate when he can but buy if he really wants it and doesn't find a working pirated copy, then you haven't been looking very hard.
The MAFIAA like to calculate it as all the bottles of the giveaway times the soda stand price, completely disregarding that many people grabbed the bottles because they were free. They'd never even consider stopping at the stand at any price, and probably drank far more than they would have even if they had the money and were inclined to buy. But when you claim that money is pie-in-the-sky like lottery winnings, you made equally unlikely assumptions. To finish the analogy, it's like saying it's not certain anybody at all would be thirsty after the race. It is certain in all but the philosophical "Will gravity be there tomorrow?" sense.
So what kind of logic is that? If I point at your car and say "Give it to me" and you go "Ok" and hand me the keys then there'll be no theft. If all girls always said yes to sex there's be no rapes. Open source software has a license that (almost) always says "Yes", but it's a damn poor analogy to... anything.
In addition: most of the stuff I've seen on Youtube should be covered under Fair Use, especially parodies.
Many people have an exaggerated impression of what that means. Parody is not comedy in general, everything that gives you a cheap laugh on YouTube is not fair use. The reason parody is given as an example of fair use is because parody can be a form of commentary on the original work, which would be covered by the first amendment. If it's just a prop to make fun of something else, it shouldn't be given any more protection than using the clip to create a drama or thriller or action clip. Also, a lof people think setting music to a home video clip or picture slide show is automatically fair use.
On the whole, if I look at most clips on YouTube I find they are according to the four points of fair use:
1. Derivative, not transformative. Most are simply the original song playing to a video, even though it is for personal use = 1/2-1/2
2. Use of creative works like songs and film clips = 0-1
3. Often using whole songs or film clips filling the whole video = 0-1
4. From none to a direct competitor to ad supported Spotify at worst. = 1/2-1/2 on average
I guess you can discuss it back and forth but the requirements for fair use is quite strict. It was mostly placed there because copyright would otherwise create a "black hole" around a copyrighted work where you couldn't talk about it. It was never meant as free non-commercial use, I know many people want that but then the law has to change.
Actually, I think Google is much smarter than the average company. Most companies tend to invest in something then struggle to find how to make money on it. Google does exactly the opposite, it's taking a profitable business model and tries to expand the scope. The more you use online services, and in particular Google services or Google-owned sites like YouTube, the more Google learns about you. That's what Google really sells, being able to target a market and hit it.
For anyone who has worked with marketing (or worse yet, in marketing) knows it's a horribly inaccurate science but none the less incredibly important. Yes, there's the occasional friend to friend recommendation but most products I never bother discussing with anyone, we got better things to do. No matter what people here think of ads, you certainly don't get to hear about the products that don't ad. Trouble is that ads are terribly hard to measure, you basically spend your money and pray for results. That's why you want to hit small, targeted markets and see if your sales projections hold up. Otherwise fail early and fail cheaply, that is an extremely valuable service. Not to mention fighting over identified trendsetters in established markets, equally vital.
Mostly everything Google does builds up under this, they want to pile as many sources of information they can, draw out as fine masked data as at all possible, and that's their business model. There's not going to be one "aha" moment that'll suddenly undercut that. Sure, the peripheral markets might not be making Google money directly but they're all trying to guide you in the same direction. That is why Google would be interested in ChromeOS and not so much local Linux applications. If ChromeOS is not ready, their solution will be to improve ChromeOS. Google won't release it without good response in user testing, and as usual slashdot overestimates users. Just like nobody wants one of those crippled i* things.
From the numbers a lot of people have posted, it would only cost about 3 cents per copy of Firefox.
Neither Firefox nor x264 could be used that way, the GPL requires an essentially limitless sub-licensing rights (technically it could be limited to GPL only software) and that's not part of the license. The closest you could have is a non-free plugin not based on x264, since flash is ok I guess that is too. The best solution would be to simply let the system codecs handle it, and if not fall back to flash. Win7, OS X has it native and most Linux users will install x264 anyway...
I haven't counted the editors but I doubt they have enough to run a 24/7 watch on every story. Not to mention it'd be slightly below first line help desk work in fun level. I don't care much for the mod points, so I usually drop to -1 and spend 15 points blasting trolls quite quickly. I guess if you're serious about moderating, go ahead. If you tend to let them expire (as they usually would for me) then help take out some of the trash instead.