What about software patches? Is that a service provided for licensing the product, a fix of defective goods (like an auto safety recall), or a gesture of good will freely given to encourage additional/future purchases from the same creator?
No, actually I did watch to the entire Q&A (well listen anyway) it because it's something I'm interested in. But yeah, the speed of the information which I wanted was reminiscent of dialing into AOL at 2400 baud.
Transcripts would be nice. I come to Slashdot to read news which is a much faster form of direct information transfer than video. Now if there was other information which couldn't be conveyed well with words, then video is an appropriate format, but the relevent content here isn't about the coffee cup in the background or even what Ms. Sutton looks like. Even then, a quick sentence could describe the appearance of the interviewee and the t-shirt she sports if the modern school of journalism (draw in the reader with POV, socio-economic status, etc...) is to be followed.
Depends, if you pinch them or otherwise trigger it right - you can move up to the front of a very long line thus getting home sooner for more quality time where you don't have to explain the tabloid headlines or pictures;)
People do realize this is tongue-in-cheek, right? Well mostly...
"Silence, peon"?! Dude, think of the children! I mean seriously, think of the awesome power of this tool when used on children. Screaming in the back seat? Being asked a third time for candy before dinner? Grocery store tantrums that everyone notices? Not anymore!
This is probably the best parenting tool to come along since the willow reed or the TV!
On another note - this thing looks like it could be bypassed with the simple expedient of plugging your ears while speaking. If you wanted to get all technical with countermeasures, it'd be interesting to see what constructive interference does to mute the loud inconvenient person
... We should be hammering on politicians' doors night and day demanding to know why we are being forced to choose one over the other when there is plenty of interest, collective wealth, and expertise to accomplish both with style and panache.
Not through NASA's current bureaucracy, hardened silo's of project funding, and political ear-marked (aging)-infrastructure pork. What made NASA awesome was that the organization pulled a "moon-shot" (ahem) by unifying every aspect of their resources to a central mission (see the probably apocryphal story about the janitor and JFK - regardless of it's veracity, the mindset probably did exist in some fashion).
Indeed. I'm occasionally involved in clinical research and I've often thought there's not really any such thing as informed consent. Many processes are too advanced or complicated for a normal member of the demographic to understand. Sometimes you can't have informed consent because of the nature of research: "we're going to do [this], and we know it will impact [these] systems and are testing to see if it can do [that], but we can't tell you what we don't know yet about [other outcomes].
There is "you've been told something too complicated to understand"-consent, and "you've been told a little story that's a massive simplification of what's really going to happen"-consent, "let us rekindle that previously crushed hope with something that may or may not get you better"-consent, and of course "sign this paper which is too boring to read"-consent.
Now I'm all for clinical research, and I very much respect the volunteers I get in mine (and have even participated in others' research when I'm not involved in design or analysis). But sometimes I think informed consent is a misnomer required by IRBs to transfer some of the ethical responsibility of research off of their chest. Ultimately, the ethics of clinical research rest on the shoulders of the researcher. IRBs exist to keep the lemons out of the system. The FDA exists (among other reasons) because the IRBs don't always work (or exist), and then it's time to make lemonade. I do think it's critical to tell a volunteer about what might happen, but expecting fully informed and comprehending subjects is usually a false assumption.
Did you truly believe there are no new tricks to be learned as you upgrade your Windows?
What's up with all the people here who can't stand change or well tested improvement? (like the stats they run on data like button clicking, eye movement, etc...). Shouldn't a self-proclaimed technical elite be enthusiastic about change on a computational device, or are some of us hitting an early and disillusioned middle age from the tech crowd that started here in the late 90s?
...Granted, I'm still a keyboard user, but metro is actually making me think of using the mouse more.... on a desktop.
Metro is just a fullscreen start menu with large icons (ie. BIG hit targets). It's actually a good direction, and the desktop will always be there for us who use WIMP interface suitable to large displays.
Dude the mouse is so last century, and this whole thing with touching and smudging a screen is lame-o tech like hand cranking an engine - what MS wants people to do is really Kinect with their computers
But yeah - the bits of 8 that I've seen don't look bad at all. I just wish more people would connect the dots and follow the rabbit hole, I expect the future to be quite the wonderland; presuming IP law doesn't make it shrivel up and die anyway.
Presenting advanced features in a context specific UI is definitely worth the slight headache of learning something new - besides what else are you supposed to do? Shout "get off my lawn" and tell old stories about the vi-macs war?
I'm actually quite fond of the ribbon interface. Sure it wasn't what I learned on, but anything common was still keyboard navigation and =COMMAND (or VB work), the ability to have a pull down menu which would select and present options for specific figure modifications (just try modifying/deleting horizontal error bars when the scale wasn't convenient for the default values using 2003). It's a shame they didn't get the ribbon setup simultaneously launched for the entire suite (e.g. Project '07 was old style).
In both cases 95 and 98 were massive improvements over the prior edition, IE6 was the winning shot of the browser war (and nobody likes the compromises war brings), and zune was just a mp3 player - so what if it didn't go viral? (You will note I did not discuss ME)
Not at all. Despite your logical fallacy (ad hominem) I will attempt to clarify that specific point of my discussion: potential person-miles is often not an accurate representation for a vehicle's average person-miles. Thus one should be cautious when using potential person-miles to rate the environmental aspects of a vehicle. It has been my observation, on the roads that I frequent, that there is a statistical difference between certain vehicle types and the fraction of occupied seats. (Some generalizations of this might follow a pattern like: dedicated commuter vehicles are high, public transit off peak hours are low, family vehicles are moderate, SUV's are low, working trucks are moderate, economy cars are low, etc...).
Sounds like you're one of the rare minorities who use the vehicle for its designed purpose. I used to be in that category, but work took me to the city and so I eventually replaced the thing with a sedan (a newer Subaru Legacy - which has the best handling in snow for any vehicle that I've ever driven (well traditional street legal anyway). Clearance is the only issue, but it has a good skid plate and with careful control over one's momentum...). I wish I lived closer to the fun places (i.e. those with a significantly lower population density).
My commuter van does 15 adults w/ work gear @ 13.2 MPG (and doesn't change much depending on load, lights, A/C, or traffic speed; probably unlike the CX-5). That works out to 192 person-miles per gallon (0.005 gallons per person-mile) at full person load. It's also much closer to passenger capacity than any SUV (or hybrid, electric, or alternate fuel vehicle) than I see on the road during commute or non-commuter times.
35 MPG is pretty awesome for a SUV, but the simple fact is that most purchases of this vehicle type are a mistake if you base the decision on actual vehicle usage (even a typical person's winter driving would be better done in a Subaru hatchback, sedan, or wagon; and wagons and minivans do better MPG and cargo). The main advantage of SUV's are their clearance - even the mass is only a tradeoff between the kinetic advantage in a two car and the high center leading to single car accidents. Now SUV's are awesome for their niche, but they are almost exclusively used outside of that niche when another vehicle would have been a better choice. If someone wants to make an environmentally influenced vehicle decision they should shoot for the lightest mass, most fuel efficient, vehicle which provides for their year round driving needs that does not have a massive battery and has been produced in a zero-landfill facility.
If safety is a concern, one should look at the probability of accident type for their driving environment (single car, rear ending, etc...) and make sure to pick the higher ratings from the crash testing, while not forgetting that those ratings are for in-class vehicles. For the most part adding mass is the number one safety feature (in the US auto-demographic) and is directly in conflict with environmental considerations.
You think they don't make a profit off of these charter schools?
Well, the NewSchools Venture Fund certainly doesn't. AFAIK they're a non-profit and give grants, not loans.
You made some good points. In the area of these additional charges, I'd just like to add that these "fees" may drive parent interaction with their children more than the mere inconvenience of arranging backup transportation (in a public transit rich area). A parent's responsibility doesn't end with food and shelter, but by and far most seem to completely abdicate responsibility for education to the state. I assume that the parents in this case are already marginally involved in their children's education as a charter school is involved, that at least should be applauded. This may mean that these parents will be even more encouraged to intercede with the education process as they will want to make sure the school does not become unaffordable through payment of the additional detention services.
... As a consequence I believe they cannot be trusted with firearms and therefore ought to lose that privilege (i.e. their gun license).
And what license would that be? And what privilege are you referring to? In the US one generally does not need a license to own certain weapons (particularly hunting rifles/shotguns), and the reason for this is the constitutional amendment explicitly affirming the right of a citizen to be in possession of weapons. As long as these persons were not disenfranchised by the courts (i.e. certain levels of criminal conviction), they no more need a license to own these weapons than they do for cellular respiration.
Now you could have suggested there be a citation for vandalism, destruction of property, discharge of a firearm w/in a certain distance of a public road, or suggested a mandatory re-education in hunter's safety, forfeiture of hunting licenses (if either of the previous two applied, which considering the group it is likely) and given your interpretation of just cause.
Now if you are from another country I can understand how a different background in what constitutes a citizen's rights could lead to your confusion here, but if you wish to have truly meaningful comments I'd suggest you try to understand the context first. If you are a US citizen, then I suggest some remedial education in: citizen rights, the US Constitution, and how to present an intelligible argument.
Please note that I have not taken any position on the actual events described in this article, just great exception to the implicit assumptions in your subtext.
The link you should have provided is either to Human and Experimental Toxicology or pubmed. Copyright infringement is just plain stupid when there's already a free, legitimate, and superior source.
These guys have a strong statistical link (remember correlation does not imply causation) when they look at the data in certain ways. They thought about possible biases and commented upon them, such as:
Ecological bias occurs when relationships among individuals are inferred from similar relationships observed among groups (or nations). Although most of the nations in this study had 90%–99% of their infants fully vaccinated, without additional data we do not know whether it is the vaccinated or unvaccinated infants who are dying in infancy at higher rates.
Now they give some reasons why possible ecological bias should be discounted, but this paper is certainly not a proof of any kind. What it does do is ask some tough questions that require direct research. They do not address a number of other variables between the US and Europe (and other lower IMR countries). We need to look into this further, but it is no reason to suspend our current immunization scheme as it is. If a parent is overly concerned they can elect to wait an extra six months or so for the regimen.
Bad batches are pulled the moment they are reported (and they're tracked with a very stringent eye). In the case of a bad batch, there is no research that you could do that your doctor could not do better (such as being on a traceability notification list). If you think your doctor so negligent to miss something like a vaccine recall, you should have already found a different person to trust much riskier life preserving decisions with.
In the few cases of extreme adverse reaction the personal devastation to family and friends can be huge, but the simple fact is that there would be thousands (or more) of funerals having even greater impact on family and friends if the flu shot were not available. I'm very sorry for your mother's friend, but hopefully the community pulled together to support her, and if not, hopefully she lived in a region like the USA where everyone supports funding for those injured by vaccines (taxes, federal and corporate programs). She took one for the rest of us and deserves honor and respect.
I think it's reasonable to ask someone to take that one in ten million shot for their own sake and that of others (in fact you could argue that someone in health care is negligent if they don't receive their vaccines). I do it, and I put my kids through it. I think that without a known and verified reason (such as allergic reaction) it should be considered child abuse to not get your children immunized (as well as a crime against the neighbors). I would love to start seeing parents tried for manslaughter if their non-immunized child is suspected as a vector for someone's death from that disease (conviction will require proof of vector, but there needs to be an investigation, and prosecution if there is probable cause). Cowardice to face infinitesimal risk for your own family and by that action (or actively decided inaction) throwing the vulnerable minority to chance's whim is utterly despicable. It's comparable to burning the stranger in town for witchcraft; we need to move beyond that.
The problems will come with the violation digital goods make of the second law - devaluation through use.
We've already seen examples of publishers changing license agreements with libraries, forcing them to only loan a book 20 some odd times before required deletion. If a publisher only sells digital goods with DRM, then you must abide by their terms because circumvention of DRM is still illegal.
For example, you buy a book (electronic) from Amazon or Barnes and Noble and it's linked to your account/device. You can't get it off of your device without breaking DRM (not in a useful format for sale anyway) and they are under no obligation to remove the DRM for you. In fact they are likely under obligation (from the publishers) to not allow ownership transfer, more than a single loan (for the life of the book), and etc...
This court case will not solve the vendor/publisher lock in via DRM. It will instead take a separate court case (perhaps class action) in which a judge forces ownership transfer to be built into DRM schemes (if ruling in favor of the content purchaser even occurs at all). If this ever happens you can count on the publishers at least (maybe not the distributors) to be poor losers, likely opting for a difficult method (perhaps online-active-at-all-times only). The best way to combat this is if license transfer/management gets built into international standard (e.g. part of epub, or a general ISO or IEEE standard license transfer scheme). It may take followup lawsuits to force a poor loser into the standard method, but if they aren't there to start with we'll get stuck with the other.
I think chromeronin is talking about the server side of iTunes - which I believe allows a user to redownload previously purchased music. (e.g. they keep a list of licenses for you). The trick is that iTunes probably doesn't have any system for user notification of license transfer built in. DRM music will likely be impossible to sell without violating the DMCA.
Slashdot Mirror
What about software patches? Is that a service provided for licensing the product, a fix of defective goods (like an auto safety recall), or a gesture of good will freely given to encourage additional/future purchases from the same creator?
That depends - do you have to only pay once, like cement bricks from the mafia, or is it a recurring cost like taxes?
Do you happen to work for Uncle Enzo? Because you are truly the Deliverator!
Thanks
No, actually I did watch to the entire Q&A (well listen anyway) it because it's something I'm interested in. But yeah, the speed of the information which I wanted was reminiscent of dialing into AOL at 2400 baud.
Transcripts would be nice. I come to Slashdot to read news which is a much faster form of direct information transfer than video. Now if there was other information which couldn't be conveyed well with words, then video is an appropriate format, but the relevent content here isn't about the coffee cup in the background or even what Ms. Sutton looks like. Even then, a quick sentence could describe the appearance of the interviewee and the t-shirt she sports if the modern school of journalism (draw in the reader with POV, socio-economic status, etc...) is to be followed.
Depends, if you pinch them or otherwise trigger it right - you can move up to the front of a very long line thus getting home sooner for more quality time where you don't have to explain the tabloid headlines or pictures ;)
People do realize this is tongue-in-cheek, right? Well mostly...
"Silence, peon"?! Dude, think of the children! I mean seriously, think of the awesome power of this tool when used on children. Screaming in the back seat? Being asked a third time for candy before dinner? Grocery store tantrums that everyone notices? Not anymore!
This is probably the best parenting tool to come along since the willow reed or the TV!
On another note - this thing looks like it could be bypassed with the simple expedient of plugging your ears while speaking. If you wanted to get all technical with countermeasures, it'd be interesting to see what constructive interference does to mute the loud inconvenient person
... We should be hammering on politicians' doors night and day demanding to know why we are being forced to choose one over the other when there is plenty of interest, collective wealth, and expertise to accomplish both with style and panache.
Not through NASA's current bureaucracy, hardened silo's of project funding, and political ear-marked (aging)-infrastructure pork. What made NASA awesome was that the organization pulled a "moon-shot" (ahem) by unifying every aspect of their resources to a central mission (see the probably apocryphal story about the janitor and JFK - regardless of it's veracity, the mindset probably did exist in some fashion).
Indeed. I'm occasionally involved in clinical research and I've often thought there's not really any such thing as informed consent. Many processes are too advanced or complicated for a normal member of the demographic to understand. Sometimes you can't have informed consent because of the nature of research: "we're going to do [this], and we know it will impact [these] systems and are testing to see if it can do [that], but we can't tell you what we don't know yet about [other outcomes].
There is "you've been told something too complicated to understand"-consent, and "you've been told a little story that's a massive simplification of what's really going to happen"-consent, "let us rekindle that previously crushed hope with something that may or may not get you better"-consent, and of course "sign this paper which is too boring to read"-consent.
Now I'm all for clinical research, and I very much respect the volunteers I get in mine (and have even participated in others' research when I'm not involved in design or analysis). But sometimes I think informed consent is a misnomer required by IRBs to transfer some of the ethical responsibility of research off of their chest. Ultimately, the ethics of clinical research rest on the shoulders of the researcher. IRBs exist to keep the lemons out of the system. The FDA exists (among other reasons) because the IRBs don't always work (or exist), and then it's time to make lemonade. I do think it's critical to tell a volunteer about what might happen, but expecting fully informed and comprehending subjects is usually a false assumption.
Hip hip hooray!
Did you truly believe there are no new tricks to be learned as you upgrade your Windows?
What's up with all the people here who can't stand change or well tested improvement? (like the stats they run on data like button clicking, eye movement, etc...). Shouldn't a self-proclaimed technical elite be enthusiastic about change on a computational device, or are some of us hitting an early and disillusioned middle age from the tech crowd that started here in the late 90s?
...Granted, I'm still a keyboard user, but metro is actually making me think of using the mouse more.... on a desktop.
Metro is just a fullscreen start menu with large icons (ie. BIG hit targets). It's actually a good direction, and the desktop will always be there for us who use WIMP interface suitable to large displays.
Dude the mouse is so last century, and this whole thing with touching and smudging a screen is lame-o tech like hand cranking an engine - what MS wants people to do is really Kinect with their computers
But yeah - the bits of 8 that I've seen don't look bad at all. I just wish more people would connect the dots and follow the rabbit hole, I expect the future to be quite the wonderland; presuming IP law doesn't make it shrivel up and die anyway.
Presenting advanced features in a context specific UI is definitely worth the slight headache of learning something new - besides what else are you supposed to do? Shout "get off my lawn" and tell old stories about the vi-macs war?
I'm actually quite fond of the ribbon interface. Sure it wasn't what I learned on, but anything common was still keyboard navigation and =COMMAND (or VB work), the ability to have a pull down menu which would select and present options for specific figure modifications (just try modifying/deleting horizontal error bars when the scale wasn't convenient for the default values using 2003). It's a shame they didn't get the ribbon setup simultaneously launched for the entire suite (e.g. Project '07 was old style).
In both cases 95 and 98 were massive improvements over the prior edition, IE6 was the winning shot of the browser war (and nobody likes the compromises war brings), and zune was just a mp3 player - so what if it didn't go viral? (You will note I did not discuss ME)
It's like trying to get someone to date your sister by saying "her personality has been improving".
You nearly made me spit the water out of my mouth! Well said.
Not at all. Despite your logical fallacy (ad hominem) I will attempt to clarify that specific point of my discussion: potential person-miles is often not an accurate representation for a vehicle's average person-miles. Thus one should be cautious when using potential person-miles to rate the environmental aspects of a vehicle. It has been my observation, on the roads that I frequent, that there is a statistical difference between certain vehicle types and the fraction of occupied seats. (Some generalizations of this might follow a pattern like: dedicated commuter vehicles are high, public transit off peak hours are low, family vehicles are moderate, SUV's are low, working trucks are moderate, economy cars are low, etc...).
Sounds like you're one of the rare minorities who use the vehicle for its designed purpose. I used to be in that category, but work took me to the city and so I eventually replaced the thing with a sedan (a newer Subaru Legacy - which has the best handling in snow for any vehicle that I've ever driven (well traditional street legal anyway). Clearance is the only issue, but it has a good skid plate and with careful control over one's momentum...). I wish I lived closer to the fun places (i.e. those with a significantly lower population density).
... Oh, and if you don't have a Warn winch, you're just posing....
Forget the winch, most of them still have new paint on the hitch, and that's the SUV owners who even have one installed.
My commuter van does 15 adults w/ work gear @ 13.2 MPG (and doesn't change much depending on load, lights, A/C, or traffic speed; probably unlike the CX-5). That works out to 192 person-miles per gallon (0.005 gallons per person-mile) at full person load. It's also much closer to passenger capacity than any SUV (or hybrid, electric, or alternate fuel vehicle) than I see on the road during commute or non-commuter times.
35 MPG is pretty awesome for a SUV, but the simple fact is that most purchases of this vehicle type are a mistake if you base the decision on actual vehicle usage (even a typical person's winter driving would be better done in a Subaru hatchback, sedan, or wagon; and wagons and minivans do better MPG and cargo). The main advantage of SUV's are their clearance - even the mass is only a tradeoff between the kinetic advantage in a two car and the high center leading to single car accidents. Now SUV's are awesome for their niche, but they are almost exclusively used outside of that niche when another vehicle would have been a better choice. If someone wants to make an environmentally influenced vehicle decision they should shoot for the lightest mass, most fuel efficient, vehicle which provides for their year round driving needs that does not have a massive battery and has been produced in a zero-landfill facility.
If safety is a concern, one should look at the probability of accident type for their driving environment (single car, rear ending, etc...) and make sure to pick the higher ratings from the crash testing, while not forgetting that those ratings are for in-class vehicles. For the most part adding mass is the number one safety feature (in the US auto-demographic) and is directly in conflict with environmental considerations.
You think they don't make a profit off of these charter schools?
Well, the NewSchools Venture Fund certainly doesn't. AFAIK they're a non-profit and give grants, not loans.
You made some good points. In the area of these additional charges, I'd just like to add that these "fees" may drive parent interaction with their children more than the mere inconvenience of arranging backup transportation (in a public transit rich area). A parent's responsibility doesn't end with food and shelter, but by and far most seem to completely abdicate responsibility for education to the state. I assume that the parents in this case are already marginally involved in their children's education as a charter school is involved, that at least should be applauded. This may mean that these parents will be even more encouraged to intercede with the education process as they will want to make sure the school does not become unaffordable through payment of the additional detention services.
... As a consequence I believe they cannot be trusted with firearms and therefore ought to lose that privilege (i.e. their gun license).
And what license would that be? And what privilege are you referring to? In the US one generally does not need a license to own certain weapons (particularly hunting rifles/shotguns), and the reason for this is the constitutional amendment explicitly affirming the right of a citizen to be in possession of weapons. As long as these persons were not disenfranchised by the courts (i.e. certain levels of criminal conviction), they no more need a license to own these weapons than they do for cellular respiration.
Now you could have suggested there be a citation for vandalism, destruction of property, discharge of a firearm w/in a certain distance of a public road, or suggested a mandatory re-education in hunter's safety, forfeiture of hunting licenses (if either of the previous two applied, which considering the group it is likely) and given your interpretation of just cause.
Now if you are from another country I can understand how a different background in what constitutes a citizen's rights could lead to your confusion here, but if you wish to have truly meaningful comments I'd suggest you try to understand the context first. If you are a US citizen, then I suggest some remedial education in: citizen rights, the US Constitution, and how to present an intelligible argument.
Please note that I have not taken any position on the actual events described in this article, just great exception to the implicit assumptions in your subtext.
The link you should have provided is either to Human and Experimental Toxicology or pubmed. Copyright infringement is just plain stupid when there's already a free, legitimate, and superior source.
These guys have a strong statistical link (remember correlation does not imply causation) when they look at the data in certain ways. They thought about possible biases and commented upon them, such as:
Now they give some reasons why possible ecological bias should be discounted, but this paper is certainly not a proof of any kind. What it does do is ask some tough questions that require direct research. They do not address a number of other variables between the US and Europe (and other lower IMR countries). We need to look into this further, but it is no reason to suspend our current immunization scheme as it is. If a parent is overly concerned they can elect to wait an extra six months or so for the regimen.
Bad batches are pulled the moment they are reported (and they're tracked with a very stringent eye). In the case of a bad batch, there is no research that you could do that your doctor could not do better (such as being on a traceability notification list). If you think your doctor so negligent to miss something like a vaccine recall, you should have already found a different person to trust much riskier life preserving decisions with.
In the few cases of extreme adverse reaction the personal devastation to family and friends can be huge, but the simple fact is that there would be thousands (or more) of funerals having even greater impact on family and friends if the flu shot were not available. I'm very sorry for your mother's friend, but hopefully the community pulled together to support her, and if not, hopefully she lived in a region like the USA where everyone supports funding for those injured by vaccines (taxes, federal and corporate programs). She took one for the rest of us and deserves honor and respect.
I think it's reasonable to ask someone to take that one in ten million shot for their own sake and that of others (in fact you could argue that someone in health care is negligent if they don't receive their vaccines). I do it, and I put my kids through it. I think that without a known and verified reason (such as allergic reaction) it should be considered child abuse to not get your children immunized (as well as a crime against the neighbors). I would love to start seeing parents tried for manslaughter if their non-immunized child is suspected as a vector for someone's death from that disease (conviction will require proof of vector, but there needs to be an investigation, and prosecution if there is probable cause). Cowardice to face infinitesimal risk for your own family and by that action (or actively decided inaction) throwing the vulnerable minority to chance's whim is utterly despicable. It's comparable to burning the stranger in town for witchcraft; we need to move beyond that.
In HTML that's: GGGGGG, right? (What, can't do septadecimal for the augmented minority)?
The problems will come with the violation digital goods make of the second law - devaluation through use.
We've already seen examples of publishers changing license agreements with libraries, forcing them to only loan a book 20 some odd times before required deletion. If a publisher only sells digital goods with DRM, then you must abide by their terms because circumvention of DRM is still illegal.
For example, you buy a book (electronic) from Amazon or Barnes and Noble and it's linked to your account/device. You can't get it off of your device without breaking DRM (not in a useful format for sale anyway) and they are under no obligation to remove the DRM for you. In fact they are likely under obligation (from the publishers) to not allow ownership transfer, more than a single loan (for the life of the book), and etc...
This court case will not solve the vendor/publisher lock in via DRM. It will instead take a separate court case (perhaps class action) in which a judge forces ownership transfer to be built into DRM schemes (if ruling in favor of the content purchaser even occurs at all). If this ever happens you can count on the publishers at least (maybe not the distributors) to be poor losers, likely opting for a difficult method (perhaps online-active-at-all-times only). The best way to combat this is if license transfer/management gets built into international standard (e.g. part of epub, or a general ISO or IEEE standard license transfer scheme). It may take followup lawsuits to force a poor loser into the standard method, but if they aren't there to start with we'll get stuck with the other.
I think chromeronin is talking about the server side of iTunes - which I believe allows a user to redownload previously purchased music. (e.g. they keep a list of licenses for you). The trick is that iTunes probably doesn't have any system for user notification of license transfer built in. DRM music will likely be impossible to sell without violating the DMCA.
You'd avoid shutdown by sales tax if you merely loan.