Most newspapers and magazines are engaged in the business of generating newspapers and magazines, not litigation. They just need to pay the fee when they decide to pursue a copyright claim, like you and I.
c. By posting Content on any public area of MySpace.com, you automatically grant as well as represent and warrant that you have the right to grant to MySpace.com, an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, fully paid, worldwide license to use, copy, perform, display, and distribute such information and content to MySpace.com and that MySpace.com has the right to prepare derivative works of, or incorporate into other works, such information and content, and to grant and authorize sublicenses of the foregoing.
So a little more generous to MySpace, but the important parts are that it is non-exclusive (so she retains rights) and that MySpace can grant a license (but I doubt the newspaper obtained one from them). The changes later in the year seem to take away stuff about derivative works, so if it happened after that, even less of a chance of the newspaper having permission.
Did he do those things? If the message he sent the editor said, in preface to the copy of the rant 'look what so and so said on her blag', then he didn't make a false representation or impersonate anybody.
(I only looked at the linked decision briefly and it didn't really seem to relate the details of how the rant passed from principal to editor)
1. MySpace.com does not claim any ownership rights in the text, files, images, photos, video, sounds, musical works, works of authorship, or any other materials (collectively, "Content") that you post to the MySpace Services. After posting your Content to the MySpace Services, you continue to retain all ownership rights in such Content, and you continue to have the right to use your Content in any way you choose. By displaying or publishing ("posting") any Content on or through the MySpace Services, you hereby grant to MySpace.com a limited license to use, modify, publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce, and distribute such Content solely on and through the MySpace Services.
My laptop is doing pretty well 1.5 years after the warranty (guarantee) ran out. If I had the money, I'd probably be looking at replacing it (I don't feel like having to deal with something after it breaks). I will certainly be looking at replacing it this time next year.
Of course, with the rovers, they had to build that guarantee into the equipment, they (apparently) did not have the option of simply shipping a replacement.
They built them to nearly guarantee a 90 day lifespan, not for a 90 day lifespan. They were planning on them lasting longer. Probably not this long though.
300 watts per square meter is probably a reasonably fair estimate of solar power, let's say for 8 hours a day. So that's 2.4 kilowatt hours per square meter per day. A gallon of gasoline is equivalent to roughly 33 kilowatt hours, so assuming 2 days of generation, you need almost 7 square meters for each gallon of gasoline that you would have consumed.
That's ignoring efficiency completely, but I doubt hydrogen powered ICEs are so much more efficient than gas that the gain overwhelms the losses from hydrolysis.
So someone who drives a reasonably fuel efficient vehicle 200 miles a week needs somewhere between 35 and 60 square meters of solar panels to get enough hydrogen in 2 days. Devote the panels to full time hydrolysis and you are still talking about 15-20 square meters (which is more reasonable).
If you decide that my 2.4 kilowatt hours per square meter per day is generous, the required surface area goes back up pretty quickly...
Most people who published content would still immediately give permission to link and refer to their content (but they would have to do so explicitly).
People doing expensive investigations would have the legal right to exclusively publish their content for whatever length of time they chose (but would be insane to not eventually grant permission to link to and refer to said content).
It is an interesting thought experiment, at the very least.
They are looking at $6 billion of additional revenue. The profits aren't likely to be anywhere near that.
The $6 billion is probably a decent percentage of their current revenues though, and if they figure that the system won't do much to their profit margins (who knows what they figure), it should mean more dollars for them.
It certainly seems so for binary software (especially if you measure by volume).
Software that provides the source is a little different, but it is often the case that old source will not 'simply' compile on a modern system (but at least you can try, and if you really need it, it is likely to eventually work).
Yes, the concept is well defined. Whether a particular work fits the definition is generally less well defined (but I didn't say that very well in my comment).
I can't really find anything about a lawsuit (but I have not searched anywhere near exhaustively), but I can find where Accuweather tried to get (former) Senator Rick Santorum to pass a bill preventing NOAA/NWS from providing data to the public:
Even prior to that time period, the NWS provided pretty good access to their data. I think the utter failure of that bill prompted them to go ahead and make a consumer portal at weather.com.
This slashdot story suggests that weather.gov existed already and that Accuweather started about by trying to make noise against a policy change:
Maybe. I have some pretty strong doubts about MMOs consuming all that much motivation and intelligence, they likely take away from similarly frivolous time consumers.
It depends on how you look at it. If, when I say I have nothing to hide, I mean that I do not believe any of my actions to be immoral or unethical, I could be making perfect sense, depending on my attitude towards avoiding societal consequences (someone might even feel it is important to bring attention to such laws; I don't think I would risk much prison time to do such).
Slashdot Mirror
They tricked him (dropped him early or whatever).
You buy expensive chargers to 'save on energy' but have no issues with buying them to leave in different rooms of your house?
Above and in this comment for those not following:
http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1285749&cid=28515565
Most newspapers and magazines are engaged in the business of generating newspapers and magazines, not litigation. They just need to pay the fee when they decide to pursue a copyright claim, like you and I.
No need to speculate:
http://web.archive.org/web/20050106060250/http://www.myspace.com/misc/terms.html
(More at:
http://web.archive.org/web/*/www.myspace.com/misc/terms.html)
The pertinent section seems to be as follows:
c. By posting Content on any public area of MySpace.com, you automatically grant as well as represent and warrant that you have the right to grant to MySpace.com, an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, fully paid, worldwide license to use, copy, perform, display, and distribute such information and content to MySpace.com and that MySpace.com has the right to prepare derivative works of, or incorporate into other works, such information and content, and to grant and authorize sublicenses of the foregoing.
So a little more generous to MySpace, but the important parts are that it is non-exclusive (so she retains rights) and that MySpace can grant a license (but I doubt the newspaper obtained one from them). The changes later in the year seem to take away stuff about derivative works, so if it happened after that, even less of a chance of the newspaper having permission.
Did he do those things? If the message he sent the editor said, in preface to the copy of the rant 'look what so and so said on her blag', then he didn't make a false representation or impersonate anybody.
(I only looked at the linked decision briefly and it didn't really seem to relate the details of how the rant passed from principal to editor)
6. Proprietary Rights in Content on MySpace.com.
1. MySpace.com does not claim any ownership rights in the text, files, images, photos, video, sounds, musical works, works of authorship, or any other materials (collectively, "Content") that you post to the MySpace Services. After posting your Content to the MySpace Services, you continue to retain all ownership rights in such Content, and you continue to have the right to use your Content in any way you choose. By displaying or publishing ("posting") any Content on or through the MySpace Services, you hereby grant to MySpace.com a limited license to use, modify, publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce, and distribute such Content solely on and through the MySpace Services.
from:
http://www1.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=misc.terms
So it sounds like she probably retains the copyright.
My laptop is doing pretty well 1.5 years after the warranty (guarantee) ran out. If I had the money, I'd probably be looking at replacing it (I don't feel like having to deal with something after it breaks). I will certainly be looking at replacing it this time next year.
Of course, with the rovers, they had to build that guarantee into the equipment, they (apparently) did not have the option of simply shipping a replacement.
They built them to nearly guarantee a 90 day lifespan, not for a 90 day lifespan. They were planning on them lasting longer. Probably not this long though.
Worst case, you will likely always be able to pull up a software keyboard and toggle it there.
(On windows, osk.exe)
Does windows 2000 even know what a DVD is?
I expect that they message may have been from your burning software (but maybe there is something funky going down).
You guys put ketchup on everything?
I'm pretty sure that the only way to make a € that doesn't get eaten by slashcode is to use the named entity: €.
£ and ¥ also seem to work: £ ¥.
How big of a solar array are you figuring there?
300 watts per square meter is probably a reasonably fair estimate of solar power, let's say for 8 hours a day. So that's 2.4 kilowatt hours per square meter per day. A gallon of gasoline is equivalent to roughly 33 kilowatt hours, so assuming 2 days of generation, you need almost 7 square meters for each gallon of gasoline that you would have consumed.
That's ignoring efficiency completely, but I doubt hydrogen powered ICEs are so much more efficient than gas that the gain overwhelms the losses from hydrolysis.
So someone who drives a reasonably fuel efficient vehicle 200 miles a week needs somewhere between 35 and 60 square meters of solar panels to get enough hydrogen in 2 days. Devote the panels to full time hydrolysis and you are still talking about 15-20 square meters (which is more reasonable).
If you decide that my 2.4 kilowatt hours per square meter per day is generous, the required surface area goes back up pretty quickly...
Watching a movie is also largely frivolous. And so on. Relax a little bit. Maybe try playing some WoW.
Most people who published content would still immediately give permission to link and refer to their content (but they would have to do so explicitly).
People doing expensive investigations would have the legal right to exclusively publish their content for whatever length of time they chose (but would be insane to not eventually grant permission to link to and refer to said content).
It is an interesting thought experiment, at the very least.
I guess it might, unless a wide range of online content providers explicitly give consent to link and paraphrase their content.
This actually seems more likely to me than for everybody to take their balls and go home.
They are looking at $6 billion of additional revenue. The profits aren't likely to be anywhere near that.
The $6 billion is probably a decent percentage of their current revenues though, and if they figure that the system won't do much to their profit margins (who knows what they figure), it should mean more dollars for them.
It certainly seems so for binary software (especially if you measure by volume).
Software that provides the source is a little different, but it is often the case that old source will not 'simply' compile on a modern system (but at least you can try, and if you really need it, it is likely to eventually work).
Yes, the concept is well defined. Whether a particular work fits the definition is generally less well defined (but I didn't say that very well in my comment).
I can't really find anything about a lawsuit (but I have not searched anywhere near exhaustively), but I can find where Accuweather tried to get (former) Senator Rick Santorum to pass a bill preventing NOAA/NWS from providing data to the public:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Weather_Service_Duties_Act_of_2005
Even prior to that time period, the NWS provided pretty good access to their data. I think the utter failure of that bill prompted them to go ahead and make a consumer portal at weather.com.
This slashdot story suggests that weather.gov existed already and that Accuweather started about by trying to make noise against a policy change:
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/04/06/27/0216251.shtml?tid=103&tid=126&tid=95&tid=99
(I imagine that is the discussion you mentioned, but who knows).
Maybe. I have some pretty strong doubts about MMOs consuming all that much motivation and intelligence, they likely take away from similarly frivolous time consumers.
The N810 is not a phone, the internet connection there would be wifi.
I think there are Nokia phones that provide a similar combination of hardware and software though.
It depends on how you look at it. If, when I say I have nothing to hide, I mean that I do not believe any of my actions to be immoral or unethical, I could be making perfect sense, depending on my attitude towards avoiding societal consequences (someone might even feel it is important to bring attention to such laws; I don't think I would risk much prison time to do such).
Get a style zapper:
https://www.squarefree.com/bookmarklets/zap.html#zap_style_sheets
It doesn't reach the point of fixing the problem, but it pretty much makes it really tiny.
Makes it pretty easy to get groceries.