So then in your model, the copier of a database can reuse a database as long as he changes it? So, if I then added the word Mr or Ms. in front of every entry in the phone book, I have in effect created a new database, and one that is now protected for me? The issue is that a database of 5 listings on your brochure is readable with one's eyes, and needs no NOVEL software (Copyrightable) to interface with it. These supposed database we are talking about are huge and require coding and software that is in itself copyrightable, and in effect making their use protected. I assume one could go after a copier of a database for copyright infringement if they are able to read their passworded or specailly constructed database because they are violating the copyright on the ability to read the data in the first place.
Seed your machines with Mp3s labeled as current songs, but which actually contain public domain songs. This is turn will bring the wrath of Hillary to your doorstep, and if they sue, then you can clean up by dropping a big old wrongful lawsuit in their lap. They can't just sue you for haveing files labled with the song's title. It MUST contain the song, and not be a new variant, Comical, or otherwise new production of it. I beleive the the act of MP3ing it makes it a new and useful change and therefore carries its own new copyright. Fuck 'em where they breath.
You know the rest of the country is laughing at you assholes out there in CA. What a mockery of democracy you are making out there. You let one pissy millionaire, who couldn't get his way in the general election, spend 1.5 mil on a recall campaign and you spend yourselves into oblivion to let the smallest of groups (its gonna be like 15% of those voting to get to elect the next gov) do the choosing. But a bunch of bullshit. What a waste of time, effort and resources on everyone's part. I guess if Gray does keep his job they will pin the expenditure for the fight on him too. Arnold's gonna get his ass whooped even if he does get "elected." Talk about an asterisk after your name in the history books.
IF you have "file" on you rmachine labeled as these songs are labeled, but in actuality the "file" contains a word document, are you now on the RIAA hit list... and
we could all blissfully share files called "living on a prayer.doc" right?
also,
How do they know just form these filnames that the file has in its entirty the notes that compose the supposedly copyrighted material. Someone would have to be listening to every fricking instance of the "file" in question. The possession of a "file" named with the name of a song doe not a copyright violation make.
I believe that every song I ever listened to on radio has already been "bought" for me by the radio station playing it into my eardrums. Therefore, I can download, copy or make for my use as much of that song as I want as they publicly played it in over the air, so therefore, it has been bought and paid for for me to hear it. Secondly, the songs that get ripped and in the process undersampled to ease swapping are in effect a new copyright, in that some work has been done to them to change them from their original form (made them more able to xfer) therefore, the new copyright now belongs to the ripper, not the original producer of the song (BTW it is not the artist, but the producer that holds the copyright on the CD, becuase it is a copyright on the physical CD, not the musical notes.) The copyright on the notes is held by the artist to guard against someone playing those notes,in that context and calling it their own. Remember the George Harrison vs. the Vandellas (?) I think, for "He's so Fine" vs. "Oh My Lord" It was ruled the notes were enough of the same for Sir George to loose his copyright on the playing of those notes and calling them his own work.
Its all too muddy. I own what is in my brain. If I want to hear the fucking song that the pukes who are in cahoots with the prickster record companies, than I can listen to that fucking song anytime I like, and they can kiss my fucking ass. They got the radio to fork up the bucks, the CD manufacturers to fork up the bucks, the record stores to fork up the bucks, and the artists to fork up the bucks, to push their pieces of shit songs into my stream of consciousness anyway. If I want to hear it again, they should be honored I want to occupy my brain on their artist of week flavor.
Hello, It was Chernobyl and its successive attempt at its coverup of the risks to the local population's health and weel being that finally led to the USSR's collapse. The forces of the expectation of protection while itself the cause of the plight of these individuals is truly getting caught between a rock and a hard place. In the US we have lots of corporate dummies to hide behind when Indain point or wherever finally goes meltdown...
So when the inefficiencies of sending ship after ship laden with good sailors out into the "abyss" off the edge of the earth to find "India.," we should have just hugged terra firma (the little speck of europe that was considered terra firma at the time) and never ventured forth to find new lands? Give me a break. Of course astronauts should go, the real question is should they be going first? Should we get proficient at ensuring vehicles gets to where they've got to go safely, before any life or limb is risked? That sounds more prudent than to say we shouldn't risk sending humans into space anymore.
I hope that the tax would also be on pencils and paper, because I am sure many a crook has used them to accomplish their deeds. It is all stupid. All routers should block any and all packets with requests for lives less than 10-15ms. That would put a kink in the hackers and Denial of service whacks.
"Get hold of a Newton"? Yes, that is exactly what you did, you have to use two whole hands to get hold of a Newton. Your comment "Adds a lot of bulk to the unit" makes me laugh, obviously you never held a Newton. Heavy? Ha. Yes the OS was VERY cool, but you could also carry around a PC with that much Horsepower. The WINCE device with the modem, and the PC CArd socket and the.... would NEVER out weight the Newton.
Get a grip people, it was Ok for then, but it is gone. Alas...
Yeah and "SHALL" has been ruled to mean "MAY" when used in a statute, (Garfield Vs. U.S.) but does that stop the IRS from writing it in ALL of their material and people think it means HAVE TO. If there is no big machine to push the finding of a Supreme decision it usually means nothing.
But that is another story....
So, then a fact contained in their database:
"The Earth is round" is their's to keep and we must all go back to thinking otherwise, please I think not. The bedrock of further formd of copyright is the ability to own what you create. Just like the gnome project, they do not own the strand of DNA, just their description of the organization of it. It does not preclude someone else from writing down the same sequences. The conundrum would be that they would have to show their database to prove that something is or is not in it, and that is the flaw. They would never open it up to public scrutiny for the lawsuit.
Slashdot Mirror
So then in your model, the copier of a database can reuse a database as long as he changes it? So, if I then added the word Mr or Ms. in front of every entry in the phone book, I have in effect created a new database, and one that is now protected for me?
The issue is that a database of 5 listings on your brochure is readable with one's eyes, and needs no NOVEL software (Copyrightable) to interface with it. These supposed database we are talking about are huge and require coding and software that is in itself copyrightable, and in effect making their use protected. I assume one could go after a copier of a database for copyright infringement if they are able to read their passworded or specailly constructed database because they are violating the copyright on the ability to read the data in the first place.
Seed your machines with Mp3s labeled as current songs, but which actually contain public domain songs. This is turn will bring the wrath of Hillary to your doorstep, and if they sue, then you can clean up by dropping a big old wrongful lawsuit in their lap. They can't just sue you for haveing files labled with the song's title. It MUST contain the song, and not be a new variant, Comical, or otherwise new production of it. I beleive the the act of MP3ing it makes it a new and useful change and therefore carries its own new copyright.
Fuck 'em where they breath.
You know the rest of the country is laughing at you assholes out there in CA. What a mockery of democracy you are making out there. You let one pissy millionaire, who couldn't get his way in the general election, spend 1.5 mil on a recall campaign and you spend yourselves into oblivion to let the smallest of groups (its gonna be like 15% of those voting to get to elect the next gov) do the choosing. But a bunch of bullshit. What a waste of time, effort and resources on everyone's part. I guess if Gray does keep his job they will pin the expenditure for the fight on him too.
Arnold's gonna get his ass whooped even if he does get "elected." Talk about an asterisk after your name in the history books.
IF you have "file" on you rmachine labeled as these songs are labeled, but in actuality the "file" contains a word document, are you now on the RIAA hit list...
and
we could all blissfully share files called "living on a prayer.doc" right?
also,
How do they know just form these filnames that the file has in its entirty the notes that compose the supposedly copyrighted material. Someone would have to be listening to every fricking instance of the "file" in question. The possession of a "file" named with the name of a song doe not a copyright violation make.
I believe that every song I ever listened to on radio has already been "bought" for me by the radio station playing it into my eardrums. Therefore, I can download, copy or make for my use as much of that song as I want as they publicly played it in over the air, so therefore, it has been bought and paid for for me to hear it.
Secondly, the songs that get ripped and in the process undersampled to ease swapping are in effect a new copyright, in that some work has been done to them to change them from their original form (made them more able to xfer) therefore, the new copyright now belongs to the ripper, not the original producer of the song (BTW it is not the artist, but the producer that holds the copyright on the CD, becuase it is a copyright on the physical CD, not the musical notes.) The copyright on the notes is held by the artist to guard against someone playing those notes,in that context and calling it their own. Remember the George Harrison vs. the Vandellas (?) I think, for "He's so Fine" vs. "Oh My Lord" It was ruled the notes were enough of the same for Sir George to loose his copyright on the playing of those notes and calling them his own work.
Its all too muddy. I own what is in my brain. If I want to hear the fucking song that the pukes who are in cahoots with the prickster record companies, than I can listen to that fucking song anytime I like, and they can kiss my fucking ass. They got the radio to fork up the bucks, the CD manufacturers to fork up the bucks, the record stores to fork up the bucks, and the artists to fork up the bucks, to push their pieces of shit songs into my stream of consciousness anyway. If I want to hear it again, they should be honored I want to occupy my brain on their artist of week flavor.
Hello,
It was Chernobyl and its successive attempt at its coverup of the risks to the local population's health and weel being that finally led to the USSR's collapse. The forces of the expectation of protection while itself the cause of the plight of these individuals is truly getting caught between a rock and a hard place.
In the US we have lots of corporate dummies to hide behind when Indain point or wherever finally goes meltdown...
So when the inefficiencies of sending ship after ship laden with good sailors out into the "abyss" off the edge of the earth to find "India.," we should have just hugged terra firma (the little speck of europe that was considered terra firma at the time) and never ventured forth to find new lands? Give me a break. Of course astronauts should go, the real question is should they be going first? Should we get proficient at ensuring vehicles gets to where they've got to go safely, before any life or limb is risked? That sounds more prudent than to say we shouldn't risk sending humans into space anymore.
I hope that the tax would also be on pencils and paper, because I am sure many a crook has used them to accomplish their deeds. It is all stupid. All routers should block any and all packets with requests for lives less than 10-15ms. That would put a kink in the hackers and Denial of service whacks.
"Get hold of a Newton"? Yes, that is exactly what you did, you have to use two whole hands to get hold of a Newton. Your comment "Adds a lot of bulk to the unit" makes me laugh, obviously you never held a Newton. Heavy? Ha. Yes the OS was VERY cool, but you could also carry around a PC with that much Horsepower. The WINCE device with the modem, and the PC CArd socket and the .... would NEVER out weight the Newton.
Get a grip people, it was Ok for then, but it is gone. Alas...
Yeah and "SHALL" has been ruled to mean "MAY" when used in a statute, (Garfield Vs. U.S.) but does that stop the IRS from writing it in ALL of their material and people think it means HAVE TO. If there is no big machine to push the finding of a Supreme decision it usually means nothing. But that is another story....
So, then a fact contained in their database: "The Earth is round" is their's to keep and we must all go back to thinking otherwise, please I think not. The bedrock of further formd of copyright is the ability to own what you create. Just like the gnome project, they do not own the strand of DNA, just their description of the organization of it. It does not preclude someone else from writing down the same sequences. The conundrum would be that they would have to show their database to prove that something is or is not in it, and that is the flaw. They would never open it up to public scrutiny for the lawsuit.