No, the issue is more like the library deciding to sell copies of the books it carries, without the author or publisher's permission
But it's not like that at all since they aren't selling anything and, reading anything on the internet constitutes copying, anyone that places information on the internet knows or reasonably can be expected to know that, so the issue of redistribution doesn't really apply and one can't legitimately complain about copying since using http implies you want stuff to be copied.
So if you are going with the book analogy, it really is just like a library allowing people to come in and read books without the authors or publishers permission (with is just fine with physical books).
No its not, reading anything on the internet constitutes copying, anyone that places information on the internet knows or reasonably can be expected to know that, so the issue of redistribution doesn't really apply. So if you are going with a book analogy, it really is just like a library allowing people to come in and read books.
The problem with the internet is that you can't really compare it to books. On the internet, all access to material implies redistribution.
If you could compare it to books, you'd call the Way Back Machine a library and no one would complain, because you'd go to the library (the way back website) and view archieved versions of publically available content.. In the book world, there is nothing wrong with this. If Micheal Criton sells copies of Jurassic Park and then later decides to rerelease Jurassic Park with extra chapters, the old version doesn't go away and there is nothing to keep me from freely allowing you to read my copy. The problem with the real world is that people don't see it like that, they bitch and moan because someone copied their content to another place and is distributing it from there, totally ignoring the fact that basic usage of the internet relies on the fact that information must be copied before it can be viewed (and the concept of proxy servers and the various legitimate reasons for caching content).
There is nothing wrong with the way back machine, if people didn't want thing publically viewable forever, they shouldn't have put them on the internet. Things such as plays that people don't want to be totally publically available need to actually make their entries protected in someway instead of expecting everyone to notice or care about a little (C) that may or may not be valid.
I don't understand why people can't grasp that concept and also the concept of 'if you are going to put something out that publically viewable, you can't take it back'.. It'd dumb to whine about caches, if you put something out that is world viewable thats the risk you take.
there is such a thing as an implied contract or a non-verbal contract in American law at least, not sure about other countries.. business law 101 would clue you in on about the 3rd day.
yeh but delaware was the first to be pro business.. other states are catching up now but delaware was the first so it has a lot more.. its not like existing business are going to up and reincorporate in another state
if they can do it in 200k worth of code and still implement all of the rest of the standard features, they sure could. The device decodes mp3's in hardware, the firmware controls the software and UI, its most likely not possible to add decoders for other formats, a quick browsing of the faq at the rockbox site makes that pretty obvious.
thats not really a similar project at all considering its done by the company that produces the hardware and not an independant third party group producing firmware for a commercial device they did not manufactor and sell
Slashdot Mirror
Good thing that Denmark doesn't really matter in the grand scope of things :)
Cool ads if you can afford to wait for them.
Or if you can afford the $7 to see the movie..
is anyone other than the editor able to read that review? do people actually pay to read a site about fixin macs and such?
It almost seems like the big companies are doing everything they can to make Orwell's book "[i]Nineteen Eigthy-Four[/i]" come true.
You can just use numbers, Orwell did.
...until you need to buy pc modchips from shaddy overseas vendors just to accomplish the tasks we already take for granted.
Don't forget Mexico.. I think they were 51 not Puerto Rico..
No, the issue is more like the library deciding to sell copies of the books it carries, without the author or publisher's permission
But it's not like that at all since they aren't selling anything and, reading anything on the internet constitutes copying, anyone that places information on the internet knows or reasonably can be expected to know that, so the issue of redistribution doesn't really apply and one can't legitimately complain about copying since using http implies you want stuff to be copied.
So if you are going with the book analogy, it really is just like a library allowing people to come in and read books without the authors or publishers permission (with is just fine with physical books).
No its not, reading anything on the internet constitutes copying, anyone that places information on the internet knows or reasonably can be expected to know that, so the issue of redistribution doesn't really apply. So if you are going with a book analogy, it really is just like a library allowing people to come in and read books.
The problem with the internet is that you can't really compare it to books. On the internet, all access to material implies redistribution.
If you could compare it to books, you'd call the Way Back Machine a library and no one would complain, because you'd go to the library (the way back website) and view archieved versions of publically available content.. In the book world, there is nothing wrong with this. If Micheal Criton sells copies of Jurassic Park and then later decides to rerelease Jurassic Park with extra chapters, the old version doesn't go away and there is nothing to keep me from freely allowing you to read my copy. The problem with the real world is that people don't see it like that, they bitch and moan because someone copied their content to another place and is distributing it from there, totally ignoring the fact that basic usage of the internet relies on the fact that information must be copied before it can be viewed (and the concept of proxy servers and the various legitimate reasons for caching content).
There is nothing wrong with the way back machine, if people didn't want thing publically viewable forever, they shouldn't have put them on the internet. Things such as plays that people don't want to be totally publically available need to actually make their entries protected in someway instead of expecting everyone to notice or care about a little (C) that may or may not be valid.
Why would you want to have them removed if you posted them?
I don't understand why people can't grasp that concept and also the concept of 'if you are going to put something out that publically viewable, you can't take it back'.. It'd dumb to whine about caches, if you put something out that is world viewable thats the risk you take.
if they are going to allow snippets, they may as well relicense the entire aix os..
Glad to see its possible to get a real job even if you failed calculus 3 times.. perhaps there is hope for me yet.
Linux OS installed complete with scandisk and defrag
Kinda like Windows?
As I posted above, there is a way to turn on 30 second skip on a Tivo. Read about it in the Tivo FAQ [tivofaq.com].
so why redundantly post it again and brag about it?
*BZZZT!* Stupid..
there is such a thing as an implied contract or a non-verbal contract in American law at least, not sure about other countries.. business law 101 would clue you in on about the 3rd day.
i think /. ran a story a while back where people in canada or some place are suing to regulate those damn network id icons
yeh but delaware was the first to be pro business.. other states are catching up now but delaware was the first so it has a lot more .. its not like existing business are going to up and reincorporate in another state
if they can do it in 200k worth of code and still implement all of the rest of the standard features, they sure could. The device decodes mp3's in hardware, the firmware controls the software and UI, its most likely not possible to add decoders for other formats, a quick browsing of the faq at the rockbox site makes that pretty obvious.
not really, they don't show any intention on adding functionality to play any format other than mp3.
no, yes.
if you read all of the faq, not just the ogg part, they list several improvements to the ui they would like to improve
as the EULA is software and not hardware
EULA is End User License Agreement, anything can have a EULA
thats not really a similar project at all considering its done by the company that produces the hardware and not an independant third party group producing firmware for a commercial device they did not manufactor and sell
The short of it: mac.com, without MacSlash's knowledge, filtered as spam their domain renewal notice, and someone swiped the domain when it expired.
good reason not to use crappy webmail..