Actually how it displays SD is the toughest test for an HD display. They should all look perfect at their native resolution but how well they upscale will matter for much of what you watch will SD material is common.
Sorry if you already know the case but I didn't. This seems from a quick google to be a patent case. Neither the article or the summary mention this key word.
Now if someone can dig a bit further than I have time to and post links to the patents themselves we might be able to have a fun technical discussion about their merits.
I think I had read this bit of the 1988 copyright act. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_1988004 8_en_3.htm But on rereading it isn't as clear as I thought, incidental running can not be adaptation of the work but I'm not sure about whether a copy has been made. I do however suggest an alternative below based on the same page of the act but with regards to the definition of infringement by copying.
21.--(1) The making of an adaptation of the work is an act restricted by the copyright in a literary, dramatic or musical work.
For this purpose an adaptation is made when it is recorded, in writing or otherwise.
(2) The doing of any of the acts specified in sections 17 to 20, or subsection (1) above, in relation to an adaptation of the work is also an act restricted by the copyright in a literary, dramatic or musical work.
For this purpose it is immaterial whether the adaptation has been recorded, in writing or otherwise, at the time the act is done.
(3) In this Part "adaptation"--
(a) in relation to a literary or dramatic work, means--
(i) a translation of the work;
(ii) a version of a dramatic work in which it is converted into a non-dramatic work or, as the case may be, of a non-dramatic work in which it is converted into a dramatic work;
(iii) a version of the work in which the story or action is conveyed wholly or mainly by means of pictures in a form suitable for reproduction in a book, or in a newspaper, magazine or similar periodical;
(b) in relation to a musical work, means an arrangement or transcription of the work.
(4) In relation to a computer program a "translation" includes a version of the program in which it is converted into or out of a computer language or code or into a different computer language or code, otherwise than incidentally in the course of running the program.
(5) No inference shall be drawn from this section as to what does or does not amount to copying a work.
------------- Note in the following definition of "Infringement of copyright by copying." that (2) says "reproducing in material form." - I would think it could be argued that a temporary in memory copy was not in "material form."
Infringement of copyright by copying.
17.--(1) The copying of the work is an act restricted by the copyright in every description of copyright work; and references in this Part to copying and copies shall be construed as follows.
(2) Copying in relation to a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work means reproducing the work in any material form.
This includes storing the work in any medium by electronic means.
(3) In relation to an artistic work copying includes the making of a copy in three dimensions of a two-dimensional work and the making of a copy in two dimensions of a three-dimensional work.
(4) Copying in relation to a film, television broadcast or cable programme includes making a photograph of the whole or any substantial part of any image forming part of the film, broadcast or cable programme.
(5) Copying in relation to the typographical arrangement of a published edition means making a facsimile copy of the arrangement.
(6) Copying in relation to any description of work includes the making of copies which are transient or are incidental to some other use of the work.
The problem isn't that in the US you use your SSN as your identity, a unique number, its good for that. The problem is that it seems to be used as authentication too. And it simply isn't sufficiently secret or strong enough for authentication.
Who said the retailer is actually running the system and collecting payment. If not they don't need to have it work or be verified? They just design a system to store the magstripe and the pin on a completely boguse machine.
As a customer how can I verify that the machine I am about to type my secret into has been through this verification process? The don't appear to have any customer visible authentication (holograms, challenge response verification etc. The only verification that the machine was genuine comes about a month after the transaction/release of secret when the item appears on the credit card bill. Until that point I have no idea that the machine was genuine other than a vague faith in the store I'm shopping in.
Chip and pin is designed to secure the banks and stores but not the customer. Get a chip and signature card!
Good post and I agree with you but you hit the specific error that brings out the spelling nazi in me.
You don't loose quality you lose it with multiple generations of encoding.
A loose nut might come off and then you might lose it.
Re:my thoughts from what I posted on Digg
on
Hope Fading at Atari
·
· Score: 2, Informative
One minor comment. I think you misuse the phrase "natural monopoly." I understand it to mean companies/industries where competition doesn't make sense such as in the providing of electricity, water, etc. where the capital investment of providing an addition distribution infrastruture makes it a non starter. These are sometimes overcome by regulating the incumbent to offer access to competitors or splitting the provider of the pipes from the supplier of electricity/water.
I think you mean that Atari won in fair competition a large proportion of the market without resorting to exclusionary tactics (or misusing its near monopoly). I wouldn't have mentioned it except for the suggestion that your comment be used on Wikipedia thereby rendering it semi-permanent.
They wouldn't be doing business in the country/countries where AT&T hold critical patents, they would just be a server somewhere else. If people happen to download the software then the downloader may become liable for patent infringement although perhaps only if used for business. Some countries at least allow personal use and research without patent license, just forbid manufacture, distribution, and commercial use.
Google is I believe deliberately not providing mail and blogging services in China precisely to avoid being put in this position. Probably at the expensive of market share and advertising oportunities.
When someone uses your connection for spamming/hacking/child porn or other illegal purposes you have some proof that:
a) other people use that network connection rather than just you b) FON will know who they are and have contact details for them
That is the reason I don't share my connection, fear that at some point I will have to prove my innocence and what I HAVEN'T done. We all know how hard it is to PROVE a negative is such cases.
However with many of the latest electronics including Sony (yes I know...) Digital LCD TVs use as little as 0.2 Watts in standby. Mandating manufacturers to get down to this sort of level with all new electronics would be a good step and would make standby acceptable to me.
What matters isn't the price of the Windows Media Licensing its the other terms some of which are unacceptable. Unless it has changed recently it commits any signing company to handing over some areas of technology development to Microsoft, and restricts what other technologies you can develop such as media servers.
The license is explicity anti-competitive and also vague in what it grants you. The MPEG licenses on the other hand while financially expensive (this varies between particular licenses) are simple patent license grants with no restrictive conditions.
In my view the price for the Microsoft licenses is higher.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually how it displays SD is the toughest test for an HD display. They should all look perfect at their native resolution but how well they upscale will matter for much of what you watch will SD material is common.
Sorry if you already know the case but I didn't. This seems from a quick google to be a patent case. Neither the article or the summary mention this key word.
Now if someone can dig a bit further than I have time to and post links to the patents themselves we might be able to have a fun technical discussion about their merits.
I think I had read this bit of the 1988 copyright act. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_1988004 8_en_3.htm But on rereading it isn't as clear as I thought, incidental running can not be adaptation of the work but I'm not sure about whether a copy has been made. I do however suggest an alternative below based on the same page of the act but with regards to the definition of infringement by copying.
21.--(1) The making of an adaptation of the work is an act restricted by the copyright in a literary, dramatic or musical work.
For this purpose an adaptation is made when it is recorded, in writing or otherwise.
(2) The doing of any of the acts specified in sections 17 to 20, or subsection (1) above, in relation to an adaptation of the work is also an act restricted by the copyright in a literary, dramatic or musical work.
For this purpose it is immaterial whether the adaptation has been recorded, in writing or otherwise, at the time the act is done.
(3) In this Part "adaptation"--
(a) in relation to a literary or dramatic work, means--
(i) a translation of the work;
(ii) a version of a dramatic work in which it is converted into a non-dramatic work or, as the case may be, of a non-dramatic work in which it is converted into a dramatic work;
(iii) a version of the work in which the story or action is conveyed wholly or mainly by means of pictures in a form suitable for reproduction in a book, or in a newspaper, magazine or similar periodical;
(b) in relation to a musical work, means an arrangement or transcription of the work.
(4) In relation to a computer program a "translation" includes a version of the program in which it is converted into or out of a computer language or code or into a different computer language or code, otherwise than incidentally in the course of running the program.
(5) No inference shall be drawn from this section as to what does or does not amount to copying a work.
-------------
Note in the following definition of "Infringement of copyright by copying." that (2) says "reproducing in material form." - I would think it could be argued that a temporary in memory copy was not in "material form."
Infringement of copyright by copying.
17.--(1) The copying of the work is an act restricted by the copyright in every description of copyright work; and references in this Part to copying and copies shall be construed as follows.
(2) Copying in relation to a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work means reproducing the work in any material form.
This includes storing the work in any medium by electronic means.
(3) In relation to an artistic work copying includes the making of a copy in three dimensions of a two-dimensional work and the making of a copy in two dimensions of a three-dimensional work.
(4) Copying in relation to a film, television broadcast or cable programme includes making a photograph of the whole or any substantial part of any image forming part of the film, broadcast or cable programme.
(5) Copying in relation to the typographical arrangement of a published edition means making a facsimile copy of the arrangement.
(6) Copying in relation to any description of work includes the making of copies which are transient or are incidental to some other use of the work.
It is explicit in UK law too. (Although I don't think the first sale doctrine is but that is another point entirely.)
The problem isn't that in the US you use your SSN as your identity, a unique number, its good for that. The problem is that it seems to be used as authentication too. And it simply isn't sufficiently secret or strong enough for authentication.
Who said the retailer is actually running the system and collecting payment. If not they don't need to have it work or be verified? They just design a system to store the magstripe and the pin on a completely boguse machine.
As a customer how can I verify that the machine I am about to type my secret into has been through this verification process? The don't appear to have any customer visible authentication (holograms, challenge response verification etc. The only verification that the machine was genuine comes about a month after the transaction/release of secret when the item appears on the credit card bill. Until that point I have no idea that the machine was genuine other than a vague faith in the store I'm shopping in.
Chip and pin is designed to secure the banks and stores but not the customer. Get a chip and signature card!
Good post and I agree with you but you hit the specific error that brings out the spelling nazi in me.
You don't loose quality you lose it with multiple generations of encoding.
A loose nut might come off and then you might lose it.
One minor comment. I think you misuse the phrase "natural monopoly." I understand it to mean companies/industries where competition doesn't make sense such as in the providing of electricity, water, etc. where the capital investment of providing an addition distribution infrastruture makes it a non starter. These are sometimes overcome by regulating the incumbent to offer access to competitors or splitting the provider of the pipes from the supplier of electricity/water.
I think you mean that Atari won in fair competition a large proportion of the market without resorting to exclusionary tactics (or misusing its near monopoly). I wouldn't have mentioned it except for the suggestion that your comment be used on Wikipedia thereby rendering it semi-permanent.
They wouldn't be doing business in the country/countries where AT&T hold critical patents, they would just be a server somewhere else. If people happen to download the software then the downloader may become liable for patent infringement although perhaps only if used for business. Some countries at least allow personal use and research without patent license, just forbid manufacture, distribution, and commercial use.
Google is I believe deliberately not providing mail and blogging services in China precisely to avoid being put in this position. Probably at the expensive of market share and advertising oportunities.
Influence is a better word than power in this sort of situation.
When someone uses your connection for spamming/hacking/child porn or other illegal purposes you have some proof that:
a) other people use that network connection rather than just you
b) FON will know who they are and have contact details for them
That is the reason I don't share my connection, fear that at some point I will have to prove my innocence and what I HAVEN'T done. We all know how hard it is to PROVE a negative is such cases.
Great post. Just one small but important improvement I would suggest.
"Sociologists aren't making predictions about you, they make predictions about the average behaviors of average groups of people."
When you say "average groups of people." that is a weaker claim than the also accurate 'groups of random people.' or even 'groups of people.'
However with many of the latest electronics including Sony (yes I know...) Digital LCD TVs use as little as 0.2 Watts in standby. Mandating manufacturers to get down to this sort of level with all new electronics would be a good step and would make standby acceptable to me.
Standby power figure is for European model.
Then don't bloody use it for paging, just use enough RAM that you don't need to page anything out.
Read the license itself, its horrible.
What matters isn't the price of the Windows Media Licensing its the other terms some of which are unacceptable. Unless it has changed recently it commits any signing company to handing over some areas of technology development to Microsoft, and restricts what other technologies you can develop such as media servers.
The license is explicity anti-competitive and also vague in what it grants you. The MPEG licenses on the other hand while financially expensive (this varies between particular licenses) are simple patent license grants with no restrictive conditions.
In my view the price for the Microsoft licenses is higher.