If you read the commentary buried somewhere deep on Groklaw and learn enough legalese to read between the lines, the judge hinted to Novell that a future motion for summary judgment might be in their best interests, indeed, he made it sound like a major summary judgment ruling would be forthcoming - if Novell requests it. And THAT could be the end of it.
I agree. I'm not as edumacated as most (no degree, no cert, working on remedying that) but was fortunate enough to get experience in a very specialized niche area while jobs were plentiful. Now, there aren't a whole lot of places that need my particular skill set, but there aren't many people out there with this skill set, either. I'm not going to make a ton of cash, but I'm comfortable and happy.
The point is, specializing can pay off, especially if it's something that's not a dime a dozen.
That's EXACTLY how it works for us. I originally bought my TV exclusively for the watching of football. Since then, I've expanded into DirecTV and got a TiVo unit so now I don't even have to schedule my life around what's on when, I can watch what I want when I want and skip the commercials!
Actually, it's not advertised, but I think you *can* get a la carte channels, at least through DirecTV. Here's the catch, though: you have to own your dish and receivers (as in, either you paid retail for them or have already finished out any programming commitments you had to sign up for to get the stuff at deep discounts.) At that point, I think it's something like $5 per month per channel.
And I've heard Comcast will do the same thing. It's there, but it's freakin' expensive.
I work in technical services in an academic library. In library parlance, "tech services" refers less to library automation per se than it does to acquisitions, cataloging, processing and all those other "behind-the-scenes" things that happen that get the books on the shelf where they ought to be. For libraries, the advent of the computerized catalog was a HUGE breakthrough, for a number of reasons. For starters, thanks to the Library of Congress and consortia like OCLC and RLIN, any library can (for a small fee) download existing cataloging records, insert library-specific data (such as barcodes, for instance) and have a full record for that title much faster than the days they had to catalog everything by hand.
Library automation has also made online catalogs themselves much more accurate and much more precise. If I'm looking for a book about CowboyNeal, back in the days of the card catalog, it would be hard to track down unless I knew a title, and I'd probably have to ask a librarian for the approximate call number. Modern online catalogs are essentially search engines that use search engine logic. Some even have the capability of searching specific fields within records (subject= cowboyneal & author= cdrtaco)
On the surface, this is a very good thing, and has made libraries a LOT more efficient. One library I used to work at had a card catalog backlog of several weeks. Once they automated, the turnaround on new materials is generally not more than 24 hours.
The downside to all this is that this power has made online catalogs quite unintuitive. Average Joe Library User is just as confused about the proper use of the online catalog as back when he was confused about the proper use of card catalogs. The other downside is that I'm finding that there's a definite tendency to fight the library system rather than work with it: the assumption is that the computer is in error and therefore requires lots of checking. The very concept of assuming that the system is correct is rather foreign.
In some libraries, at least, the stress comes not because of automation, but rather from not knowing how to implement it correctly.
"The Congress shall have power... (lots of powers enumerated and omitted for brevity)... To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;..."
This is the extent of Constitutional discussion of anything related to intellectual property. The argument that the GPL is unconstitutional is baseless. Congress determines those details, and it's up to Congress and the courts to decide how to regulate IP.
One thing you have to understand is that libraries already have to learn to do more with less. For most libraries, the VAST majority of their funds go toward the purchase of new and replacement materials. Add in technology and public internet access and physical plant, there's not much left over for salaries and benefits.
Public libraries simply can't compete with corporate or even academic America in terms of being able to pay fair wages and benefits. Most libraries are barely able to make ends meet or have to make very tough financial choices. Among professionals with master's degrees or better, I feel fairly safe in saying that public librarians earn among the lowest wages (this based on what I know of public library salary structures.) And their jobs are growing more complex all the time.
In case you can't tell, I used to work at a public library. One thing that always burned me was that surplus materials were "sold" to the local Friends of the Library group for a whopping $1 for the lot. The Friends would then hold book sales and pull in upwards of $10k per sale, not a whole lot of which made it back to the library in terms of gifts, etc (which is actually the point of a Friends group.) As a taxpayer, this seemed a colossal waste of my money for the sole purpose of letting a bunch of people get first cracks at books without paying retail prices. As an employee, I felt the time and energy I spent preparing materials for the Friends (in this case, computers) was an unpaid service I was being made to perform for someone other than my employer. And then we're always being told about how tight money is.
Hatch is trying to pull this off at the same time Congress is debating whether the BCS violates antitrust laws. The NCAA doesn't have an antitrust exemption, and neither does the NFL. To my knowledge, Major League Baseball is the only group of that sort to have an antitrust exemption, and even that's come up for debate during all those strikes.
A simple public awareness campaign should put an end to the madness. In the context of other "market realities," it simply doesn't make sense. In fact, Congress has taken an active interest in limiting those other "market realities." Seriously, what's the difference between one group controlling all access to recorded music and one group controlling all access to pro football?
Actually, I wonder about this. Since they failed to renew, they demonstrated a lack of interest in protecting that aspect of their name and trademark, effectively relinquishing all claimed rights to that domain. It's one thing to deal with a squatter who is trying to make a buck off your good name, it's another entirely to demonstrate a lack of interest.
From what little I saw of the ruling, the key to the case is not free speech, but rather which federal agency is handling this. Commerce assigned it to the FTC as a trade regulatory issue, but the district court judge obviously saw it as a telecommunications issue, and therefore under control of the FCC.
In essence, the list is legal, it's who has enforcement power that is in question.
They paid a $30 service fee, leading them to believe it was ok. This isn't about not knowing the law, this is about Kazaa leading them to believe that by sending them money, they'd be legal. That's the real travesty here.
The family paid the money, they just paid the wrong people.
I can see the point about downloaded music becoming the norm, although I think you'll always have a hardcore group of audiophiles who will want a physical (analog) recording to play on top-shelf equipment. But I have to disagree with the prediction about on-demand movies. My girlfriend's 80-year-old mother (who is not at all tech-savvy) is wowed by the difference in quality between a DVD and digital cable.
What's even more significant is the archival nature of DVDs: it's easy to watch what you want when you want, and they're inexpensive enough to produce that there is a plethora of obscure, old, special-interest or otherwise non-mainstream titles. On-Demand can only handle a finite number of titles, and I'd imagine that the vast majority will be new releases.
Given the cost/benefit situation as well as more limited access to less popular or less current titles, I don't forsee the demise of the DVD or other similar future format (blue laser DVD?)
Haven't US courts ruled that in order for a license agreement to be enforceable, it has to be made available, in its entirety, prior to being given the option to accept?
As I recall, there used to be a situation with software in sealed envelopes which said something like, "by unsealing this envelope you agree to the license agreement contained herein," and the courts ruled those null and void. This seems to be the same issue.
I think the point is that the software patent system has got to the stage where it's impossible for any company to be sure of that (after all, it's not like Microsoft's legal department is small). Yet another reason to hope against hope that the EU will reject the notion of introducing them here.
I wonder if anyone has patented a method for making a computer display the words "Hello world."
IANAPA (Patent attorney), but as I understand it, the holder of patent can choose when to enfornce the patent. "Because we have been" is NOT a legal argument.
IANAL, but my understanding is that when it comes to intellectual property, failure to defend that property is grounds for de facto loss of rights to that property. This is one reason companies like sending threatening cease and desist letters to poor people who post cheap parodies: it's as much about establishing a pattern of protecting their IP as anything else.
Obviously, you have law degrees, but what other degrees or field expertise do you have (such as computer science backgrounds, library degrees, etc.)? Obviously, not everyone is going to understand every single patent out there, but do you handle cases exclusively by what's on paper, relying on the claims of industry experts, or do you provide your own understanding of at least some of the key fields?
In my experience, end-users who are not tech-savvy have little real understanding of online security practices: they tend to ignore basic things such as updating antivirus dat files because they don't know or don't understand. And from my own experience, I know that broadband providers are more interested in pitching all their cool features than they are in educating users how to be safe. Seriously, how hard would it have been for my ISP to have included a Sygate or ZoneAlarm trial on the install CD they had to send out anyway? What kills me is that it's in the ISP's best interests to encourage safe computer habits, and they don't really emphasize that.
Have they already forgotten the lessons of the old Divx players? No one wanted an inferior, crippled product. The market already spoke. I have a hard time imagining they'll get it "right" this time.
Digital piracy will always exist. For every mousetrap, someone will build a better mouse. So why should we law-abiding citizens have to pay the price? If I want a DVD or CD, I'm going to buy it. Period.
It sounds like GW is trying to increase profits and push their retailers by using the philosophy that their games are popular, thus people will buy them, so they should have to pay full price. In short, the product sells itself and they can charge whatever they want. I've noticed other companies (*cough*Wizards of the Coast*cough*) trying to do the same thing.
By comparison, other game companies are taking the exact opposite approach: they encourage local retailers to stock what they can, no requirements about "you must take such-and-such to get such-and-such" and simply let the market decide. They actively go out and promote communities around their games and gaming in general. They tend to devote a lot of time to the community. From what I can tell, Kenzer & Co. is one of the best examples out there (they publish the comic Knights of the Dinner Table, as well as Hackmaster, Kingdoms of Kalamar, Fairy Meat and Dwarven Dig.) Their message boards are literally the heart of their community, but the neat thing is that the major names all participate in the discussions. More to the point, the major names even take part in the esoteric discussions of favorite B-movies. Heck, the other day, Gary Gygax popped in and briefly talked about a stuffed koala he used to own!! When discussing the games and the rules, etc, they give the distinct impression that player feedback matters.
The result of this is that they've fostered a fanatically loyal fan base who voluntarily spend money on products to ensure that the company stays afloat. GW would do well to foster that kind of relationship with their fans.
Slashdot Mirror
If you read the commentary buried somewhere deep on Groklaw and learn enough legalese to read between the lines, the judge hinted to Novell that a future motion for summary judgment might be in their best interests, indeed, he made it sound like a major summary judgment ruling would be forthcoming - if Novell requests it. And THAT could be the end of it.
...in Soviet Russia, text copies YOU!
I agree. I'm not as edumacated as most (no degree, no cert, working on remedying that) but was fortunate enough to get experience in a very specialized niche area while jobs were plentiful. Now, there aren't a whole lot of places that need my particular skill set, but there aren't many people out there with this skill set, either. I'm not going to make a ton of cash, but I'm comfortable and happy.
The point is, specializing can pay off, especially if it's something that's not a dime a dozen.
That's EXACTLY how it works for us. I originally bought my TV exclusively for the watching of football. Since then, I've expanded into DirecTV and got a TiVo unit so now I don't even have to schedule my life around what's on when, I can watch what I want when I want and skip the commercials!
Actually, it's not advertised, but I think you *can* get a la carte channels, at least through DirecTV. Here's the catch, though: you have to own your dish and receivers (as in, either you paid retail for them or have already finished out any programming commitments you had to sign up for to get the stuff at deep discounts.) At that point, I think it's something like $5 per month per channel.
And I've heard Comcast will do the same thing. It's there, but it's freakin' expensive.
I work in technical services in an academic library. In library parlance, "tech services" refers less to library automation per se than it does to acquisitions, cataloging, processing and all those other "behind-the-scenes" things that happen that get the books on the shelf where they ought to be. For libraries, the advent of the computerized catalog was a HUGE breakthrough, for a number of reasons. For starters, thanks to the Library of Congress and consortia like OCLC and RLIN, any library can (for a small fee) download existing cataloging records, insert library-specific data (such as barcodes, for instance) and have a full record for that title much faster than the days they had to catalog everything by hand.
Library automation has also made online catalogs themselves much more accurate and much more precise. If I'm looking for a book about CowboyNeal, back in the days of the card catalog, it would be hard to track down unless I knew a title, and I'd probably have to ask a librarian for the approximate call number. Modern online catalogs are essentially search engines that use search engine logic. Some even have the capability of searching specific fields within records (subject= cowboyneal & author= cdrtaco)
On the surface, this is a very good thing, and has made libraries a LOT more efficient. One library I used to work at had a card catalog backlog of several weeks. Once they automated, the turnaround on new materials is generally not more than 24 hours.
The downside to all this is that this power has made online catalogs quite unintuitive. Average Joe Library User is just as confused about the proper use of the online catalog as back when he was confused about the proper use of card catalogs. The other downside is that I'm finding that there's a definite tendency to fight the library system rather than work with it: the assumption is that the computer is in error and therefore requires lots of checking. The very concept of assuming that the system is correct is rather foreign.
In some libraries, at least, the stress comes not because of automation, but rather from not knowing how to implement it correctly.
Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution:
"The Congress shall have power... (lots of powers enumerated and omitted for brevity)...
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;..."
This is the extent of Constitutional discussion of anything related to intellectual property. The argument that the GPL is unconstitutional is baseless. Congress determines those details, and it's up to Congress and the courts to decide how to regulate IP.
The sad truth is that the BAA is making that argument, at least where e-books are concerned.
One thing you have to understand is that libraries already have to learn to do more with less. For most libraries, the VAST majority of their funds go toward the purchase of new and replacement materials. Add in technology and public internet access and physical plant, there's not much left over for salaries and benefits.
Public libraries simply can't compete with corporate or even academic America in terms of being able to pay fair wages and benefits. Most libraries are barely able to make ends meet or have to make very tough financial choices. Among professionals with master's degrees or better, I feel fairly safe in saying that public librarians earn among the lowest wages (this based on what I know of public library salary structures.) And their jobs are growing more complex all the time.
In case you can't tell, I used to work at a public library. One thing that always burned me was that surplus materials were "sold" to the local Friends of the Library group for a whopping $1 for the lot. The Friends would then hold book sales and pull in upwards of $10k per sale, not a whole lot of which made it back to the library in terms of gifts, etc (which is actually the point of a Friends group.) As a taxpayer, this seemed a colossal waste of my money for the sole purpose of letting a bunch of people get first cracks at books without paying retail prices. As an employee, I felt the time and energy I spent preparing materials for the Friends (in this case, computers) was an unpaid service I was being made to perform for someone other than my employer. And then we're always being told about how tight money is.
I've been advocating this sort of move for years.
Hatch is trying to pull this off at the same time Congress is debating whether the BCS violates antitrust laws. The NCAA doesn't have an antitrust exemption, and neither does the NFL. To my knowledge, Major League Baseball is the only group of that sort to have an antitrust exemption, and even that's come up for debate during all those strikes.
A simple public awareness campaign should put an end to the madness. In the context of other "market realities," it simply doesn't make sense. In fact, Congress has taken an active interest in limiting those other "market realities." Seriously, what's the difference between one group controlling all access to recorded music and one group controlling all access to pro football?
Actually, I wonder about this. Since they failed to renew, they demonstrated a lack of interest in protecting that aspect of their name and trademark, effectively relinquishing all claimed rights to that domain. It's one thing to deal with a squatter who is trying to make a buck off your good name, it's another entirely to demonstrate a lack of interest.
Is there any legal precedent here?
From what little I saw of the ruling, the key to the case is not free speech, but rather which federal agency is handling this. Commerce assigned it to the FTC as a trade regulatory issue, but the district court judge obviously saw it as a telecommunications issue, and therefore under control of the FCC.
In essence, the list is legal, it's who has enforcement power that is in question.
It was a federal district court, so it could have nationwide implications. The next step, I believe, is US Circuit court.
They paid a $30 service fee, leading them to believe it was ok. This isn't about not knowing the law, this is about Kazaa leading them to believe that by sending them money, they'd be legal. That's the real travesty here.
The family paid the money, they just paid the wrong people.
I can see the point about downloaded music becoming the norm, although I think you'll always have a hardcore group of audiophiles who will want a physical (analog) recording to play on top-shelf equipment. But I have to disagree with the prediction about on-demand movies. My girlfriend's 80-year-old mother (who is not at all tech-savvy) is wowed by the difference in quality between a DVD and digital cable.
What's even more significant is the archival nature of DVDs: it's easy to watch what you want when you want, and they're inexpensive enough to produce that there is a plethora of obscure, old, special-interest or otherwise non-mainstream titles. On-Demand can only handle a finite number of titles, and I'd imagine that the vast majority will be new releases.
Given the cost/benefit situation as well as more limited access to less popular or less current titles, I don't forsee the demise of the DVD or other similar future format (blue laser DVD?)
Haven't US courts ruled that in order for a license agreement to be enforceable, it has to be made available, in its entirety, prior to being given the option to accept?
As I recall, there used to be a situation with software in sealed envelopes which said something like, "by unsealing this envelope you agree to the license agreement contained herein," and the courts ruled those null and void. This seems to be the same issue.
I wonder if anyone has patented a method for making a computer display the words "Hello world."
IANAL, but my understanding is that when it comes to intellectual property, failure to defend that property is grounds for de facto loss of rights to that property. This is one reason companies like sending threatening cease and desist letters to poor people who post cheap parodies: it's as much about establishing a pattern of protecting their IP as anything else.
Obviously, you have law degrees, but what other degrees or field expertise do you have (such as computer science backgrounds, library degrees, etc.)? Obviously, not everyone is going to understand every single patent out there, but do you handle cases exclusively by what's on paper, relying on the claims of industry experts, or do you provide your own understanding of at least some of the key fields?
In my experience, end-users who are not tech-savvy have little real understanding of online security practices: they tend to ignore basic things such as updating antivirus dat files because they don't know or don't understand. And from my own experience, I know that broadband providers are more interested in pitching all their cool features than they are in educating users how to be safe. Seriously, how hard would it have been for my ISP to have included a Sygate or ZoneAlarm trial on the install CD they had to send out anyway?
What kills me is that it's in the ISP's best interests to encourage safe computer habits, and they don't really emphasize that.
There is no SCO.
Have they already forgotten the lessons of the old Divx players? No one wanted an inferior, crippled product. The market already spoke. I have a hard time imagining they'll get it "right" this time.
Digital piracy will always exist. For every mousetrap, someone will build a better mouse. So why should we law-abiding citizens have to pay the price? If I want a DVD or CD, I'm going to buy it. Period.
It sounds like GW is trying to increase profits and push their retailers by using the philosophy that their games are popular, thus people will buy them, so they should have to pay full price. In short, the product sells itself and they can charge whatever they want. I've noticed other companies (*cough*Wizards of the Coast*cough*) trying to do the same thing.
By comparison, other game companies are taking the exact opposite approach: they encourage local retailers to stock what they can, no requirements about "you must take such-and-such to get such-and-such" and simply let the market decide. They actively go out and promote communities around their games and gaming in general. They tend to devote a lot of time to the community. From what I can tell, Kenzer & Co. is one of the best examples out there (they publish the comic Knights of the Dinner Table, as well as Hackmaster, Kingdoms of Kalamar, Fairy Meat and Dwarven Dig.) Their message boards are literally the heart of their community, but the neat thing is that the major names all participate in the discussions. More to the point, the major names even take part in the esoteric discussions of favorite B-movies. Heck, the other day, Gary Gygax popped in and briefly talked about a stuffed koala he used to own!! When discussing the games and the rules, etc, they give the distinct impression that player feedback matters.
The result of this is that they've fostered a fanatically loyal fan base who voluntarily spend money on products to ensure that the company stays afloat. GW would do well to foster that kind of relationship with their fans.
Conform! Consume! Obey!