Because otherwise the knowledge would be locked away as a trade secret and nobody else would be able to benefit from it, even indirectly. And there wouldn't be any clause causing it to expire either. So yes, a patent does increase freedom. That's the whole point of them.
Patented IP can't be used without the permission of the patent holder. However, a trade secret CAN be used by anyone provided they don't use illegal means to discover that trade secret (i.e. they can do their own R&D).
Patents only increase this so-called "freedom" AFTER they expire. In the meantime, they do nothing of the sort (unless they allow the free use of the IP by everyone, in which case the patent is irrelevant).
What if you don't directly link to the site, but instead use some sort of proxy (i.e. Akamai)?? For example:
      http://a1.g.akamaitech.net/6/6/6/6/www.yahoo.com/ Technically, you're no longer linking to the site. You're linking to Akamai (so does this make Akamai's services illegal, since they are now dynamically mirroring the content?).
Or, what if you don't actually use a link, but instead type the URL in plain text?
      http://www.yahoo.com
I've heard the argument made that this is analogous to personally transporting someone to a location to buy crack vs. just telling that person where it is available.
His reply "Well - sony has a large interest in the media industry and they are worried about protecting their property - they wont even sell CDRs in their PCs because of this".
Did you even bother to verify that statement? Apparently not, because a simple check at sony.com shows that all of their desktop PC models can be ordered with CD-RW drives directly from Sony.
"IMO, Republicans ought to continue the staredown with democrats until they start repealing their own legislation. Make the basterds squirm and swallow their own bullshit pride. As for the populations without power? Well, at least they'll learn what voting for liberals results in (stone age living) and will know better and teach their kids better in the future."
You want the Democrats to "swallow their own bullshit pride", yet at the same time you want the Republicans to "continue the staredown" for no other reason than to teach people a lesson. Sounds like Democrats aren't the only ones who need a lesson in swallowing pride.
I actually thought you had a good post going until you turned it into a trollish political diatribe.
If the OS only checks for authentication with a clearinghouse once to "activate" the OS, what's to prevent ghosting?
One person will install the software, authenticate, and then create a ghost image. From there, people will just distribute the ghost image instead of an actual copy of the CD (well, maybe *with* a copy of the CD).
And if they decide to make it check periodically? Pfft. For "home users", either someone will create a "crack" for it so that it won't check anymore, or they'll trick the system into thinking it authenticated correctly. And actual business users? I doubt they'll embrace an OS that won't run on "secure" machines (i.e. not connected to the outside world -- I know my work has several NT servers that have no outside access).
I also did NOT receive this email, however I went and checked my preferences at Ebay "just in case". Lo and behold, the fact that I didn't get the email is irrelevant, because all of my preferences have been reset.
I would suggest that everyone who is registered with Ebay check their preferences "just in case", as the absense of the email does not necessarily mean that your preferences were not changed.
What's to prevent just any site from putting these tags in their pages, or POPUPS? It's bad enough now with sites using popups, now we'll have to deal with popups that you have to pay for.
And even if the user has some way of preventing surreptitious loading of said "tagged" popups, that doesn't mean his neighbor will when he goes surfing through all of those porn/warez pages.
According to the article: "HDTV-compatible recorders will refuse to tape movies, shows and sports events that have a 'don't copy' bit set."
What you're suggesting is completely contrary to what that quote says. Regardless of the ability to transfer the data from one device to another, this says you will never be able to record the signal to the device in the first place. This makes no mention of "internal medium" vs. removeable, instead the device just will not record.
"On the other hand the consumer is paying for the content on the cable stations (ehhh, somewhat), and since it's not broadcasted freely to everyone, there is need to copyright protection."
Apparently, I see that a little differently than you do. From my understanding, this means no copying at all of material with the copy bit set, effectively preventing time-shifting at all. If I'm paying for premium content, shouldn't I have the ability (or right?) to time-shift that content? Why can I time-shift content that I don't pay for, but I can't time-shift content that I'm explicitly paying for every month?
It's the content that I'm paying for that I don't want to miss, and therefore it's that content that most needs to be time-shifted.
Yes, but you do have the right to walk down the street and peer into windows.
So I guess you've never heard of "peeping toms" being arrested? Where I live, "peeping toms" are not sued (as you say later in your comment), they are arrested.
You have the right to walk up to their door and even try the lock. You can even carry a crowbar while doing it if you wish.
Damn, I'd hate to live where you live, because that's certainly not the case where I live. I had a neighbor that was arrested for almost exactly what you describe (well, he was arrested 3 times actually, once he was caught in the act by another neighbor, once he was caught by someone who happened at home at the house he was trying to break into, and the other for successfully breaking in (they suspected him because of his 2 previous attempts in the same area)).
If a policeman notices you acting suspiciously and want to catch you (as opposed to just stopping you), he will watch you and catch you with the good after you left the premises.
That's because as long as there's no life at stake, it's better to get as much evidence as you can against the perpetrator. That, and actually making sure the person is committing a crime, instead of taking the chance of "jumping the gun".
Notice, that store security doesn't stop shoplifters until after they've left the store. Until they cross the threshold, they are not shoplifting. They may have the intent, but they haven't yet committed the crime.
This analogy doesn't even fit in this discussion. It's perfectly legal to walk around a store with an item prior to paying for it. The crime comes when you leave the store with that item without paying for it. By your use of this analogy, it would be legal to break into someone's home, as long as you didn't steal anything or harm someone (which is definitely not the case).
While I agree with your ultimate statement that port-scanning should not be illegal, your use of analogies in getting to that end statement is flawed at best.
Like I said, personally, I don't think there's much wrong with port-scanning. It's a tool that can be used for both legitimate and criminal purposes. But you can't ban something just because it COULD be used for a criminal purpose (running over someone with a car is definitely a crime, but we don't outlaw cars). As long as a tool has a legitimate purpose, then it's existence is justified.
On the other hand, IF companies were to offer older music/new media at a cheaper price to those who already owned it (or whatever scheme you come up with), there would be far less incentive for those companies to actually bring the old material to the new medium. If they don't think they can make a ton of money by re-releasing the content on the new media, they'll never do it.
As a consumer, I'd love to pay lower prices for that material, but realistically you also wouldn't have much material to buy, since most of it would never get re-released.
An excellent Dune resource is the Dune Encyclopedia. It has a tremendous amount of back history, and covers everything before the last couple of books.
Unfortunately, I've found it to be extremely rare (it's been out of print since the late 80's, and didn't have a very large print run to begin with). I managed to get a copy find a copy in excellent condition at a garage sale for less than $20, but you'll be hard pressed to find it for less than $100 in even mediocre condition. I would give more information about it (ISBN, etc.), but I'm at work at the moment and don't have it on hand (does anyone read/. from home?).
If you can find this book, it's a must-have for any Dune addict. (Hemos, if you don't have this one, you owe it to yourself to find it)
Now drives are cheap and large. I expect the same to happen with memory . ..
Actually, based on the recent Rambus dealings, it's very likely that RAM prices will go up, not down. Assuming this technology can do what they claim (conceivable), and not have an impact on performance (highly doubtful), this could seriously lessen the impact of Rambus's patent squablings on the end user's wallet.
Third, they will slaughter all the other messaging services except for ICQ, and even ICQ is going to hurt a little. Having the biggest installed base counts for more than having the broadest featureset.
Slashdot Mirror
Since 32X is the fastest CDwriter available today . . .
Just wanted to mention the fact that Plextor actually recently released a 40x CD-RW drive, info on which can be found here.
Because otherwise the knowledge would be locked away as a trade secret and nobody else would be able to benefit from it, even indirectly. And there wouldn't be any clause causing it to expire either. So yes, a patent does increase freedom. That's the whole point of them.
Patented IP can't be used without the permission of the patent holder. However, a trade secret CAN be used by anyone provided they don't use illegal means to discover that trade secret (i.e. they can do their own R&D).
Patents only increase this so-called "freedom" AFTER they expire. In the meantime, they do nothing of the sort (unless they allow the free use of the IP by everyone, in which case the patent is irrelevant).
What if you don't directly link to the site, but instead use some sort of proxy (i.e. Akamai)?? For example:
      http://a1.g.akamaitech.net/6/6/6/6/www.yahoo.com/
Technically, you're no longer linking to the site. You're linking to Akamai (so does this make Akamai's services illegal, since they are now dynamically mirroring the content?).
Or, what if you don't actually use a link, but instead type the URL in plain text?
      http://www.yahoo.com
I've heard the argument made that this is analogous to personally transporting someone to a location to buy crack vs. just telling that person where it is available.
His reply "Well - sony has a large interest in the media industry and they are worried about protecting their property - they wont even sell CDRs in their PCs because of this".
Did you even bother to verify that statement? Apparently not, because a simple check at sony.com shows that all of their desktop PC models can be ordered with CD-RW drives directly from Sony.
"IMO, Republicans ought to continue the staredown with democrats until they start repealing their own legislation. Make the basterds squirm and swallow their own bullshit pride. As for the populations without power? Well, at least they'll learn what voting for liberals results in (stone age living) and will know better and teach their kids better in the future."
You want the Democrats to "swallow their own bullshit pride", yet at the same time you want the Republicans to "continue the staredown" for no other reason than to teach people a lesson. Sounds like Democrats aren't the only ones who need a lesson in swallowing pride.
I actually thought you had a good post going until you turned it into a trollish political diatribe.
If the OS only checks for authentication with a clearinghouse once to "activate" the OS, what's to prevent ghosting?
One person will install the software, authenticate, and then create a ghost image. From there, people will just distribute the ghost image instead of an actual copy of the CD (well, maybe *with* a copy of the CD).
And if they decide to make it check periodically? Pfft. For "home users", either someone will create a "crack" for it so that it won't check anymore, or they'll trick the system into thinking it authenticated correctly. And actual business users? I doubt they'll embrace an OS that won't run on "secure" machines (i.e. not connected to the outside world -- I know my work has several NT servers that have no outside access).
I also did NOT receive this email, however I went and checked my preferences at Ebay "just in case". Lo and behold, the fact that I didn't get the email is irrelevant, because all of my preferences have been reset.
I would suggest that everyone who is registered with Ebay check their preferences "just in case", as the absense of the email does not necessarily mean that your preferences were not changed.
What's to prevent just any site from putting these tags in their pages, or POPUPS? It's bad enough now with sites using popups, now we'll have to deal with popups that you have to pay for.
And even if the user has some way of preventing surreptitious loading of said "tagged" popups, that doesn't mean his neighbor will when he goes surfing through all of those porn/warez pages.
According to the article: "HDTV-compatible recorders will refuse to tape movies, shows and sports events that have a 'don't copy' bit set."
What you're suggesting is completely contrary to what that quote says. Regardless of the ability to transfer the data from one device to another, this says you will never be able to record the signal to the device in the first place. This makes no mention of "internal medium" vs. removeable, instead the device just will not record.
"On the other hand the consumer is paying for the content on the cable stations (ehhh, somewhat), and since it's not broadcasted freely to everyone, there is need to copyright protection."
Apparently, I see that a little differently than you do. From my understanding, this means no copying at all of material with the copy bit set, effectively preventing time-shifting at all. If I'm paying for premium content, shouldn't I have the ability (or right?) to time-shift that content? Why can I time-shift content that I don't pay for, but I can't time-shift content that I'm explicitly paying for every month?
It's the content that I'm paying for that I don't want to miss, and therefore it's that content that most needs to be time-shifted.
Yes, but you do have the right to walk down the street and peer into windows.
So I guess you've never heard of "peeping toms" being arrested? Where I live, "peeping toms" are not sued (as you say later in your comment), they are arrested.
You have the right to walk up to their door and even try the lock. You can even carry a crowbar while doing it if you wish.
Damn, I'd hate to live where you live, because that's certainly not the case where I live. I had a neighbor that was arrested for almost exactly what you describe (well, he was arrested 3 times actually, once he was caught in the act by another neighbor, once he was caught by someone who happened at home at the house he was trying to break into, and the other for successfully breaking in (they suspected him because of his 2 previous attempts in the same area)).
If a policeman notices you acting suspiciously and want to catch you (as opposed to just stopping you), he will watch you and catch you with the good after you left the premises.
That's because as long as there's no life at stake, it's better to get as much evidence as you can against the perpetrator. That, and actually making sure the person is committing a crime, instead of taking the chance of "jumping the gun".
Notice, that store security doesn't stop shoplifters until after they've left the store. Until they cross the threshold, they are not shoplifting. They may have the intent, but they haven't yet committed the crime.
This analogy doesn't even fit in this discussion. It's perfectly legal to walk around a store with an item prior to paying for it. The crime comes when you leave the store with that item without paying for it. By your use of this analogy, it would be legal to break into someone's home, as long as you didn't steal anything or harm someone (which is definitely not the case).
While I agree with your ultimate statement that port-scanning should not be illegal, your use of analogies in getting to that end statement is flawed at best.
Like I said, personally, I don't think there's much wrong with port-scanning. It's a tool that can be used for both legitimate and criminal purposes. But you can't ban something just because it COULD be used for a criminal purpose (running over someone with a car is definitely a crime, but we don't outlaw cars). As long as a tool has a legitimate purpose, then it's existence is justified.
Voodoo5 for $299.99? Shop around.
2 47 918&hdwt=31001
Buy.com has them for $175.95:
http://www.us.buy.com/retail/product.asp?sku=10
"Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."
Seems to me like France is trying way too hard to forget about the Nazi era and their association with it.
On the other hand, IF companies were to offer older music/new media at a cheaper price to those who already owned it (or whatever scheme you come up with), there would be far less incentive for those companies to actually bring the old material to the new medium. If they don't think they can make a ton of money by re-releasing the content on the new media, they'll never do it.
As a consumer, I'd love to pay lower prices for that material, but realistically you also wouldn't have much material to buy, since most of it would never get re-released.
An excellent Dune resource is the Dune Encyclopedia. It has a tremendous amount of back history, and covers everything before the last couple of books.
/. from home?).
Unfortunately, I've found it to be extremely rare (it's been out of print since the late 80's, and didn't have a very large print run to begin with). I managed to get a copy find a copy in excellent condition at a garage sale for less than $20, but you'll be hard pressed to find it for less than $100 in even mediocre condition. I would give more information about it (ISBN, etc.), but I'm at work at the moment and don't have it on hand (does anyone read
If you can find this book, it's a must-have for any Dune addict. (Hemos, if you don't have this one, you owe it to yourself to find it)
I wonder if they bothered to look on the store shelves. Maybe they missed the "no gore" version sitting right next to the "regular" versions.
Now drives are cheap and large. I expect the same to happen with memory . . .
Actually, based on the recent Rambus dealings, it's very likely that RAM prices will go up, not down. Assuming this technology can do what they claim (conceivable), and not have an impact on performance (highly doubtful), this could seriously lessen the impact of Rambus's patent squablings on the end user's wallet.
Third, they will slaughter all the other messaging services except for ICQ, and even ICQ is going to hurt a little. Having the biggest installed base counts for more than having the broadest featureset.
Didn't AOL purchase ICQ?