No kidding? All I'm saying-- all I've been saying, if you would just slow down and read what I've actually written-- is that public property and the public domain are two completely different things because of this fundamental difference in the nature of creative works and real property. Therefore, I conclude, the analogy presented earlier is fundamentally flawed.
But the work in the public domain is not being converted, it is being copied and the copy is being converted. The original remains.
Yes, I've said so twice now.
Is there any way you can honestly see using a public domain item to make a copyrighted work removing the public domain item from the reach of the people? Does it suddenly cease to exist because there is a new derived work? What you're saying implies it.
No, what I'm saying directly contradicted that assertion. Twice.
My point wasn't to elaborate the status and usage of public domain works and how their derivations come to be proprietary, but to criticize the use of analogies that attempt to equate copyright (or lack thereof) with real (public) property. It is a fundamentally flawed analogy for the exact reason you point out. One can use public domain works to create copyrighted works and the public domain work still exists. Public property cannot be converted into non-public property without diminishing the quantity of public property available.
Public domain creative works can be made into proprietary works by simply deriving new works from them. Otherwise every single piece of classical sheet music, every orchestra concert and recording, every movie, tv show, or commercial that had a Beethoven, Bach, or Mozart bit in it, etc, would also be public domain. Indeed, several Disney movies, including Hunchback of Notre Dame, Fantasia, Little Mermaid, Cinderella, Snow White, and many more would be public domain because either significant story elements or musical score elements are derived from public domain sources. Now, let's stop pretending that there is any useful analogy between the intellectual fraud known as "intellectual property" and real property. Once we do that the issues become a lot clearer.
Sexual reproduction does more than simply perpetuate a species, it also offers genetic material an opportunity to mutate and to mix things up with compatible sets of genetic material. I don't think the robots as machines really need this as much as the software components of the robots would perhaps benefit from it... but then the software doesn't really need a robot to exist, any CPU with cycles would do.
For many items, Amazon is actually competing with third party sellers that are selling on their site.
Not bloody likely considering the fees that Amazon charges both to the seller and for S/H on each order (of which they keep a portion--it is not 100% passed thru to the seller). Either way Amazon wins.
Depends. For every measure there is a countermeasure. No such thing as perfect security and I didn't mean to imply that there was. On the flip side, just because an attack is theoretically possible doesn't mean it's feasible.
But if jow blow can access your computer, I would assume he has access to your private key as well as you would store it most likely on your computer.
Probably not. More likely burned on CD-R or on a USB keychain or something. Even so, if the key is on my system I've also likely password protected it. In fact I know I have.:)
Encrypted communication and hard drive encryption are already possible. Including "trusted computing" in Linux allows Linux users to run closed-source binaries (either applications or libraries) that interact with encrypted files obtained from third parties, where such binaries use this "trusted" nonsense to restrict the use of these files in some way. This allows Linux users to trade their freedom in return for continued access to digital media without having to stop using Linux at the same time. While we can have discussions about whether this is "right" or not, it seems largely inevitable that certain operating systems and computing platforms will get this and that certain digital media providers will take advantage of it. It makes using Linux less of an all-or-nothing decision.
Is it true? Well, maybe not so much as I made it sound. Most fansub groups do remove shows that get licensed (just an announcement of a license is enough). Obviously those of us watching fansubs aren't going to buy DVDs for every show we ever watched a fansub of unless we *liked* the show. From a practical standpoint (in my experience) the quality of authentic DVDs is just plain higher than fansubs and bootlegs anyway, so a serious fan is going to want the real thing on that basis alone. If money is a concern one can always buy used DVDs off amazon.com, borrow from the library, and rent the videos from a shop. Assuming that's much of a price break or that the local library or video shop even has anime.
Beats me. Perhaps the OSI should express some disdain for licenses that meet the letter of the definition of "free" but don't really seem to have their heart in it. That might make him happy.;)
For my part, I'm still wondering what the OSI does that the FSF doesn't already do. So what if the license meets the technical definition of "free" but has problems that might hamper my usage of software under that license? The OSI simply lists the license as approved. FSF takes the trouble to warn me about potential issues with it. Obviously FSF is biased towards GPL, but I don't see a problem with that (I think I'd be worried if they weren't).
True enough, it's not Free Software as defined by the Free Software Foundation - because they have defined Free Software to mean GPL/LGPL and nothing else.
False. FSF License page clearly states that the CDDL is a GPL-incompatible free software license. And I quote: "This is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft; it has some complex restrictions that make it incompatible with the GNU GPL."
I've had good luck ordering CDs and manga from amazon.co.jp. Considerably less expensive than a trip to Japan. Of course, if your Japanese isn't that great it can be a bit unnerving trying to work through all the screens to make an order. I found babelfish.altavista.com very helpful, just be ready for a lot of "All Your Base" kind of reading.
If you want Japanese cartoons before they're released in English, learn Japanese.
And then what? Watch them as they're broadcast in Japanese on local TV here in the States? Good luck! Even if you live in heavy Japanese settled areas you are unlikely to find much Japanese language programming. Fansubs usually come out as the shows are being broadcast in Japan. Fansubbers then do a lot of hard work to provide their own translations of these shows.
Finally, the entire anime fan community has a strong "buy a licensed version" ethos. If the Japanese companies who make these shows were to release subtitled versions of the shows online for a reasonable fee I suspect that fansubbing would screech to a halt (so I don't get what you're talking about with fansubbers "creating barriers to legitimate online distribution" there is no current legitimate online distribution--if there were, there would be no need for fansubs). I think the typical fansub viewer would prefer the original audio with subtitles over any English remake of the dialog anyway.
Considering he didn't start using teddy bears as characters until the third film, you may have a point. But then I'm wondering why a shriveled old Kermit-the-Frog as Zen master was such a great device in Empire. And then, have you actually seen the first film? There's a giant monkey in it, stereotype played to the fullest no less (why couldn't Chewbacca have been the smart guy, alpha male and Han Solo the bumbling sidekick?).
Personally I found AotC very watchable and am looking forward to this next one. I expect a huge war and a lot of very serious drama (both in terms of Anakain succumbing to the Dark Side and the whole Amidala giving birth to Luke and Leia thing).
At least Lucas managed to keep Star Wars not only viable, but enjoyable for decades. Not like the Matrix where they went from classic to crapola in one sequel and a handful of years.
Uh, yes, thanks for the clarification. Of course if there's a law about it, there's no use discussing it because laws are never wrong, vague, incorrectly, or just plain immoral.
Not me, I would consider that a violation of contract. Stop trying to turn everything into some sort of pretend property rights (especially when things like "intellectual property rights" are in direct contradiction of real property rights). What you are doing is intellectual fraud. We already have specific, accurate, useful terms for these things so stop trying to confuse the issue with bad analogies and twisted language.
Geez, once again, I get modded down by Mac zealots with mod points for responding to what was, essentially, spam ("time to switch!"). Maybe I'll start using my karma bonus. Or maybe I'll just throw up my hands in disgust. It's getting so that you may as well not have an opinion on Mac that isn't all gushy and sweet on it if you plan on being able to post on Slashdot. To wit, the whole idea of buying a Mac because Windows will now be harder to pirate is completely bizarre.
The point here is that the only people affected by this change are people using illegal copies of software they didn't pay for. If I wanted to run an illegal copy of something, why is the proposed solution to go buy a completely legal copy of something else entirely? The constant "time to switch to Apple" posts are nothing more than spam at this point. They aren't even trying to be relevant.
Slashdot Mirror
No kidding? All I'm saying-- all I've been saying, if you would just slow down and read what I've actually written-- is that public property and the public domain are two completely different things because of this fundamental difference in the nature of creative works and real property. Therefore, I conclude, the analogy presented earlier is fundamentally flawed.
But the work in the public domain is not being converted, it is being copied and the copy is being converted. The original remains.
Yes, I've said so twice now.
Is there any way you can honestly see using a public domain item to make a copyrighted work removing the public domain item from the reach of the people? Does it suddenly cease to exist because there is a new derived work? What you're saying implies it.
No, what I'm saying directly contradicted that assertion. Twice.
My point wasn't to elaborate the status and usage of public domain works and how their derivations come to be proprietary, but to criticize the use of analogies that attempt to equate copyright (or lack thereof) with real (public) property. It is a fundamentally flawed analogy for the exact reason you point out. One can use public domain works to create copyrighted works and the public domain work still exists. Public property cannot be converted into non-public property without diminishing the quantity of public property available.
Public domain creative works can be made into proprietary works by simply deriving new works from them. Otherwise every single piece of classical sheet music, every orchestra concert and recording, every movie, tv show, or commercial that had a Beethoven, Bach, or Mozart bit in it, etc, would also be public domain. Indeed, several Disney movies, including Hunchback of Notre Dame, Fantasia, Little Mermaid, Cinderella, Snow White, and many more would be public domain because either significant story elements or musical score elements are derived from public domain sources. Now, let's stop pretending that there is any useful analogy between the intellectual fraud known as "intellectual property" and real property. Once we do that the issues become a lot clearer.
Sexual reproduction does more than simply perpetuate a species, it also offers genetic material an opportunity to mutate and to mix things up with compatible sets of genetic material. I don't think the robots as machines really need this as much as the software components of the robots would perhaps benefit from it... but then the software doesn't really need a robot to exist, any CPU with cycles would do.
For many items, Amazon is actually competing with third party sellers that are selling on their site.
Not bloody likely considering the fees that Amazon charges both to the seller and for S/H on each order (of which they keep a portion--it is not 100% passed thru to the seller). Either way Amazon wins.
Depends. For every measure there is a countermeasure. No such thing as perfect security and I didn't mean to imply that there was. On the flip side, just because an attack is theoretically possible doesn't mean it's feasible.
But if jow blow can access your computer, I would assume he has access to your private key as well as you would store it most likely on your computer.
:)
Probably not. More likely burned on CD-R or on a USB keychain or something. Even so, if the key is on my system I've also likely password protected it. In fact I know I have.
Encrypted communication and hard drive encryption are already possible. Including "trusted computing" in Linux allows Linux users to run closed-source binaries (either applications or libraries) that interact with encrypted files obtained from third parties, where such binaries use this "trusted" nonsense to restrict the use of these files in some way. This allows Linux users to trade their freedom in return for continued access to digital media without having to stop using Linux at the same time. While we can have discussions about whether this is "right" or not, it seems largely inevitable that certain operating systems and computing platforms will get this and that certain digital media providers will take advantage of it. It makes using Linux less of an all-or-nothing decision.
Is it true? Well, maybe not so much as I made it sound. Most fansub groups do remove shows that get licensed (just an announcement of a license is enough). Obviously those of us watching fansubs aren't going to buy DVDs for every show we ever watched a fansub of unless we *liked* the show. From a practical standpoint (in my experience) the quality of authentic DVDs is just plain higher than fansubs and bootlegs anyway, so a serious fan is going to want the real thing on that basis alone. If money is a concern one can always buy used DVDs off amazon.com, borrow from the library, and rent the videos from a shop. Assuming that's much of a price break or that the local library or video shop even has anime.
Beats me. Perhaps the OSI should express some disdain for licenses that meet the letter of the definition of "free" but don't really seem to have their heart in it. That might make him happy. ;)
For my part, I'm still wondering what the OSI does that the FSF doesn't already do. So what if the license meets the technical definition of "free" but has problems that might hamper my usage of software under that license? The OSI simply lists the license as approved. FSF takes the trouble to warn me about potential issues with it. Obviously FSF is biased towards GPL, but I don't see a problem with that (I think I'd be worried if they weren't).
True enough, it's not Free Software as defined by the Free Software Foundation - because they have defined Free Software to mean GPL/LGPL and nothing else.
False. FSF License page clearly states that the CDDL is a GPL-incompatible free software license. And I quote: "This is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft; it has some complex restrictions that make it incompatible with the GNU GPL."
Yeah, that's brilliant. You have me all fired up about OSI now. That RMS is handing out kook-aid! Heh!
Seriously, what does OSI even do? At least FSF provides a whole lot of Free software and project hosting.
I've had good luck ordering CDs and manga from amazon.co.jp. Considerably less expensive than a trip to Japan. Of course, if your Japanese isn't that great it can be a bit unnerving trying to work through all the screens to make an order. I found babelfish.altavista.com very helpful, just be ready for a lot of "All Your Base" kind of reading.
If you want Japanese cartoons before they're released in English, learn Japanese.
And then what? Watch them as they're broadcast in Japanese on local TV here in the States? Good luck! Even if you live in heavy Japanese settled areas you are unlikely to find much Japanese language programming. Fansubs usually come out as the shows are being broadcast in Japan. Fansubbers then do a lot of hard work to provide their own translations of these shows.
Finally, the entire anime fan community has a strong "buy a licensed version" ethos. If the Japanese companies who make these shows were to release subtitled versions of the shows online for a reasonable fee I suspect that fansubbing would screech to a halt (so I don't get what you're talking about with fansubbers "creating barriers to legitimate online distribution" there is no current legitimate online distribution--if there were, there would be no need for fansubs). I think the typical fansub viewer would prefer the original audio with subtitles over any English remake of the dialog anyway.
Using that argument, it would be okay for a poor kid to shoplift because he needs it. Doesn't make it right.
This analogy is terrible. Using analogies like this would be like carrying water with a telephone.
Considering he didn't start using teddy bears as characters until the third film, you may have a point. But then I'm wondering why a shriveled old Kermit-the-Frog as Zen master was such a great device in Empire. And then, have you actually seen the first film? There's a giant monkey in it, stereotype played to the fullest no less (why couldn't Chewbacca have been the smart guy, alpha male and Han Solo the bumbling sidekick?).
Personally I found AotC very watchable and am looking forward to this next one. I expect a huge war and a lot of very serious drama (both in terms of Anakain succumbing to the Dark Side and the whole Amidala giving birth to Luke and Leia thing).
At least Lucas managed to keep Star Wars not only viable, but enjoyable for decades. Not like the Matrix where they went from classic to crapola in one sequel and a handful of years.
Uh, yes, thanks for the clarification. Of course if there's a law about it, there's no use discussing it because laws are never wrong, vague, incorrectly, or just plain immoral.
Not me, I would consider that a violation of contract. Stop trying to turn everything into some sort of pretend property rights (especially when things like "intellectual property rights" are in direct contradiction of real property rights). What you are doing is intellectual fraud. We already have specific, accurate, useful terms for these things so stop trying to confuse the issue with bad analogies and twisted language.
From your link: One billion digits of pi in less than 3 hours 48 minutes.
I can download 640mb via BT in about an hour (or at least that's my experience with ISOs so far).
So what's your point? Why don't you switch to Mac and shut up?
Geez, once again, I get modded down by Mac zealots with mod points for responding to what was, essentially, spam ("time to switch!"). Maybe I'll start using my karma bonus. Or maybe I'll just throw up my hands in disgust. It's getting so that you may as well not have an opinion on Mac that isn't all gushy and sweet on it if you plan on being able to post on Slashdot. To wit, the whole idea of buying a Mac because Windows will now be harder to pirate is completely bizarre.
The point here is that the only people affected by this change are people using illegal copies of software they didn't pay for. If I wanted to run an illegal copy of something, why is the proposed solution to go buy a completely legal copy of something else entirely? The constant "time to switch to Apple" posts are nothing more than spam at this point. They aren't even trying to be relevant.
You could probably get another several billion digits on there!
Thank you for the Mac OS X spam.