The patent is based on a sentence or two, but also includes how the invention was implemented, so that when the patent expires, how to implement is public knowledge. I think. IANAL.
All you people who came to Dayton last weekend made it near impossible for me to get anywhere (I live about two miles from the airport). If I didn't know all the back roads in that area I think I might still be out there. I will admit that the air show was pretty cool. The Thunderbirds buzzed about 50 yards over my house 30 times or so during their shows on Saturday and Sunday.
And yes, the air force museum is near the top of a list I'd give anyone visiting the states.
To clarify the parent's Ctrl+Enter shortcut (which I assume is from the URL bar), you can type in yahoo[Ctrl+Enter], and be taken to http://www.yahoo.com/. In Mozilla, you type in yahoo[Enter] and you're taken to http://www.yahoo.com/. If you type yahoo[Ctrl+Enter], you get http://www.yahoo.com/ in a new tab (or window). To get a URL in a new tab in Mozilla Firebird, you have to hit [Alt+Enter], and I find [Ctrl+Enter] is more natural.
The mouse scrolling plugin for Mozilla is available at http://autoscroll.mozdev.org/installation.html. It is the same code Mozilla Firebird uses, just Mozilla Firebird includes it by default. I wouldn't be surprised if Mozilla includes it soon as well.
I believe that while Mozilla Firebird is fast, Mozilla is much more mature than Mozilla Firebird.
To further clarify this, you must do a fresh install of Mozilla to get that option. If you have Mozilla currently installed with ChatZilla, you must uninstall it before installing Mozilla without ChatZilla.
Ahh. Ok. When I think of a viewer I normally think of something with more features, but what you mention does make sense as a requirement for a data format to be open.
I would simply go with SVG. The first time I saw an SVG graphic on a webpage I was asked to download a viewer, and 30 seconds later I saw the image. That's not a real inconvenience.
I don't necessarily think there has to be an open-source viewer. If the data format is open, an open-source viewer will come along, and having the government release documents using this format would create demand for such a viewer.
If you read the parent of the parent, it doesn't mention that the poster actually does pirate music. According to you, by simply boycotting CDs, he is "illegally pirating their material" and "shamelessly abusing artists by grabbing their music and never even dreaming of sending them a single dime for it". I guess all of us who boycott CDs should "rot in hell".
And if I'm on trial for child pornography I could motion for a mistrial due to conflict of interests because the judge hates child pornography. I doubt my motion would pass, but i could file it.
So you're saying if I download 10-15 songs from a website the artist and label are out of the same amount of money as if I stole a CD with the same songs, and that there should be no difference in how I would be charged and prosecuted?
To quote yourself, "piracy is an IP issue, you know". Surely you understand that intellectual property is different from physical property. When one takes physical property without consent, it is stealing. When one takes intellectual property without consent, it is piracy. You seem to continually claim that piracy and stealing are one and the same because the owner of the intellectual or physical property is out of money because you pirated or stole whatever item it was. I have downloaded songs off of KaZaA and other file-sharing protocols (however, I no longer do so), and I can honestly tell you that the record companies/cd stores/artists are not out of any money because I downloaded songs off of the internet. If those songs were not available online, I simply would not have listened to music. To answer the question you'd ask after reading that last sentence, I no longer have those songs on my system. I still haven't bought a CD in five years. I listen to the radio occasionally, but otherwise I just don't listen to music.
Now, if I had stolen those CDs, the record companies are out of money because they spent money producing the CD. The money that you claim they would have lost had I pirated the songs is due to marketing, and the amount of money they spend on that would not change.
All of that said, I believe that pirating music is wrong, but it is not as wrong as stealing that same music.
Sooner or later this will be challenged in court. If VA decides to add more provisions to their license, and they say, "We can come into your house at any time and eat your ice cream", would that be okay with everyone, just because they don't actually seem to do it? There is a limit, and that limit has never been made clear.
Ha! I don't have ice cream in my house!
However, a "public utility" must not only abide by the terms in a TOS, but also with advertisements made by itself. By being solely a website, slashdot is sort of advertising that they only affect you through their website, so the ice cream clause in the TOS would be void. However, the clause about them owning everything you do on their website probably would hold up.
And there is no difference between "public utilities", "private organizations" and normal persons. They are all given equal protection under the law by the 14th amendment (I know, it only reads "persons", but the Supreme Court extended that meaning to include corporations and other organizations). The only restrictions made on a "public utilit[y]" are restrictions made by itself, such as by advertising, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, etc.
I think they're going after people who are uploading songs more than those who download them. If you own the CDs, bring them in to court with you, and claim you are space-shifting content that you own.
Slashdot Mirror
A park district near me has something that would work for this instance, and would probably be cheaper, just hard to find.
The patent is based on a sentence or two, but also includes how the invention was implemented, so that when the patent expires, how to implement is public knowledge. I think. IANAL.
All you people who came to Dayton last weekend made it near impossible for me to get anywhere (I live about two miles from the airport). If I didn't know all the back roads in that area I think I might still be out there. I will admit that the air show was pretty cool. The Thunderbirds buzzed about 50 yards over my house 30 times or so during their shows on Saturday and Sunday.
And yes, the air force museum is near the top of a list I'd give anyone visiting the states.
To clarify the parent's Ctrl+Enter shortcut (which I assume is from the URL bar), you can type in yahoo[Ctrl+Enter], and be taken to http://www.yahoo.com/. In Mozilla, you type in yahoo[Enter] and you're taken to http://www.yahoo.com/. If you type yahoo[Ctrl+Enter], you get http://www.yahoo.com/ in a new tab (or window). To get a URL in a new tab in Mozilla Firebird, you have to hit [Alt+Enter], and I find [Ctrl+Enter] is more natural.
The mouse scrolling plugin for Mozilla is available at http://autoscroll.mozdev.org/installation.html. It is the same code Mozilla Firebird uses, just Mozilla Firebird includes it by default. I wouldn't be surprised if Mozilla includes it soon as well.
I believe that while Mozilla Firebird is fast, Mozilla is much more mature than Mozilla Firebird.
To further clarify this, you must do a fresh install of Mozilla to get that option. If you have Mozilla currently installed with ChatZilla, you must uninstall it before installing Mozilla without ChatZilla.
I doubt he uses it much under X.
This was about a year ago when I was still using IE (uggh). Anyway, Mozilla will probably have native SVG support by 1.5.
Ahh. Ok. When I think of a viewer I normally think of something with more features, but what you mention does make sense as a requirement for a data format to be open.
I would simply go with SVG. The first time I saw an SVG graphic on a webpage I was asked to download a viewer, and 30 seconds later I saw the image. That's not a real inconvenience.
I don't necessarily think there has to be an open-source viewer. If the data format is open, an open-source viewer will come along, and having the government release documents using this format would create demand for such a viewer.
So do you give up, saying I "won" this?
If you read the parent of the parent, it doesn't mention that the poster actually does pirate music. According to you, by simply boycotting CDs, he is "illegally pirating their material" and "shamelessly abusing artists by grabbing their music and never even dreaming of sending them a single dime for it". I guess all of us who boycott CDs should "rot in hell".
And if I'm on trial for child pornography I could motion for a mistrial due to conflict of interests because the judge hates child pornography. I doubt my motion would pass, but i could file it.
It's a class-action suit--citizens of California get the money, not the state of California.
Well, I was going more for the +1 Funny instead of the +1 Informative, but I guess the moderators didn't get my joke.
So Microsoft admits that they overcharged for the price of Windows--does this mean that the price of Windows will now go down?
So you're saying if I download 10-15 songs from a website the artist and label are out of the same amount of money as if I stole a CD with the same songs, and that there should be no difference in how I would be charged and prosecuted?
To quote yourself, "piracy is an IP issue, you know". Surely you understand that intellectual property is different from physical property. When one takes physical property without consent, it is stealing. When one takes intellectual property without consent, it is piracy. You seem to continually claim that piracy and stealing are one and the same because the owner of the intellectual or physical property is out of money because you pirated or stole whatever item it was. I have downloaded songs off of KaZaA and other file-sharing protocols (however, I no longer do so), and I can honestly tell you that the record companies/cd stores/artists are not out of any money because I downloaded songs off of the internet. If those songs were not available online, I simply would not have listened to music. To answer the question you'd ask after reading that last sentence, I no longer have those songs on my system. I still haven't bought a CD in five years. I listen to the radio occasionally, but otherwise I just don't listen to music.
Now, if I had stolen those CDs, the record companies are out of money because they spent money producing the CD. The money that you claim they would have lost had I pirated the songs is due to marketing, and the amount of money they spend on that would not change.
All of that said, I believe that pirating music is wrong, but it is not as wrong as stealing that same music.
However, a "public utility" must not only abide by the terms in a TOS, but also with advertisements made by itself. By being solely a website, slashdot is sort of advertising that they only affect you through their website, so the ice cream clause in the TOS would be void. However, the clause about them owning everything you do on their website probably would hold up.
And there is no difference between "public utilities", "private organizations" and normal persons. They are all given equal protection under the law by the 14th amendment (I know, it only reads "persons", but the Supreme Court extended that meaning to include corporations and other organizations). The only restrictions made on a "public utilit[y]" are restrictions made by itself, such as by advertising, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, etc.
I guess I was looking for a hard and fast law, but it makes more sense that it is flexible, as you say.
Well, RHAS will still be sold as a commercial product. RH is now focusing on the business market and is dropping the consumer market.
I think they're going after people who are uploading songs more than those who download them. If you own the CDs, bring them in to court with you, and claim you are space-shifting content that you own.