That is completely wrong. There are in fact real dollars behind all the ISK in the game. Real money was "lost". Just because you can't (legally) convert ISK to Dollars doesn't mean the money isn't real. There are quite a few people who convert Dollars to ISK by buying PLEX (Pilot License EXtensions) in game and selling them on the open market. The economy in Eve is a real thing. Some people (Such as The Mitanni) actually make a living off the game and no longer work. Me, I'm satisfied just making enough ISK to buy those PLEX's and not have to pay for my game in terms of Dollars.
That is a really bad sign. That makes giving them classified message traffic treason, which is punishable by death during time of war. This does not bode well for Bradley Manning.
Rather than slowing things down, set up a real alt, not using one of your two spare character slots. If you're making that much, you can buy two plex's a month in game, right? Train the other one to do cool shit, but take your time. One of my corp mates has an alt that he's done _nothing_ with except train core cert to elite. Now that he has core at elite, all he has to do is train up whatever skills he wants for whatever ships and weapons. That doesn't take all that long.
"IT departments everywhere noted huge gains in productivity today, as LulzSec announced it was taking Eve Online, offline. 'We don't know what happened exactly, but the whole tech crew start screaming about their crack being gone, and suddenly things started to get fixed. Oh - and they all even took showers.'"
Who is your QSA? Who ever it is, they're giving you terrible advice. That should have been as simple as pointing out to them that the website was not part of the card holder environment, and as such, PCI didn't apply to it anyway. If they don't know that, you don't want to deal with them anyway.
Also, PCI is strictly mandatory - if you want to accept credit cards. Mandatory compliance came into the picture in 2008.
Lastly, with the new 2.0 spec, you are supposed to be taking a risk based approach to compliance, which makes pretty much everything you've posted to the contrary laughable.
Ask them what their security plan is? How often do they conduct internal and external security scans? Do they conform to any security standards, like NIST, SANS, or even PCI? Also, ensure you have permission to conduct your own security scans, and ask them if you get results where there is a CVSS score of 4.0 or greater.
you used to hear these things on slashdot FIRST, sometimes several days ahead of the mainstream media, and now slashdot is at least a week behind. This is old, old news at this point.
More importantly, if you DO pass this to a third party, PCI DSS 1.2 states you are still responsible for compliance, so in effect, this gains you nothing.
You are permitted to store the information long enough to get authorization from your processor. You are permitted to transmit the data if it's encrypted. The encryption must meet the standards defined in the PCI DSS 1.2 appendix.
Are you one of ASCAP's shills? What exactly is your relationship with ASCAP? Are you a lawyer?
I have already pointed out that their FAQ is a NON issue here. Feel free to actually read what I write in response, rather than just parroting non-sense.
Second, go look up the word 'indemnification'. I'll wait... Ok. Got it? Good.
Third, I hope that one of them posts their contract so that people who don't understand that parody is protected free speech (that would be you) finally 'get it'. They may not be able to - I don't know if the contract has a provision preventing disclosure to a third party, but I do know such clauses are common.
Sheesh. If you just come back with the same old BS, I'm not going to bother to respond.
I did my first professional work at the age of 5. I've worked in the industry on and off ever since, and I've NEVER seen ASCAP compensate a small, local musician.
To this crowd, that is the point. If a document surfaces that shows the truth, the geeks will all come out in force against ASCAP. I know. I'm a geek, too.
No, YOU are wrong, but not for the reasons you think.
He is indemnified by his agreement with karaoke-version.com. An agreement that is separate from what is published in their FAQ, according to DJ Particle, who has the same type of contract with them.
In short, this is only a matter of law in that law governs contracts.
If there is no clause in your contract with them that prohibits reproduction or disclosure to a third party, I think it would help BA Dave in the court of public opinion here if you could reveal some of those details.
Yes, agreed. Sadly, Al was big enough that they would have made things very difficult for him had he not done so. Why Luke did is beyond me, but it's also none of my business.:-)
BA Dave paid for his backing tracks with a license that specifically allows this kind of reuse non-commercially. He gives his music away, and is thus non-commercial. ASCAP is shaking him down anywway like the thugs that they are.
Uh, no. The law here very clearly IS on BA Dave's side. I am far more informed on this than you think. See my other comments for a better explanation, as I don't wish to repeat it over and over and over. BA Dave doesn't charge for his music, but did in fact pay for his backing tracks with an agreement that allows their reuse for non-commercial purposes without additional fees. He gives his music away, he doesn't profit from them, and is thus non-commercial. ASCAP is acting like a pimp.
Sadly untrue. Due to the sampling methodology they use, small member artists usually never see a dime from ASCAP. They keep the large artists who could prevail against them happy, and keep the rest.
Oh, I totally have bias (as you well know, I'm sure since you have me friended). I'm a DJ for Dementia Radio and crap like this (ASCAP / BMI extortion) threatens our ability to function as a community. No one in this sector of art is making ANY money. Every single person I know in Dementia has a day job, without exception. Even The Great Luke Ski supports himself as a caricature artist. Not everyone is as popular as Tom Smith, Jonathon Coulton, or Wield Al Yankovic. Most don't make any kind of profit at all, and do it for the Art. For ASCAP to shake down artists for other artists who aren't really owed anything (see the various legal opinions) and who DON'T ever see the money anyway are EXACTLY like the RIAA in this regard. They are leaches who exist on the life blood of the people they should exist to represent. I have been involved in the business of music all of my life, and so have my parents and grandparents. BMI/ASCAP are nothing but boils on the ass of humanity. Am I biased. You bet your ass I am. I am biased against all manor of pimps and thugs - and these guys are at the top of the list.
Slashdot Mirror
That is completely wrong. There are in fact real dollars behind all the ISK in the game. Real money was "lost". Just because you can't (legally) convert ISK to Dollars doesn't mean the money isn't real. There are quite a few people who convert Dollars to ISK by buying PLEX (Pilot License EXtensions) in game and selling them on the open market. The economy in Eve is a real thing. Some people (Such as The Mitanni) actually make a living off the game and no longer work. Me, I'm satisfied just making enough ISK to buy those PLEX's and not have to pay for my game in terms of Dollars.
That is a really bad sign. That makes giving them classified message traffic treason, which is punishable by death during time of war. This does not bode well for Bradley Manning.
Rather than slowing things down, set up a real alt, not using one of your two spare character slots. If you're making that much, you can buy two plex's a month in game, right? Train the other one to do cool shit, but take your time. One of my corp mates has an alt that he's done _nothing_ with except train core cert to elite. Now that he has core at elite, all he has to do is train up whatever skills he wants for whatever ships and weapons. That doesn't take all that long.
Or, go whole hog and train up to fly a titan.
"IT departments everywhere noted huge gains in productivity today, as LulzSec announced it was taking Eve Online, offline. 'We don't know what happened exactly, but the whole tech crew start screaming about their crack being gone, and suddenly things started to get fixed. Oh - and they all even took showers.'"
Who is your QSA? Who ever it is, they're giving you terrible advice. That should have been as simple as pointing out to them that the website was not part of the card holder environment, and as such, PCI didn't apply to it anyway. If they don't know that, you don't want to deal with them anyway.
Also, PCI is strictly mandatory - if you want to accept credit cards. Mandatory compliance came into the picture in 2008.
Lastly, with the new 2.0 spec, you are supposed to be taking a risk based approach to compliance, which makes pretty much everything you've posted to the contrary laughable.
Ask them what their security plan is? How often do they conduct internal and external security scans? Do they conform to any security standards, like NIST, SANS, or even PCI? Also, ensure you have permission to conduct your own security scans, and ask them if you get results where there is a CVSS score of 4.0 or greater.
I'm guessing you've never read http://funroll-loops.info/, an excellent collection of quotes from actual Gentards.
you used to hear these things on slashdot FIRST, sometimes several days ahead of the mainstream media, and now slashdot is at least a week behind. This is old, old news at this point.
Yes, the one that didn't FUCKING SUCK BALLS like you do.
GO TEAM EDWARD (JAMES OLMOS).
His first one - the second one, he built, after he lost his hand. The one in the third movie is the one he built.
Everyone add the tag, Cylons to this one. :-D
More importantly, if you DO pass this to a third party, PCI DSS 1.2 states you are still responsible for compliance, so in effect, this gains you nothing.
False.
You are permitted to store the information long enough to get authorization from your processor. You are permitted to transmit the data if it's encrypted. The encryption must meet the standards defined in the PCI DSS 1.2 appendix.
Look it up: https://pcisecuritystandards.org/
Are you one of ASCAP's shills? What exactly is your relationship with ASCAP? Are you a lawyer?
I have already pointed out that their FAQ is a NON issue here. Feel free to actually read what I write in response, rather than just parroting non-sense.
Second, go look up the word 'indemnification'. I'll wait... Ok. Got it? Good.
Third, I hope that one of them posts their contract so that people who don't understand that parody is protected free speech (that would be you) finally 'get it'. They may not be able to - I don't know if the contract has a provision preventing disclosure to a third party, but I do know such clauses are common.
Sheesh. If you just come back with the same old BS, I'm not going to bother to respond.
Sorry, but I don't buy it.
I did my first professional work at the age of 5. I've worked in the industry on and off ever since, and I've NEVER seen ASCAP compensate a small, local musician.
Read this:
http://www.woodpecker.com/writing/essays/royalty-politics.html
and this:
http://www.woodpecker.com/writing/essays/phillips.html
To this crowd, that is the point. If a document surfaces that shows the truth, the geeks will all come out in force against ASCAP. I know. I'm a geek, too.
No, YOU are wrong, but not for the reasons you think.
He is indemnified by his agreement with karaoke-version.com. An agreement that is separate from what is published in their FAQ, according to DJ Particle, who has the same type of contract with them.
In short, this is only a matter of law in that law governs contracts.
If there is no clause in your contract with them that prohibits reproduction or disclosure to a third party, I think it would help BA Dave in the court of public opinion here if you could reveal some of those details.
Right - additionally, I thought you and BA Dave both had separate agreements that aren't reflected in their FAQs.
Just because it's in the FAQ doesn't mean it's the whole story (to the OP).
Yes, agreed. Sadly, Al was big enough that they would have made things very difficult for him had he not done so. Why Luke did is beyond me, but it's also none of my business. :-)
Pretty clearly, you didn't RTFA if you think BA Dave owes anyone anything.
He doesn't profit from his music - he gives it away for nothing, AND, he PAID for his backing tracks already in a way that allows reuse!
What part of that makes ASCAP look good in any way?
Wrong.
BA Dave paid for his backing tracks with a license that specifically allows this kind of reuse non-commercially. He gives his music away, and is thus non-commercial. ASCAP is shaking him down anywway like the thugs that they are.
Uh, no. The law here very clearly IS on BA Dave's side. I am far more informed on this than you think. See my other comments for a better explanation, as I don't wish to repeat it over and over and over. BA Dave doesn't charge for his music, but did in fact pay for his backing tracks with an agreement that allows their reuse for non-commercial purposes without additional fees. He gives his music away, he doesn't profit from them, and is thus non-commercial. ASCAP is acting like a pimp.
Sadly untrue. Due to the sampling methodology they use, small member artists usually never see a dime from ASCAP. They keep the large artists who could prevail against them happy, and keep the rest.
Oh, I totally have bias (as you well know, I'm sure since you have me friended). I'm a DJ for Dementia Radio and crap like this (ASCAP / BMI extortion) threatens our ability to function as a community. No one in this sector of art is making ANY money. Every single person I know in Dementia has a day job, without exception. Even The Great Luke Ski supports himself as a caricature artist. Not everyone is as popular as Tom Smith, Jonathon Coulton, or Wield Al Yankovic. Most don't make any kind of profit at all, and do it for the Art. For ASCAP to shake down artists for other artists who aren't really owed anything (see the various legal opinions) and who DON'T ever see the money anyway are EXACTLY like the RIAA in this regard. They are leaches who exist on the life blood of the people they should exist to represent. I have been involved in the business of music all of my life, and so have my parents and grandparents. BMI/ASCAP are nothing but boils on the ass of humanity. Am I biased. You bet your ass I am. I am biased against all manor of pimps and thugs - and these guys are at the top of the list.