I have a problem with fatcats who want to change the law so they can make even MORE money, and screw over the little guy. Want to make more money? Make better movies. Don't become complacent.
Great movies like this are WHY movie production will ALWAYS be able to make money, even without copy controls.
I mean, here I am, all excited about a new trailer.. and I go look, wait for it to download....
THIS TRAILER HAS BEEN UP FOR OVER 2 MONTHS.
Way to go slashdot.. that's just fantastic reporting. You guys rule. Hey, I suppose we're so busy reading slashdot we need you to tell us 2 months later when a trailer comes out.
Next thing you know, you'll be telling us that Star Wars Episode 2 was just released in theaters! And in Febuary, you'll be telling us it's 2003!
They also used it in Photo Guy.. at least int he copy I watched. I suspect, though, given that the first half was the soundtrack from American Beauty and the last was straight out of Requiem for a Dream, that it was just something the pirate kiddies added in on a pre-released version with no soundtrack.
So you can write an app, and run it anywhere. So you can either use a web browser as a display, or native windows, or gtk, because there is a translation layer.
Because C isn't object oriented.
Becuase if we hook into.net, all the new.net applications will just WORK IN *NIX.
Where have I *agreed* to agree? I haven't. What if I never read this little text file?
If we expect this to hold up, then we sure better not complain about EULA's and click-through agreements because they have no signature, and so forth, because this is even less clear.
Your points are right.. but what we are talking about is when a given license comes into effect, not what the terms of that license are.
The terms of the gpl we understand.. the question is whether or not you are forced into it in the first place.
If you don't accept the GPL,and you redistribute, or otherwise do something not allowed by standard copyright law, then you are guilty of copyright violation, but not of "violating the GPL", as you never agreed to it in the first place.
Look at it this way. The GPL is not *forced* upon you. You do not have to accept it; you don't click through, you don't sign anything, and it's not an EULA.
What it IS is a set of terms under which you can do things other than what standard copyright allows. If you don't accept the GPL, you are bound by standard copyright law; no more, no less.
If I use code available under the GPL in my softeware, the GPL is ONE option I can choose to accept to allow me to distribute/modify the code in my own work. I can also choose to contact the authors and negotiate another license. Or I can choose to NOT use any license, and hope I don't get sued by the copyright holders for copyright violation.
My point is that the GPL is not something you are forced into; it's something you can choose to use in order to avoid legal problems.
If you distribute some work that happens to be available under the GPL without accepting the terms of the GPL, you are guilty of copyright violation; you cannot be forced to release source, though you can be forced to stop distributing, and punitive damages, and releasing source will probably be one legal remedy for you (comply with a license that was offered so you don't get sued)
They are not "required to by the GPL". What they are REQUIRED to do is have a license to re-distribute the work of another.. and one way they can do that is by following the GPL. As they didn't do that; they were guilty of copyright infringement, not "violating the GPL".
Furthermore, the only poeple who can really force someone to do something is the COPYRIGHT HOLDER whose rights are being infringed upon.
The community really doesn't have a right to scream "give us the source".. only the copyright holders do.
I mean, I know this is slashdot, and a million people are going to say the same thing...
but that's rediculous. A VISA is a very, very common international term NOT related to credit cards. If the site was about any kind of financial transaction providing, I'd say this was completely justified.....
"It's only if you get it before you've contracted the virus, I'm guessing, that it's even effective. This is a long, long way from developing something that can remove/cure cancer 100% effectively."
By definition, a VACCINE is something you administer prior to exposure. A cure and a vaccine are two different things. You can get vaccinated against Hepatitis B, for instance, but there is still no *cure* for Hep-B. If you catch it, because you aren't immunized, you are still screwed.
The article, even the SUMMARY clearly said that this is a vaccine for the virus that causes 100% of all cervical cancer cases.... that's fairly accurate. I think most of us know there is no single cause of cancer, and hence, no single cure (or vaccine)
Or rather, it would, if newspapers didn't have professional ethics that don't let them do this.
Leaked information that is "kind of, but not really, secret" is one thing; you can bet if some jerk at a company leaked, say, blueprints for their next car, the newspaper won't publish it. A leaked memo full of opinions is a little different than a flyer.
You just don't get it... if I file a big report on some new experiment, and someone leaks it, they ARE in shit if they publish it; copyright law DOES apply.
Yeah, they should go after individuals... absolutely. They also have a right to keep their information from being published. They aren't "going after" the website.. they just want the information taken down, which MAKESE SENSE and IS FAIR IN THIS CASE.
Can't always upgrade them.. but WHO CARES. I mean, okay, if you are on a ghetto budget like most of America or the rest of the world, I guess a component PC at home is way cheaper and easier to upgrade once in a while when you finish begging for change on the streetcorner and get enough nickles for that new video card/ram slice/whatever...
But some of us just sink a bundle into a sexy new rockin laptop to make everyone on the airplane/hotel/yacht jealous every 18 months or so. Really.. count up how much some overclocker fiends spend in a year incrementally upgrading their computer.. then look at what they could have bought if they waited and saved the money.. it's surprising.
Yes, actually, that's the perception they are trying to smash. Laptops have sucked for games for quite a while, mianly due to the lack of proper 3d support compared to desktops. Only in the last 18 months or so have laptops that contain geforce or other higher-end 3d video cards been available.
Plus, people like to bitch (wrongly) about LCDs being no good.
but my eye tests don't indicate so. My vision is actually quite sensitive.
I don't think you've actually used a modern LCD, or you wouldn't be saying this. This used to be very true; however, I can attest that the screen on my Toshiba Satellite 4200 definately has no noticeable ghosting, and is *just fine* for playing any video game I've put on it. Never ONCE Have I said "Boy, I wish I had a crt, because this looks crappy"
I went from using a 21" monitor to this LCD, because the LCD looks better, including running video games.
Gaming on laptops is really an option, believe it.
Mobile gamings is fine. No, you can't get the top, top, top of the line video card in your laptop; but gone are the days when the laptop sucks compared to the desktop.
I play quake3, warcraft 3, neverwinter nights, etctera, on my laptop with no problems or complaints whatsoever. No, I don't get 300 fps at 1600x1200 in quake3, nor do I really care.
And then publish a small exerpt from it, which normally is considered fair-use, I am still violating copyright; I am doing so simply be stealing the work in the first place.
I don't get why everyone is so against wal-mart et-al this time... mostly it's because they haven't read the article.
Here we have someone STEALING then PUBLISHING confidential information; and it's not like it's the cure for cancer or anything like that...
and everyone is calling them names for.. . trying to protect what is rightfully theirs?
In Vegas, card counting is NOT *cheating*. Cheating is illegal, and you can go to prison. Cheating would be manipulating a game in some way, or using some kind of computing device to help you (and that part is only because of specific laws passed.. cheating used to only apply to outright cheating) You cannot go to prison, or even be fined, for card counting. No cheating involved. The casino simply does not want you to play, because they will constantly lose money to you, so you are a liability.
When they kick you out, they tell you that you can't come back because you are NOT ALLOWED in their buildling, and that if you are on the premesis, you will be charged with criminal trespass.
In Atlantic City, it's specifically illegal for casinos to kick you out for card counting.
Stores prevent people from coming back by saying "Don't come in here, or you will be charged with tresspassing"
Was there really a 50% increase in major pipes today? And perhaps yesterday? I thought something was funny... couldn't play quake for 2 days cause of an extra 100ms that came from nowhere.
And in the pre-IP days, if all you had was a bunch of computers and some ethernet cards, it's all you needed, and easier to set up to boot (no setup involved)
And it has less overhead that NetBIOS over TCP, if you want to get really technical.
Yes.. well... Dont'forget that, in some cases, this is a matter of a) No contractual speed limit b) Speed limit is set by a setting in the modem the person OWNS c) Nobody said NOT to do it.
So although you might think it's 'obvious" that the cable company wont'like it... that is grounds for terminating service, not having the FBI show up.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, back when I had DOS at home, everyone else had unix, right?
Get a grip. We're talking about HOME COMPUTERS HERE. PCs. Not big unix workstations.
I have a problem with fatcats who want to change the law so they can make even MORE money, and screw over the little guy. Want to make more money? Make better movies. Don't become complacent.
Great movies like this are WHY movie production will ALWAYS be able to make money, even without copy controls.
I mean, here I am, all excited about a new trailer.. and I go look, wait for it to download....
THIS TRAILER HAS BEEN UP FOR OVER 2 MONTHS.
Way to go slashdot.. that's just fantastic reporting. You guys rule. Hey, I suppose we're so busy reading slashdot we need you to tell us 2 months later when a trailer comes out.
Next thing you know, you'll be telling us that Star Wars Episode 2 was just released in theaters! And in Febuary, you'll be telling us it's 2003!
They also used it in Photo Guy.. at least int he copy I watched.
I suspect, though, given that the first half was the soundtrack from American Beauty and the last was straight out of Requiem for a Dream, that it was just something the pirate kiddies added in on a pre-released version with no soundtrack.
Okay.
.net, all the new .net applications will just WORK IN *NIX.
So you can write an app, and run it anywhere.
So you can either use a web browser as a display, or native windows, or gtk, because there is a translation layer.
Because C isn't object oriented.
Becuase if we hook into
If you are writing a C compiler in C, how do you compile it in the first place?
Traditionally, you compile by hand, which produces crappy but working code.. then you use the resulting compiler to re-compile, yielding clean code.
Right.. so point out that looking at porn will cause you to get your library priveleges taken away.
Where have I *agreed* to agree? I haven't. What if I never read this little text file?
If we expect this to hold up, then we sure better not complain about EULA's and click-through agreements because they have no signature, and so forth, because this is even less clear.
Your points are right.. but what we are talking about is when a given license comes into effect, not what the terms of that license are.
The terms of the gpl we understand.. the question is whether or not you are forced into it in the first place.
If you don't accept the GPL,and you redistribute, or otherwise do something not allowed by standard copyright law, then you are guilty of copyright violation, but not of "violating the GPL", as you never agreed to it in the first place.
not true.
Look at it this way. The GPL is not *forced* upon you. You do not have to accept it; you don't click through, you don't sign anything, and it's not an EULA.
What it IS is a set of terms under which you can do things other than what standard copyright allows. If you don't accept the GPL, you are bound by standard copyright law; no more, no less.
If I use code available under the GPL in my softeware, the GPL is ONE option I can choose to accept to allow me to distribute/modify the code in my own work. I can also choose to contact the authors and negotiate another license. Or I can choose to NOT use any license, and hope I don't get sued by the copyright holders for copyright violation.
My point is that the GPL is not something you are forced into; it's something you can choose to use in order to avoid legal problems.
If you distribute some work that happens to be available under the GPL without accepting the terms of the GPL, you are guilty of copyright violation; you cannot be forced to release source, though you can be forced to stop distributing, and punitive damages, and releasing source will probably be one legal remedy for you (comply with a license that was offered so you don't get sued)
They are not "required to by the GPL".
What they are REQUIRED to do is have a license to re-distribute the work of another.. and one way they can do that is by following the GPL.
As they didn't do that; they were guilty of copyright infringement, not "violating the GPL".
Furthermore, the only poeple who can really force someone to do something is the COPYRIGHT HOLDER whose rights are being infringed upon.
The community really doesn't have a right to scream "give us the source".. only the copyright holders do.
I mean, I know this is slashdot, and a million people are going to say the same thing...
but that's rediculous. A VISA is a very, very common international term NOT related to credit cards.
If the site was about any kind of financial transaction providing, I'd say this was completely justified.....
Heh.... actually
The CD format was developed as a medium-fidelity format... cheap, easy to mass produce, and good enough quality for the home user.
Only in later years after mass market acceptance did they start calling it "high fidelity"
It's not a copyright system. Copyright is a matter of law, not technology.
This is a copy protection system.
"It's only if you get it before you've contracted the virus, I'm guessing, that it's even effective. This is a long, long way from developing something that can remove/cure cancer 100% effectively."
By definition, a VACCINE is something you administer prior to exposure. A cure and a vaccine are two different things. You can get vaccinated against Hepatitis B, for instance, but there is still no *cure* for Hep-B. If you catch it, because you aren't immunized, you are still screwed.
The article, even the SUMMARY clearly said that this is a vaccine for the virus that causes 100% of all cervical cancer cases.... that's fairly accurate.
I think most of us know there is no single cause of cancer, and hence, no single cure (or vaccine)
Or rather, it would, if newspapers didn't have professional ethics that don't let them do this.
Leaked information that is "kind of, but not really, secret" is one thing; you can bet if some jerk at a company leaked, say, blueprints for their next car, the newspaper won't publish it.
A leaked memo full of opinions is a little different than a flyer.
You just don't get it... if I file a big report on some new experiment, and someone leaks it, they ARE in shit if they publish it; copyright law DOES apply.
Yeah, they should go after individuals... absolutely. They also have a right to keep their information from being published. They aren't "going after" the website.. they just want the information taken down, which MAKESE SENSE and IS FAIR IN THIS CASE.
Absolutely.
Can't always upgrade them.. but WHO CARES. I mean, okay, if you are on a ghetto budget like most of America or the rest of the world, I guess a component PC at home is way cheaper and easier to upgrade once in a while when you finish begging for change on the streetcorner and get enough nickles for that new video card/ram slice/whatever...
But some of us just sink a bundle into a sexy new rockin laptop to make everyone on the airplane/hotel/yacht jealous every 18 months or so. Really.. count up how much some overclocker fiends spend in a year incrementally upgrading their computer.. then look at what they could have bought if they waited and saved the money.. it's surprising.
Yes, actually, that's the perception they are trying to smash.
Laptops have sucked for games for quite a while, mianly due to the lack of proper 3d support compared to desktops. Only in the last 18 months or so have laptops that contain geforce or other higher-end 3d video cards been available.
Plus, people like to bitch (wrongly) about LCDs being no good.
but my eye tests don't indicate so.
My vision is actually quite sensitive.
I don't think you've actually used a modern LCD, or you wouldn't be saying this. This used to be very true; however, I can attest that the screen on my Toshiba Satellite 4200 definately has no noticeable ghosting, and is *just fine* for playing any video game I've put on it. Never ONCE Have I said "Boy, I wish I had a crt, because this looks crappy"
I went from using a 21" monitor to this LCD, because the LCD looks better, including running video games.
Gaming on laptops is really an option, believe it.
Mobile gamings is fine.
No, you can't get the top, top, top of the line video card in your laptop; but gone are the days when the laptop sucks compared to the desktop.
I play quake3, warcraft 3, neverwinter nights, etctera, on my laptop with no problems or complaints whatsoever. No, I don't get 300 fps at 1600x1200 in quake3, nor do I really care.
And then publish a small exerpt from it, which normally is considered fair-use, I am still violating copyright; I am doing so simply be stealing the work in the first place.
I don't get why everyone is so against wal-mart et-al this time... mostly it's because they haven't read the article.
Here we have someone STEALING then PUBLISHING confidential information; and it's not like it's the cure for cancer or anything like that...
and everyone is calling them names for.. . trying to protect what is rightfully theirs?
In Vegas, card counting is NOT *cheating*. Cheating is illegal, and you can go to prison.
Cheating would be manipulating a game in some way, or using some kind of computing device to help you (and that part is only because of specific laws passed.. cheating used to only apply to outright cheating) You cannot go to prison, or even be fined, for card counting. No cheating involved. The casino simply does not want you to play, because they will constantly lose money to you, so you are a liability.
When they kick you out, they tell you that you can't come back because you are NOT ALLOWED in their buildling, and that if you are on the premesis, you will be charged with criminal trespass.
In Atlantic City, it's specifically illegal for casinos to kick you out for card counting.
Stores prevent people from coming back by saying "Don't come in here, or you will be charged with tresspassing"
Was there really a 50% increase in major pipes today? And perhaps yesterday? I thought something was funny... couldn't play quake for 2 days cause of an extra 100ms that came from nowhere.
It's NetBIOS (LanManager, if you like)
Old-school networking, using it's own protocol.
And in the pre-IP days, if all you had was a bunch of computers and some ethernet cards, it's all you needed, and easier to set up to boot (no setup involved)
And it has less overhead that NetBIOS over TCP, if you want to get really technical.
Yes.. well...
Dont'forget that, in some cases, this is a matter of
a) No contractual speed limit
b) Speed limit is set by a setting in the modem the person OWNS
c) Nobody said NOT to do it.
So although you might think it's 'obvious" that the cable company wont'like it... that is grounds for terminating service, not having the FBI show up.