Public shaming is GREAT! It's about a community. It's about poeple.
I am an advocate of privacy! I'm an advocate that the government does not have the right to strip me of that privacy.
And I also know that when I make a tcp connection to a server, that server KNOWS my IP address, and the time the connection was up for, and what was transferred over it, and I have no legal contract with that server stating what can and can't be done with that information. In other words, I have *NO* expectation of privacy.
Just like cellular phones. You have NO expectation of privacy on an analog cellular phone... oh.. unless you live in the US, where cellular scanners are illegal.
Up here, in Canada, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy when using the public airwaves. Period.
Uhh... how are they stretching it here? How is it sickening? Napster Co. Says EXPLICITLY and CLEARLY that TRADING COPYRIGHTED MUSIC IS ILLEGAL. Everyone should know this anyway, but they say it. They also say that THEY WILL BLOCK USERS IF COPYRIGHT HOLDRS INFORM THEM OF VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW. They did not say 'we require a court order stating that said users have broken things'. They said that they would cooperate fully to stop the violation to protect the copyright holder. What is wrong with what metallica is doing? They are doing EXACTLY what napster aksed them to do.
No. They didn't collect any personal information about these people. The COPA says they can't collect things like name, address, phone number, etc of children under 13 wihtout a guardian's permission. It does not mean they cannot log that 'JOE123' shared metallica files.
They aren't trying to 'intimidate' these fans, and why should they be stopped? Look. We all get mad.. right? we all don't like what metallica is doing.
Is their work being traded illegally? *YES* Do the people doing it know this? *YES* Has napster said that napster is not to be used for illegal purposes? *YES* has napster said it will remove users who are using it for illegal purposes? *YES*
Fair use applies to straight copyright law. Contracts and EULAs can add additional rights. Remember, 'fair use' doesn't equate to 'you think it's fair'.
Also, copyright law does not 'grant' you rights, it grants rights TO THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER. It gives them the power to license it to you under their own terms and conditions.
Even if this is the case.. if someone can show that anyone can just go fill out the form and get it.. can they still claim it to be trade secret? Or is this their way of saying 'see.. we're open about everything! we're not trying to hijack the protocol! OH! but if you try to build something using our proprietary extensions, we'll fuck you over'
Common sense goes a long way. That, plus the DMCA makes napster OBLIGATED to do their part. Remember, they are in the middle of a court case. Part of their defense will be that they offer to remove people who are using napster for illegal purposes. In other words.. they don't need to be sued.. they just need to be made aware of the problem, and they'll fix it. Metallica is making them aware of the problem. Now.. will they fix it right away? Who knows.. it's not relevant at this point. Metallica doesn't care.. they are just making a point to help the RIAA in their case, I would bet.
The real truth is that open source just IS. I mean, we wrap it up, put licenses on it, talk about how it will change the world, and try to push it on people.. but in the end, it's here because it's been here for a long time.. it's here because, to a certain segment of the computing community, it's how things should be done. It's here because of poeple who like to share. So. Companies can complain, journalists can complain, they can all say how Open-Source is a 'dead end' idea.. but the fact is, it's been here longer than these commercial companies have.
Remember.. it doesn't say 'sue' 335000 napster users, it says 'ban' them, and if you all remember napster's usage policy.. they say they will ban people if they are made aware of copyright infringement. Metallica is doing just that. Napster hides behind a usage agreement that says that napster is only to be used for legal purposes, and if it is being used for illegal purposes, that they should be informed and the users will be banned. Metallica is simply doing EXACTLY THAT.
They are probably trying to demonstrate that napster had no intention of obeying it's own usage agreement, and that they can't deal with the complaints.
I'm just requoting what someone said in an earlier post.. but they mentioned it was due to long range missiles performing mid-course corrections. this is the critical time for course corrections, and a small error in the missile's knowledge of it's position will mean it misses the target by a WHOLE LOT. The higher and faster it goes, the more so this is true. Who knows. a 1 meter error for an ICBM right before it starts it's descent might mean hundreds of miles of difference...
9.8 m/s^2 = acceleration in earth's gravitational field (near earth). Certainly, this is rough, as it changes depending on your distance from earth (unless I'm totally screwed up).
What they are referring to here is the gravitational constant, used to calculate the force of attraction between two masses.
Uhh...no. The release says it is being turned off at midnight tonight.
The release also said that they government had a mandate to remove SA by 2006. This means they had until 2006 to do it. It means that after 2006, they CAN'T use it. Currently, they will turn it off, and see how things go. They can still turn it back on if they want.
So. I'm impressed.. they will fix the problem. All nice and polite.. and it's not that big a deal.. however... They admit they are in violation, yet are still distributing the code in violation from their site? This should stop immediately until the problem is fixed, no? I mean, they are *NOT* allowed to distribute it, and neither is anybody else.
Of course.... and this might be a bit silly.. but... if it's just some memory management routines... is the nvidia driver a 'derivitave' work, or does it just use a tiny bit of code from some GPL code? Think about it.. if it's not really a derivitave work... the GPL may not apply.
Because the license expressly says that if the software is running on more than one computer at once. It still has to be 'installed' on your machine. THere is still a 'copy' made in memory on your machine. Hence, distribution. ASP's provide things through their own java/web style interfaces.. under which there is no transfer of actual software.
that they will 'monitor' all email.. the point is, it's an eavesdropping infrastructure, similar to what the telephone system has, to a degree, now. Equipment was added to allow the feds to (with proper warrants) eavesdrop. It's simply to make it easier for them to eavesdrop when they have a legal right to.
See.. though it made sense in a certain way... that if you already own the CD, you have the right to listen to the music, therefore, you can d/l it from mp3.com. This may be true.. YOU can't be charged for 'piracy'. However....... This does not change the fact that mp3.com does not have the right to profit (and in the web, hits=profit) from others work without permission, and that is exactly what they were doing.
What are you asking? You say you know that ebay is in the US. Therefore, ebay must obey US law. It doesn't matter if those doing the selling are outside US. According to the US Justice system, you *can* break US law even when not on US soil. They simply have no jurusdiction to prosecute you. Look at the people running online casinos from the carribean. They have LEGAL gambling licenses from the government where their servers are, and al business is run from their, yet, some have been charged by the FBI for 'illegal bookmaking', and if they re-enter the US, they will be arrested.
Regardless of how 'evil' the CoS is, and all their other exploits... If the E-meter was clearly CoS property from the beginning, and not the property of the person auctioning it, or rather, if the CoS has *never* transfered ownership of an e-meter to someone else, and can demonstrate that they *always* own them, then nobody has a right to sell them. Period.
Though it may be entirely possible to produce something like the empeg for a much cheaper price... keep in mind the amount of work that goes into putting something like the empeg into production. What if you have to sell thousands of these things? how will you make them? What about the machined parts? will it fit in a standard car audio bracket? Where will it go? What about vibration? Will you vibration test it, or will the drives just croak?
It's simple. Rap is dying.. so the industry is using washed up rap stars to sue people, just in case they lose. That way, the artist looks bad 'boo hoo' and not the industry.
Slashdot Mirror
Public shaming is GREAT! It's about a community. It's about poeple.
I am an advocate of privacy! I'm an advocate that the government does not have the right to strip me of that privacy.
And I also know that when I make a tcp connection to a server, that server KNOWS my IP address, and the time the connection was up for, and what was transferred over it, and I have no legal contract with that server stating what can and can't be done with that information. In other words, I have *NO* expectation of privacy.
Just like cellular phones. You have NO expectation of privacy on an analog cellular phone... oh.. unless you live in the US, where cellular scanners are illegal.
Up here, in Canada, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy when using the public airwaves. Period.
*sigh*
Back up copies generally refer to software. Or rather, a back-up is generally referred to as 'fair use'.
However, metallica is going after those who are SHARING metallica files, not those who are downloading.
In other words, just because you have the CD, and have the right to a backup copy, does not mean I have the right to give you that backup copy.
Uhh... how are they stretching it here? How is it sickening?
Napster Co. Says EXPLICITLY and CLEARLY that TRADING COPYRIGHTED MUSIC IS ILLEGAL. Everyone should know this anyway, but they say it. They also say that THEY WILL BLOCK USERS IF COPYRIGHT HOLDRS INFORM THEM OF VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW. They did not say 'we require a court order stating that said users have broken things'. They said that they would cooperate fully to stop the violation to protect the copyright holder.
What is wrong with what metallica is doing? They are doing EXACTLY what napster aksed them to do.
No.
They didn't collect any personal information about these people.
The COPA says they can't collect things like name, address, phone number, etc of children under 13 wihtout a guardian's permission. It does not mean they cannot log that 'JOE123' shared metallica files.
They aren't trying to 'intimidate' these fans, and why should they be stopped?
Look. We all get mad.. right? we all don't like what metallica is doing.
Is their work being traded illegally? *YES*
Do the people doing it know this? *YES*
Has napster said that napster is not to be used for illegal purposes? *YES*
has napster said it will remove users who are using it for illegal purposes? *YES*
What's the big deal then? Seriously?
jdk 1.2 *IS* java 2 silly.
Uhh..
how is that news?
They are the 'first' to offer kerberos v5 native in windows 2000? Who ELSE would be offering it as native in windows 2000?
Fair use applies to straight copyright law. Contracts and EULAs can add additional rights. Remember, 'fair use' doesn't equate to 'you think it's fair'.
Also, copyright law does not 'grant' you rights, it grants rights TO THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER. It gives them the power to license it to you under their own terms and conditions.
Even if this is the case.. if someone can show that anyone can just go fill out the form and get it.. can they still claim it to be trade secret?
Or is this their way of saying 'see.. we're open about everything! we're not trying to hijack the protocol! OH! but if you try to build something using our proprietary extensions, we'll fuck you over'
Common sense goes a long way. That, plus the DMCA makes napster OBLIGATED to do their part. Remember, they are in the middle of a court case. Part of their defense will be that they offer to remove people who are using napster for illegal purposes. In other words.. they don't need to be sued.. they just need to be made aware of the problem, and they'll fix it.
Metallica is making them aware of the problem. Now.. will they fix it right away? Who knows.. it's not relevant at this point. Metallica doesn't care.. they are just making a point to help the RIAA in their case, I would bet.
The real truth is that open source just IS.
I mean, we wrap it up, put licenses on it, talk about how it will change the world, and try to push it on people.. but in the end, it's here because it's been here for a long time.. it's here because, to a certain segment of the computing community, it's how things should be done. It's here because of poeple who like to share.
So. Companies can complain, journalists can complain, they can all say how Open-Source is a 'dead end' idea.. but the fact is, it's been here longer than these commercial companies have.
Remember.. it doesn't say 'sue' 335000 napster users, it says 'ban' them, and if you all remember napster's usage policy.. they say they will ban people if they are made aware of copyright infringement. Metallica is doing just that. Napster hides behind a usage agreement that says that napster is only to be used for legal purposes, and if it is being used for illegal purposes, that they should be informed and the users will be banned. Metallica is simply doing EXACTLY THAT.
They are probably trying to demonstrate that napster had no intention of obeying it's own usage agreement, and that they can't deal with the complaints.
I'm just requoting what someone said in an earlier post.. but they mentioned it was due to long range missiles performing mid-course corrections. this is the critical time for course corrections, and a small error in the missile's knowledge of it's position will mean it misses the target by a WHOLE LOT. The higher and faster it goes, the more so this is true.
Who knows. a 1 meter error for an ICBM right before it starts it's descent might mean hundreds of miles of difference...
9.8 m/s^2 = acceleration in earth's gravitational field (near earth). Certainly, this is rough, as it changes depending on your distance from earth (unless I'm totally screwed up).
What they are referring to here is the gravitational constant, used to calculate the force of attraction between two masses.
Uhh...no.
The release says it is being turned off at midnight tonight.
The release also said that they government had a mandate to remove SA by 2006. This means they had until 2006 to do it. It means that after 2006, they CAN'T use it. Currently, they will turn it off, and see how things go. They can still turn it back on if they want.
So. I'm impressed.. they will fix the problem. All nice and polite.. and it's not that big a deal.. however...
They admit they are in violation, yet are still distributing the code in violation from their site? This should stop immediately until the problem is fixed, no? I mean, they are *NOT* allowed to distribute it, and neither is anybody else.
Of course.... and this might be a bit silly.. but... if it's just some memory management routines... is the nvidia driver a 'derivitave' work, or does it just use a tiny bit of code from some GPL code? Think about it.. if it's not really a derivitave work... the GPL may not apply.
Because the license expressly says that if the software is running on more than one computer at once. It still has to be 'installed' on your machine. THere is still a 'copy' made in memory on your machine. Hence, distribution. ASP's provide things through their own java/web style interfaces.. under which there is no transfer of actual software.
that they will 'monitor' all email.. the point is, it's an eavesdropping infrastructure, similar to what the telephone system has, to a degree, now.
Equipment was added to allow the feds to (with proper warrants) eavesdrop. It's simply to make it easier for them to eavesdrop when they have a legal right to.
And that's the truth.
Poor guy.
Well... if that's the case, then my argument is totally irrelevant ;)
See.. though it made sense in a certain way... that if you already own the CD, you have the right to listen to the music, therefore, you can d/l it from mp3.com. This may be true.. YOU can't be charged for 'piracy'. However.......
This does not change the fact that mp3.com does not have the right to profit (and in the web, hits=profit) from others work without permission, and that is exactly what they were doing.
What are you asking?
You say you know that ebay is in the US. Therefore, ebay must obey US law. It doesn't matter if those doing the selling are outside US. According to the US Justice system, you *can* break US law even when not on US soil. They simply have no jurusdiction to prosecute you.
Look at the people running online casinos from the carribean. They have LEGAL gambling licenses from the government where their servers are, and al business is run from their, yet, some have been charged by the FBI for 'illegal bookmaking', and if they re-enter the US, they will be arrested.
Regardless of how 'evil' the CoS is, and all their other exploits...
If the E-meter was clearly CoS property from the beginning, and not the property of the person auctioning it, or rather, if the CoS has *never* transfered ownership of an e-meter to someone else, and can demonstrate that they *always* own them, then nobody has a right to sell them. Period.
Though it may be entirely possible to produce something like the empeg for a much cheaper price... keep in mind the amount of work that goes into putting something like the empeg into production. What if you have to sell thousands of these things? how will you make them? What about the machined parts? will it fit in a standard car audio bracket? Where will it go? What about vibration? Will you vibration test it, or will the drives just croak?
It's simple. Rap is dying.. so the industry is using washed up rap stars to sue people, just in case they lose. That way, the artist looks bad 'boo hoo' and not the industry.