Re:Backups shouldn't be fair use.
on
Region-free PS3
·
· Score: 1
Please read the rest of the thread. If I respond to you here, and to everybody else who said the same thing as you, I'll have an exponentially increasing number of responses to write. Multiple others have said exactly what you just said.
Re:Backups shouldn't be fair use.
on
Region-free PS3
·
· Score: 1
I was trying to show the parent just how rediculous his assertions were by conforming to the same style.
That confuses me. Perhaps your original comment has the wrong parent then...
but someone is saying that the consumer shouldn't have backup rights simply because these new formats are reliable.
That's not an argument I would make. My argument is that you shouldn't have the right simply because it's possible. I wouldn't claim the new formats are reliable, nor would I claim the old formats are reliable. It's almost as easy to wreck a book as it is a CD. I'd go as far as saying that regular use is just as likely to wreck either, though CDs are slightly easier to damage through accidental mis-use.
Re:No, saying you don't know a use case
on
Region-free PS3
·
· Score: 1
Re:Backups shouldn't be fair use.
on
Region-free PS3
·
· Score: 1
I hardly think you would be arrested for copying out a part of a book by hand, yet you seem to think it's ok to design measures to stop people doing this for CDs/DVDs. Why is that?
Who said anything about arresting anybody? Nothing related to copyright should be criminal (yes, I know that's not how existing law works). Companies should be able to design their products however they like though. You seem to think it's ok to tell them they can't. Why is that?
Re:You obviously don't have children
on
Region-free PS3
·
· Score: 1
Well, the guy just gave you a good reason. And you're going off on him half-cocked.
That's a good point, and I didn't see it that way at first. Probably bias from all the other times people have said that to me.
I don't think it's a good reason though.
If the publishers/distributors were legally obliged to provide me a replacement copy of a damaged work at their expense and within a reasonable period of time then I might agree with you.
I would respond to that with a question: Why should distributors of electronic content bear that burden when other mediums don't? At the very least you should pay for the transport and physical media of the replacement. Many software vendors will provide you a replacement for damaged media for a minimal fee already. Unfortunatly the music and movie industries aren't so nice.
Even then, if a work goes out of print, or a distributor goes out of business, they won't be able to replace it anyway.
Copyright should require renewals every three years. That way, works by companies that don't exist anymore wouldn't be protected after a few years of neglect. Then you could do whatever you want with the content and the backup issue would be moot.
I've been hearing hype about how great this thing is going to be for years... It's starting to have the Duke Nukem Forever feel to it.
Re:Nothing really new except confirming rumors
on
GDC - Sony Keynote
·
· Score: 1
Sounds more like the guy doesn't know how to downshift out of marketing speak. I'm sure he thinks there's a definitive answer in there somewhere.
I kinda wish it were seperate though... That would open the possibility of different sizes, third party vendors, and price competition. They could treat the hard drives like memory cards.
Whatever service you think you are getting for those extra rates, realize it's still at the whim of the provider, and just like they are proposing to do to these other entities, they will happily find a way to jack you for more if they see an opportunity to do so.
I agree. What I'm saying is that users aren't willing to pay more for less restrictions.
Re:Backups shouldn't be fair use.
on
Region-free PS3
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
And when your children render a disc unreadable just by mishandling it?
Use the appropriate dicipline to teach your children not to mishandle your media, or don't allow your children to handle the media. Why are people so afraid to dicipline their children these days? Your kids should be scared to death of damaging your stuff. They'll grow up just fine, and they won't hate you. You can start *really young*.
What do you do when your kid spills whatever you put in their sippy cup all over some book you left lying around? Or scribbles all over it with a crayon?
Re:Backups shouldn't be fair use.
on
Region-free PS3
·
· Score: 1
He's had to buy three because they get scratched from use (normal use, not rolling over it with his office chair)
Normal use doesn't scratch CDs. I have hundreds of CDs that I use all the time, and none of them are scratched. CD's get scratched because I take care of them.Throw them around, put them in the tray with recless abandon, and you scratch them.
People who treat their media like junk wreck their media. Same goes for books.
Re:Backups shouldn't be fair use.
on
Region-free PS3
·
· Score: 1
You have a very warped perception of what the CD, as in the thin slice of plastic that something is written on, represents. If you compare the price to a blank CD, you see I pay essentially nothing for the disc, only for the information that's on it. The disc itself is detachable, replacable and infinately less durable than the content which could be moved around losslessly in perpetuity.
I could say that about your perception of the paperback book, which costs the producer about the same amount as the media and associated physical materals that come with the CD. The fact that equipment exists that allows easy movement of the information doesn't mean that the law should treat the content on that media any differently.
Arguments can be made for the elimination of copyright, but the fact that it has become easy to break isn't the best of those arguments.
Re:Backups shouldn't be fair use.
on
Region-free PS3
·
· Score: 1
I'm not convinced that the first amendment should apply to you!
Because I don't agree with you? Asshole.
It is not your place to question fair use, fair use is a integral part of copyright law.
Two things. First, Bullshit, it's my place to question whatever I'd like to question. Second, I'm not saying Fair Use is bad/wrong/should go away. I'm questioning what should be considered fair use.
There are books still in circulation that were written 100 years ago, and until that is the case for optical disks, there simply _isn't any argument_ that they should not be copyable.
That's a rediculous argument that isn't backed up by law. Backups are allowed under law, but those reasons you came up with came straight out of your ass.
Re:You obviously don't have children
on
Region-free PS3
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
You obviously don't have children
I hate when people say that.
Are you implying that I wouldn't take a principled stance as soon as it was less convienient for me?
Re:Backups shouldn't be fair use.
on
Region-free PS3
·
· Score: 1
If you can't think of any good reason for the law the allow backups, perhaps you are not qualified to debate this since in order to debate something correctly you need to have a thorough understanding of BOTH sides of the matter, which you CLEARLY do not.
I didn't say I can't think of reasons... I said I don't think they're good reasons. If you'd like to present well reasond arguments, perhaps you can change my mind.
I just wanted to point out that there are serious holes in your logic and attempted to patch them up.
There are holes in your logic too. You don't own the content in your books anymore than you own the content on a CD. You have an implied license to that content plus some additional rights granted by law.
You've made a good argument for allowing format shifting, and I think that format shifting should be allowed. You have also made a good argument that backups are allowed. Again, I agree, they're allowed. But I still don't see a *good* reason to allow them.
It is time for a second Internet to come into action -- one that is voluntarily connected, one that is run over cabling (or satellite) connections that are not subsidized by any government regime. If we want it, it will happen, we just have to support the initial costs. These costs might be higher but in the long run they're lower because we won't be taxed to subsidize the costs.
I don't care much for the idea of regulating any speech -- broadcast or face-to-face. I don't see the Constitution giving the Federal government any power to regulate the airwaves (the interstate commerce clause was not meant to give the Feds power to tariff and tax, it was meant to give the Feds the power to prevent the individual states from tariffing and taxing interstate commerce).
If your goal is to have your packets routed end to end with no interference by any third party, such a thing already exists. It's called business class service. Nobody bothers you, you don't have ports blocked, you don't get your transfer rates capped, and it's just plain internet heaven. It costs about twice as much though, and almost nobody is willing to pay. If people aren't willing to spend a little more to maintain their liberty on the internet, what makes you think they'd be willing to pay a lot more to help build a new one?
Re:Backups shouldn't be fair use.
on
Region-free PS3
·
· Score: 1
You seem confused.
In both cases you are purchasing both a license and an object.
Sometimes the license is implied (books, CDs, most DVDs), and sometimes the license is explicit (software), but you are buying both in all cases.
This is NOT something we should let go. It maybe a dead horse now, but it's a horse that should never have been born in the first place.
You're right, of course, but if you're not going to drop it you could at least stop calling it something it's not...
We all knew that when the article originally said that the Sony spyware used root-kit technology that it would end up being called a root-kit, but that doesn't mean we should all give in and steadily erode the facts.
If you're going to take the moral high ground, make sure you're on the right road first. (Yes, that's a mixed metaphor).
Backups shouldn't be fair use.
on
Region-free PS3
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
I don't think I could have picked a less popular subject, however...
You don't get to make a backup of books, art, or other physical media that is non-electronic... Back when it was easy to have your electronic media easily destroyed at no fault to you, a backup exemption made sense. We no longer live in the age of VCRs eating tapes though, and on the rediculously rare (relative to tape eating) chance that your device does damage your disc, the player manufacturer should be responsible for procuring you a replacement. If, however, you roll over your favorite video game CD with your office chair (not I know anybody who has ever done that...), why should you have more right to a replacement than the guy who had his paperback fall out of his jacket pocket into the toilet on a bus (not that... well, you know)?
DRM should never prevent you from doing something with your media that would have otherwise been legal under copyright law, but I'm not convinced that there is a good reason for the law to allow backups.
I was kinda hoping that the PS3 would ship with no hard drive in any version. It would be nice if the harddrive was like memory cards were for PS2. It would be especially nice when the third party models started to come out. In the hard drive department, so far it seems to me that two out of three of the next gen players have already blown it.
If I preorder a PS3, I want the damn system. I do not want some crimpled gimp that requires future upgrades to act as the actual product I bought.
Hopefully you've learned a lesson about pre-ordering before the store can tell you exactly 'what and when'. Hopefully that will translate into stores learning their lesson when people start refusing to open their wallet early.
Re:Nothing really new except confirming rumors
on
GDC - Sony Keynote
·
· Score: 1
Or debunking rumors... Like the harddrive being required, but sold seperatly.
Still, I'd be happy if I didn't hear another thing about the PS3 until they had a list of launch titles and a price. I'm tired of console hype with no substance. If Sony pulls a Microsoft and is all hype and no substance right up until the last 3 days, this is going to be a long 7 months of purple slashdot dupes and fanboy flamewars.
I build my shelves 8 inches deep (Yes, build. All the shelves you buy these days are extra deep... Otherwise known as extra-space wasting) so that hard cover and reference books just reach the front of the shelves, and all the shelves are adjustable. If you space your holes right, you can have shelves that are perfect for either the typical hardcover, or the typical paperback. If you want to combine both on a shelf, what we typically do is stand up the ones that are shelf height and lie the others on their side. If most of the books are tall, the short ones are on their side, and the other way around... Truely large books are uncommon (let's face it. most geeks have a collection of fiction in paperback, trade paperback/comic book, and hardback sizes, and the O'Reilly sized books, but not much else.), and go elsewhere, like on top of the shelves.
If you use #2 pine, and you don't mind using the wall as a structural component (side-to-side stabalizing only, so you don't need the back) you can build attractive, if not plain looking set of shelves in about an hour if you take the time to build a shelf hole jig. As a bonus they only cost around $20.
WARNING: if you move, personally pack the library, or you will spend far more weekends than you would like alphabetizing books (and buying bookcases).
Heh... I moved a year ago, and we still haven't finished unpacking and re-sorting. Not only did friends and family just stuff thousands of books into boxes at random, but nothing is labeled. We don't have enough shelves at the new place yet for everything, and it's an adventure every time my wife is looking for something in particular we haven't unpacked yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Please read the rest of the thread. If I respond to you here, and to everybody else who said the same thing as you, I'll have an exponentially increasing number of responses to write. Multiple others have said exactly what you just said.
I was trying to show the parent just how rediculous his assertions were by conforming to the same style.
That confuses me. Perhaps your original comment has the wrong parent then...
but someone is saying that the consumer shouldn't have backup rights simply because these new formats are reliable.
That's not an argument I would make. My argument is that you shouldn't have the right simply because it's possible. I wouldn't claim the new formats are reliable, nor would I claim the old formats are reliable. It's almost as easy to wreck a book as it is a CD. I'd go as far as saying that regular use is just as likely to wreck either, though CDs are slightly easier to damage through accidental mis-use.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=181047&cid=149 81983
I hardly think you would be arrested for copying out a part of a book by hand, yet you seem to think it's ok to design measures to stop people doing this for CDs/DVDs. Why is that?
Who said anything about arresting anybody? Nothing related to copyright should be criminal (yes, I know that's not how existing law works). Companies should be able to design their products however they like though. You seem to think it's ok to tell them they can't. Why is that?
Well, the guy just gave you a good reason. And you're going off on him half-cocked.
That's a good point, and I didn't see it that way at first. Probably bias from all the other times people have said that to me.
I don't think it's a good reason though.
If the publishers/distributors were legally obliged to provide me a replacement copy of a damaged work at their expense and within a reasonable period of time then I might agree with you.
I would respond to that with a question: Why should distributors of electronic content bear that burden when other mediums don't? At the very least you should pay for the transport and physical media of the replacement. Many software vendors will provide you a replacement for damaged media for a minimal fee already. Unfortunatly the music and movie industries aren't so nice.
Even then, if a work goes out of print, or a distributor goes out of business, they won't be able to replace it anyway.
Copyright should require renewals every three years. That way, works by companies that don't exist anymore wouldn't be protected after a few years of neglect. Then you could do whatever you want with the content and the backup issue would be moot.
troll 1. v.,n. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a
posting on {Usenet} designed to attract predictable responses or
{flame}s;
Read the rest of the thread and my responces, and then come back here and tell me with a straight face that I posted my comment as a troll.
I've been hearing hype about how great this thing is going to be for years... It's starting to have the Duke Nukem Forever feel to it.
Sounds more like the guy doesn't know how to downshift out of marketing speak. I'm sure he thinks there's a definitive answer in there somewhere.
I kinda wish it were seperate though... That would open the possibility of different sizes, third party vendors, and price competition. They could treat the hard drives like memory cards.
Whatever service you think you are getting for those extra rates, realize it's still at the whim of the provider, and just like they are proposing to do to these other entities, they will happily find a way to jack you for more if they see an opportunity to do so.
I agree. What I'm saying is that users aren't willing to pay more for less restrictions.
And when your children render a disc unreadable just by mishandling it?
Use the appropriate dicipline to teach your children not to mishandle your media, or don't allow your children to handle the media. Why are people so afraid to dicipline their children these days? Your kids should be scared to death of damaging your stuff. They'll grow up just fine, and they won't hate you. You can start *really young*.
What do you do when your kid spills whatever you put in their sippy cup all over some book you left lying around? Or scribbles all over it with a crayon?
He's had to buy three because they get scratched from use (normal use, not rolling over it with his office chair)
Normal use doesn't scratch CDs. I have hundreds of CDs that I use all the time, and none of them are scratched. CD's get scratched because I take care of them.Throw them around, put them in the tray with recless abandon, and you scratch them.
People who treat their media like junk wreck their media. Same goes for books.
You have a very warped perception of what the CD, as in the thin slice of plastic that something is written on, represents. If you compare the price to a blank CD, you see I pay essentially nothing for the disc, only for the information that's on it. The disc itself is detachable, replacable and infinately less durable than the content which could be moved around losslessly in perpetuity.
I could say that about your perception of the paperback book, which costs the producer about the same amount as the media and associated physical materals that come with the CD. The fact that equipment exists that allows easy movement of the information doesn't mean that the law should treat the content on that media any differently.
Arguments can be made for the elimination of copyright, but the fact that it has become easy to break isn't the best of those arguments.
I'm not convinced that the first amendment should apply to you!
Because I don't agree with you? Asshole.
It is not your place to question fair use, fair use is a integral part of copyright law.
Two things. First, Bullshit, it's my place to question whatever I'd like to question. Second, I'm not saying Fair Use is bad/wrong/should go away. I'm questioning what should be considered fair use.
There are books still in circulation that were written 100 years ago, and until that is the case for optical disks, there simply _isn't any argument_ that they should not be copyable.
That's a rediculous argument that isn't backed up by law. Backups are allowed under law, but those reasons you came up with came straight out of your ass.
You obviously don't have children
I hate when people say that.
Are you implying that I wouldn't take a principled stance as soon as it was less convienient for me?
If you can't think of any good reason for the law the allow backups, perhaps you are not qualified to debate this since in order to debate something correctly you need to have a thorough understanding of BOTH sides of the matter, which you CLEARLY do not.
I didn't say I can't think of reasons... I said I don't think they're good reasons. If you'd like to present well reasond arguments, perhaps you can change my mind.
I just wanted to point out that there are serious holes in your logic and attempted to patch them up.
There are holes in your logic too. You don't own the content in your books anymore than you own the content on a CD. You have an implied license to that content plus some additional rights granted by law.
You've made a good argument for allowing format shifting, and I think that format shifting should be allowed. You have also made a good argument that backups are allowed. Again, I agree, they're allowed. But I still don't see a *good* reason to allow them.
It is time for a second Internet to come into action -- one that is voluntarily connected, one that is run over cabling (or satellite) connections that are not subsidized by any government regime. If we want it, it will happen, we just have to support the initial costs. These costs might be higher but in the long run they're lower because we won't be taxed to subsidize the costs.
I don't care much for the idea of regulating any speech -- broadcast or face-to-face. I don't see the Constitution giving the Federal government any power to regulate the airwaves (the interstate commerce clause was not meant to give the Feds power to tariff and tax, it was meant to give the Feds the power to prevent the individual states from tariffing and taxing interstate commerce).
If your goal is to have your packets routed end to end with no interference by any third party, such a thing already exists. It's called business class service. Nobody bothers you, you don't have ports blocked, you don't get your transfer rates capped, and it's just plain internet heaven. It costs about twice as much though, and almost nobody is willing to pay. If people aren't willing to spend a little more to maintain their liberty on the internet, what makes you think they'd be willing to pay a lot more to help build a new one?
You seem confused.
In both cases you are purchasing both a license and an object.
Sometimes the license is implied (books, CDs, most DVDs), and sometimes the license is explicit (software), but you are buying both in all cases.
This is NOT something we should let go. It maybe a dead horse now, but it's a horse that should never have been born in the first place.
You're right, of course, but if you're not going to drop it you could at least stop calling it something it's not...
We all knew that when the article originally said that the Sony spyware used root-kit technology that it would end up being called a root-kit, but that doesn't mean we should all give in and steadily erode the facts.
If you're going to take the moral high ground, make sure you're on the right road first. (Yes, that's a mixed metaphor).
I don't think I could have picked a less popular subject, however...
You don't get to make a backup of books, art, or other physical media that is non-electronic... Back when it was easy to have your electronic media easily destroyed at no fault to you, a backup exemption made sense. We no longer live in the age of VCRs eating tapes though, and on the rediculously rare (relative to tape eating) chance that your device does damage your disc, the player manufacturer should be responsible for procuring you a replacement. If, however, you roll over your favorite video game CD with your office chair (not I know anybody who has ever done that...), why should you have more right to a replacement than the guy who had his paperback fall out of his jacket pocket into the toilet on a bus (not that... well, you know)?
DRM should never prevent you from doing something with your media that would have otherwise been legal under copyright law, but I'm not convinced that there is a good reason for the law to allow backups.
I was kinda hoping that the PS3 would ship with no hard drive in any version. It would be nice if the harddrive was like memory cards were for PS2. It would be especially nice when the third party models started to come out. In the hard drive department, so far it seems to me that two out of three of the next gen players have already blown it.
If I preorder a PS3, I want the damn system. I do not want some crimpled gimp that requires future upgrades to act as the actual product I bought.
Hopefully you've learned a lesson about pre-ordering before the store can tell you exactly 'what and when'. Hopefully that will translate into stores learning their lesson when people start refusing to open their wallet early.
Or debunking rumors... Like the harddrive being required, but sold seperatly.
Still, I'd be happy if I didn't hear another thing about the PS3 until they had a list of launch titles and a price. I'm tired of console hype with no substance. If Sony pulls a Microsoft and is all hype and no substance right up until the last 3 days, this is going to be a long 7 months of purple slashdot dupes and fanboy flamewars.
My wife's flip phone has the camera in the earpiece section, and it measures a meager 6.3mm thick at that point.
Just thought I'd throw that in there since I happen to have the phone and a micrometer at arms length at the moment.
Wake me up when students realize they have it easy compared to people in the real world.
I'd kill to have a college schedule again.
I build my shelves 8 inches deep (Yes, build. All the shelves you buy these days are extra deep... Otherwise known as extra-space wasting) so that hard cover and reference books just reach the front of the shelves, and all the shelves are adjustable. If you space your holes right, you can have shelves that are perfect for either the typical hardcover, or the typical paperback. If you want to combine both on a shelf, what we typically do is stand up the ones that are shelf height and lie the others on their side. If most of the books are tall, the short ones are on their side, and the other way around... Truely large books are uncommon (let's face it. most geeks have a collection of fiction in paperback, trade paperback/comic book, and hardback sizes, and the O'Reilly sized books, but not much else.), and go elsewhere, like on top of the shelves.
If you use #2 pine, and you don't mind using the wall as a structural component (side-to-side stabalizing only, so you don't need the back) you can build attractive, if not plain looking set of shelves in about an hour if you take the time to build a shelf hole jig. As a bonus they only cost around $20.
WARNING: if you move, personally pack the library, or you will spend far more weekends than you would like alphabetizing books (and buying bookcases).
Heh... I moved a year ago, and we still haven't finished unpacking and re-sorting. Not only did friends and family just stuff thousands of books into boxes at random, but nothing is labeled. We don't have enough shelves at the new place yet for everything, and it's an adventure every time my wife is looking for something in particular we haven't unpacked yet.