Did you file a complaint with eBay? I've had two bad experiences (less than $15 in each case) with sellers in the past and, after trying to work it out with them personally, I ended up filing complaints with eBay in both cases and soon thereafter (within 2-3 weeks) I either recieved the item or was refunded my money by the seller. eBay was very prompt in replying to my e-mails, but you really need to have your ducks in a row (copies of all prior e-mails, scans of physical correspondence, receipts, credit card bills, etc.) to make the dispute resolution go smoothly.
The following related situation is something I have been seeking an answer to recently:
If later, I choose to sell software/music/movies that I buy, do I have to provide, freely as a part of the sale, the backup copy (be it a direct CD-R duplicate of the CD or CD-R with.mp3's ripped from the CD, for example)?
The reason I am wondering about this is that I have found that a large number of people sell their "barely-used" CDs/DVDs/software on eBay and yet they never seem to provide the backup copies (as a part of the sale) they may have made. According to "Fair Use", it would seem that since people are allowed to make a backup copy of any media they purchase, that they should, in turn, be required to turn over those backups when the original media is later sold.
My friend, I don't think the RIAA is interested in throwing everyone in jail! On the contrary, if anything, they want keep IP-offenders out of prison so they (the IP-offenders) can keep working in order to pay the fines from all the lawsuits! And rightfully so. Just like many people continue to commonly ignore/disregard laws regarding speed limits, driving-under-the-influence, under-age-drinking, seat-belts. Unregulated P2P is the "crack" of the Internet age. And, the funny thing is, I don't know how the rampant P2P'ers find the time to enjoy all the stuff they download/share - and have I have a feeling they don't actually spend much time enjoying the "fruits of their labor" as a result. On the contrary, for some of the mega-P2P folks I know, it's almost like the act of downloading/sharing IS the payoff!
Actually, the new Metallica CD is NOT copy-protected. Furthermore, in addition to a backup copy, I have already made high-quality.mp3 (using CDex/Lame) and.aac (using iTunes) rips. As far as the online content goes, Metallica is allowing CD-buyers to download decent (128kbps, I believe) mp3-encoded songs from 3 past live performances with a hint that more downloads are to come.
Thank you for that breath of fresh air! I agree wholeheartedly with 99% of what you say, but I am having a hard time understanding why intelligent, internet-savvy folks like yourself keep complaining about the cost of CDs being too high ($15+). I buy CDs quite regularly and I rarely pay more than $10-$12 (including tax and S/H if applicable), and usually far less. How can that be, you ask? Well, first off, I rarely buy my music from the traditional, impulse-buy retail outlets such as Best Buy, Musicland, etc.) because you are usually paying a higher price due to the "convenience-tax" that they levy (just like convenience stores and gas station foodmarts do on snacks and such). Second of all, I rarely buy new releases when they first come out because, oftentimes, they will go on sale after two to three weeks after the hype and excitement has died down. Instead, I buy a lot of used CDs from brick-and-mortar thrift stores and music resellers (e.g., Vintage Vinyl). I also shop around on EBay and the Amazon zShops, where you can find amazing deals (I just got the recently-released Sugar Ray album for $5.50, including S/H, for example). And, lastly, I have started buying single songs and the occasional full album from the Apple iTunes store. The only time I pay more than $10-12 tops for a CD is when it is a rare import or autographed copy, which are fairly uncommon occurrences in my buying habits. Actually, now that I think about it, one of the most expensive "common" CDs I have ever bought was the $19 I spent on Poison's Flesh and Blood that I bought for my girlfriend at the time in 1990 - which was 13 years ago. Heck, I even paid a mere $12 (S/H included) via pre-release order for the new Metallica album - and it even came with a bonus DVD of an album-length, 75+ minute jam session! So, from where I'm sitting, music/CDs have definitely gotten cheaper as time has gone on.
Consider this, however. Let's say I have an acquaintance who is a famous musician and somehow I manage to get a copy of his newly-created music before it been released and I manage to rip it to MP3 and release it on the P2P networks. Have I robbed anyone? Well, according to your argument, I haven't. After all, he still retains the original copy of the music.
But, in truth, I have robbed him if you consider that, by my actions, I have created a potential for loss of income by prematurely releasing his unreleased music via P2P. Could my actions have helped him? Well, yes, since releasing the music may have given him more exposure, which may in turn lead to sales that may not have occurred had I not released his music via P2P.
In the end, I think it's all about theft of choice and theft of potential value. In other words, if I distribute someone else's work via P2P, I have, in effect, made a decision for them (stealing their choice in the matter) in terms of the distribution of the work and, since the potential value of said work is directly related to the distribution it receives, I have indirectly or inadvertently influenced the value of said work, possibly for the better, but probably for the worse.
Sorry, my friend, but you are mistaken about me being a pirate for buying OEM software. Why, you say? Well, OEM software, according to Microsoft's OEM legalese, is intended to be purchased and installed by "system builders", or, in less formal terms, those who are building new Windows-based computers (as opposed toi upgrading them). I did not violate the agreement because I purchased the OEM software in the role of a "system builder" (i.e., I someone who was building a Windows-based computer) and with the hardware to build the new machine that is utilizing it. The license remains valid as long as it is installed and registered on the original machine that was built to use it (i.e., the license it not transferrable to new machines). This has been discussed time and time again on microsoft.* newsgroups and is the consensus of the Microsoft employees that have responded for clarification on the issue. I would post links, but you seem smart enough to dig for yourself.
I'm so sick of people complaining that Microsoft's OS software is so expensive. I spent $150 for the OEM copy of Windows XP Pro that I own. How so, you say? Well, you can buy it here. If you're interested in XP Home, you can get it here for $90. For comparison, since I am also a Mac OS X user and a SUSE/Redhat user as well, you can buy Mac OS X (Jaguar) for about $120 here (I paid $130 when it came out). Furthermore, my copy of SUSE 8.1 Pro Edition cost $80 here and my copy of Redhat 9.0 Pro cost $150 here. The non-Pro editions of SUSE and Redhat are cheaper, of course, but come with less packages and less support. The bottom line: if you're going to spend money for your OS, you will probably spend an average of $80-$150 per release depending on your needs, regardless of the OS vendor. Otherwise, you can continue being an unsupportive hyprocrite freeloader and spend $0 by using your favorite P2P app and get whatever OS you want.
Re:The name needs adjustment
on
ClusterKnoppix
·
· Score: 1
In order to please Mr. Stallman, I suggest GNU/Linux/KDE/ClusterKnoppix.
Who do you think you are? This is Slashdot! How dare you analyze the situation logically and reasonably!
Seriously, though, I'm glad you brought that up. That'll make him feel a whole lot better. Sometimes the "myth of the almighty Slashdotting" can get even the most level-headed webmaster up in arms. Now if only he'd return my phone call...
Your examples are fine - for the case that you are aware or have the means to become aware that you are creating something similar to what someone else has been done before. Take the following unlikely but possible situation as an example. Let's say I lock myself in a recording studio for 1 month and I spend the time creating a song, having no contact whatsoever with the outside world. At the end of the 1 month period of time, I then release the song on the Apple iTunes store and sell 1 million downloads in a 24 hour span of time. What should happen if another musician comes to realize that the bassline of my song is identical to the bassline of a song he/she wrote 30 years earlier (that I had never heard or listened to in my life) and decided to sue me?
1. Slashdot is a popular, "free" discussion board that relies on "donations" and, most importantly, advertising revenue to sustain itself.
2. Microsoft advertises heavily on Slashdot despite the fact that 9 out of 10 Microsoft-related articles are spun in a negative context.
3. Microsoft has tons of cash to spend on advertising.
4. Microsoft-related stories tend to get lots of visibility.
5. Polls and browser analysis have shown that most Slashdot users utilize Microsoft-related products to view Slashdot.
Given those relatively factual statements, it appears that Michael is just doing a good job at generating ad revenue.
All of the above tools are free, high quality, and easy to install/use on WIndows 2K/XP. I automatically install them along with many other tools whenever I prep a new Windows 2K/XP machine. And to think I'm not even an MCSE...
Spot on, my friend! If I could mod you up, I would. It seems, based on the lack of replies, that you've shut all of the freeloaders, hyporcrites, and loud-mouths down.
Well, in theory, the bills propose restrictions that could help with the prosecution of people who are misusing "communications services" for nefarious reasons (as in terrorists). What I meant by ("guaranteeing freedom", in so far as anything that ephemeral can guaranteed) is best illustrated by example. For instance, many people believe that the enhanced security measures at airports are causing minor violations of privacy. From recent personal air travel experience I can feel where they are coming from since, for no apparent reason (at least no reason was given to me), I was forced to remove my shoes, belt, and lift up my shirt the last time I flew even though I am a born-and-raised U.S. citizen who once held a TS-1 security clearance and has never been convicted of any crimes) for the sake of ensuring the overall safety of all airline passengers.
I agree that the aforementioned bill proposals can be looked at from many angles, some of which seem to open up the floodgates for abuse, but almost all bill proposals that have to do with regulating the activites of human beings can be looked at that way when they are first written. Just be sure you voice your dissent to the appropriate political bodies (all the while remembering that you should be able to suggest an alternate solution to the problems they are trying to address)! Complaining without offering up solutions to the problems is the quickest way to be ignored.
Thank you for looking at this in a level-headed and non-selfish manner. It seems many (not all) Slashdotters have a real hard time putting the shoe on the other foot. Everyone forgets that in order to guarantee one freedom, you sometimes have to restrain or constrain another in order to maintain a coherent society.
Every kernel released after 1.3 can be considered in some part a security upgrade. They are free. To upgrade NT now you must pay for Win2000, XP, 2003, etc.
Regarding Linux, your statement is quite true for those of who customize/maintain our own commercially-unsupported Linux distributions. However, if you purchase and use one of the commercial enterprise-level Linux distibutions from Redhat, Mandrake, or SUSE (w/ the associated support contract), you can end up violating the terms of the support agreement if you attempt to apply unapproved kernel upgrades yourself. Coupled with the emerging EOL (end-of-life) policies of the aforementioned companies, folks who have entered into these deals are ending up in a very Microsoft-like situation. The only real difference is the cost, which is going to evolve over time on both the Linux and Windows fronts in the ongoing war of marketshare.
Well, if I don't have that right, I guess I better stop paying taxes for the support and upkeep of said roads. In my opinion, protesting by blocking roads/highways does nothing except hurt innocent people who are trying to get to work and make a living, as well as create the potential for uncontrolled havoc and violence. There's plenty of other places (parks and campuses come to mind) for people to protest without disrupting the life of John Q.
Just think of the Slashdot potential for this. Someday, we may very well be able to post using high-quality audio/video clips instead of text messages.
Slashdot Mirror
Did you file a complaint with eBay? I've had two bad experiences (less than $15 in each case) with sellers in the past and, after trying to work it out with them personally, I ended up filing complaints with eBay in both cases and soon thereafter (within 2-3 weeks) I either recieved the item or was refunded my money by the seller. eBay was very prompt in replying to my e-mails, but you really need to have your ducks in a row (copies of all prior e-mails, scans of physical correspondence, receipts, credit card bills, etc.) to make the dispute resolution go smoothly.
The following related situation is something I have been seeking an answer to recently:
.mp3's ripped from the CD, for example)?
If later, I choose to sell software/music/movies that I buy, do I have to provide, freely as a part of the sale, the backup copy (be it a direct CD-R duplicate of the CD or CD-R with
The reason I am wondering about this is that I have found that a large number of people sell their "barely-used" CDs/DVDs/software on eBay and yet they never seem to provide the backup copies (as a part of the sale) they may have made. According to "Fair Use", it would seem that since people are allowed to make a backup copy of any media they purchase, that they should, in turn, be required to turn over those backups when the original media is later sold.
My friend, I don't think the RIAA is interested in throwing everyone in jail! On the contrary, if anything, they want keep IP-offenders out of prison so they (the IP-offenders) can keep working in order to pay the fines from all the lawsuits! And rightfully so. Just like many people continue to commonly ignore/disregard laws regarding speed limits, driving-under-the-influence, under-age-drinking, seat-belts. Unregulated P2P is the "crack" of the Internet age. And, the funny thing is, I don't know how the rampant P2P'ers find the time to enjoy all the stuff they download/share - and have I have a feeling they don't actually spend much time enjoying the "fruits of their labor" as a result. On the contrary, for some of the mega-P2P folks I know, it's almost like the act of downloading/sharing IS the payoff!
Actually, the new Metallica CD is NOT copy-protected. Furthermore, in addition to a backup copy, I have already made high-quality .mp3 (using CDex/Lame) and .aac (using iTunes) rips. As far as the online content goes, Metallica is allowing CD-buyers to download decent (128kbps, I believe) mp3-encoded songs from 3 past live performances with a hint that more downloads are to come.
Thank you for that breath of fresh air! I agree wholeheartedly with 99% of what you say, but I am having a hard time understanding why intelligent, internet-savvy folks like yourself keep complaining about the cost of CDs being too high ($15+). I buy CDs quite regularly and I rarely pay more than $10-$12 (including tax and S/H if applicable), and usually far less. How can that be, you ask? Well, first off, I rarely buy my music from the traditional, impulse-buy retail outlets such as Best Buy, Musicland, etc.) because you are usually paying a higher price due to the "convenience-tax" that they levy (just like convenience stores and gas station foodmarts do on snacks and such). Second of all, I rarely buy new releases when they first come out because, oftentimes, they will go on sale after two to three weeks after the hype and excitement has died down. Instead, I buy a lot of used CDs from brick-and-mortar thrift stores and music resellers (e.g., Vintage Vinyl). I also shop around on EBay and the Amazon zShops, where you can find amazing deals (I just got the recently-released Sugar Ray album for $5.50, including S/H, for example). And, lastly, I have started buying single songs and the occasional full album from the Apple iTunes store. The only time I pay more than $10-12 tops for a CD is when it is a rare import or autographed copy, which are fairly uncommon occurrences in my buying habits. Actually, now that I think about it, one of the most expensive "common" CDs I have ever bought was the $19 I spent on Poison's Flesh and Blood that I bought for my girlfriend at the time in 1990 - which was 13 years ago. Heck, I even paid a mere $12 (S/H included) via pre-release order for the new Metallica album - and it even came with a bonus DVD of an album-length, 75+ minute jam session! So, from where I'm sitting, music/CDs have definitely gotten cheaper as time has gone on.
But, in truth, I have robbed him if you consider that, by my actions, I have created a potential for loss of income by prematurely releasing his unreleased music via P2P. Could my actions have helped him? Well, yes, since releasing the music may have given him more exposure, which may in turn lead to sales that may not have occurred had I not released his music via P2P.
In the end, I think it's all about theft of choice and theft of potential value. In other words, if I distribute someone else's work via P2P, I have, in effect, made a decision for them (stealing their choice in the matter) in terms of the distribution of the work and, since the potential value of said work is directly related to the distribution it receives, I have indirectly or inadvertently influenced the value of said work, possibly for the better, but probably for the worse.
Sorry, my friend, but you are mistaken about me being a pirate for buying OEM software. Why, you say? Well, OEM software, according to Microsoft's OEM legalese, is intended to be purchased and installed by "system builders", or, in less formal terms, those who are building new Windows-based computers (as opposed toi upgrading them). I did not violate the agreement because I purchased the OEM software in the role of a "system builder" (i.e., I someone who was building a Windows-based computer) and with the hardware to build the new machine that is utilizing it. The license remains valid as long as it is installed and registered on the original machine that was built to use it (i.e., the license it not transferrable to new machines). This has been discussed time and time again on microsoft.* newsgroups and is the consensus of the Microsoft employees that have responded for clarification on the issue. I would post links, but you seem smart enough to dig for yourself.
I'm so sick of people complaining that Microsoft's OS software is so expensive. I spent $150 for the OEM copy of Windows XP Pro that I own. How so, you say? Well, you can buy it here. If you're interested in XP Home, you can get it here for $90. For comparison, since I am also a Mac OS X user and a SUSE/Redhat user as well, you can buy Mac OS X (Jaguar) for about $120 here (I paid $130 when it came out). Furthermore, my copy of SUSE 8.1 Pro Edition cost $80 here and my copy of Redhat 9.0 Pro cost $150 here. The non-Pro editions of SUSE and Redhat are cheaper, of course, but come with less packages and less support. The bottom line: if you're going to spend money for your OS, you will probably spend an average of $80-$150 per release depending on your needs, regardless of the OS vendor. Otherwise, you can continue being an unsupportive hyprocrite freeloader and spend $0 by using your favorite P2P app and get whatever OS you want.
In order to please Mr. Stallman, I suggest GNU/Linux/KDE/ClusterKnoppix .
Who do you think you are? This is Slashdot! How dare you analyze the situation logically and reasonably!
Seriously, though, I'm glad you brought that up. That'll make him feel a whole lot better. Sometimes the "myth of the almighty Slashdotting" can get even the most level-headed webmaster up in arms. Now if only he'd return my phone call...
"Well, it's been a few hours and it looks like a Pentium 100 and 128MB of RAM is all anyone would ever need to host a website."
- rwsorden, May 5, 2003 from Infamous Technology Quotes
Heh. If he gets too many hits, I think there's a good chance that I will be downgraded from Friend V2.0 to Acquaintance V1.5...
My buddy over at Oesterly.com seems to think that a Pentium 100 and 128MB is sufficient.
$500. Hmmm...how about these 1GB PC2100 DDR SDRAM prices? Pretty inexpensive, if you ask me.
Your examples are fine - for the case that you are aware or have the means to become aware that you are creating something similar to what someone else has been done before. Take the following unlikely but possible situation as an example. Let's say I lock myself in a recording studio for 1 month and I spend the time creating a song, having no contact whatsoever with the outside world. At the end of the 1 month period of time, I then release the song on the Apple iTunes store and sell 1 million downloads in a 24 hour span of time. What should happen if another musician comes to realize that the bassline of my song is identical to the bassline of a song he/she wrote 30 years earlier (that I had never heard or listened to in my life) and decided to sue me?
Let's see how this train of thought pans out...
1. Slashdot is a popular, "free" discussion board that relies on "donations" and, most importantly, advertising revenue to sustain itself.
2. Microsoft advertises heavily on Slashdot despite the fact that 9 out of 10 Microsoft-related articles are spun in a negative context.
3. Microsoft has tons of cash to spend on advertising.
4. Microsoft-related stories tend to get lots of visibility.
5. Polls and browser analysis have shown that most Slashdot users utilize Microsoft-related products to view Slashdot.
Given those relatively factual statements, it appears that Michael is just doing a good job at generating ad revenue.
if ($article_text =~ /\b(drm)\b/i) /\b(microsoft|gates)\b/i) /\b(mac|jobs|os x)\b/i) /\b(linu[xs])\b/i)
{
if ($article_text =~
{
$reply_text = random_reply({include_key_phrases => "die", "M$", "sucks", "end of the world"]});
}
elsif ($article_text =~
{
$reply_text = random_reply({ include_key_phrases => "expensive", "hip", "iTunes", "God"]});
}
elsif ($article_text =~
{
$reply_text = random_reply({include_key_phrases => ["choice", "freedom", "ReiserFS", "beer"]});
}
}
Although this has nothing to do with Linux TCO vs. Windows TCO, here goes:
list of open file handles - how about Handle
list of bound ports - how about TCPView
robust scripting language - how about ActivePerl
All of the above tools are free, high quality, and easy to install/use on WIndows 2K/XP. I automatically install them along with many other tools whenever I prep a new Windows 2K/XP machine. And to think I'm not even an MCSE...
It's only $24.50 at Bookpool, but there's is a shipping cost unless you spend over $40 total.
Spot on, my friend! If I could mod you up, I would. It seems, based on the lack of replies, that you've shut all of the freeloaders, hyporcrites, and loud-mouths down.
Well, in theory, the bills propose restrictions that could help with the prosecution of people who are misusing "communications services" for nefarious reasons (as in terrorists). What I meant by ("guaranteeing freedom", in so far as anything that ephemeral can guaranteed) is best illustrated by example. For instance, many people believe that the enhanced security measures at airports are causing minor violations of privacy. From recent personal air travel experience I can feel where they are coming from since, for no apparent reason (at least no reason was given to me), I was forced to remove my shoes, belt, and lift up my shirt the last time I flew even though I am a born-and-raised U.S. citizen who once held a TS-1 security clearance and has never been convicted of any crimes) for the sake of ensuring the overall safety of all airline passengers.
I agree that the aforementioned bill proposals can be looked at from many angles, some of which seem to open up the floodgates for abuse, but almost all bill proposals that have to do with regulating the activites of human beings can be looked at that way when they are first written. Just be sure you voice your dissent to the appropriate political bodies (all the while remembering that you should be able to suggest an alternate solution to the problems they are trying to address)! Complaining without offering up solutions to the problems is the quickest way to be ignored.
Thank you for looking at this in a level-headed and non-selfish manner. It seems many (not all) Slashdotters have a real hard time putting the shoe on the other foot. Everyone forgets that in order to guarantee one freedom, you sometimes have to restrain or constrain another in order to maintain a coherent society.
Every kernel released after 1.3 can be considered in some part a security upgrade. They are free. To upgrade NT now you must pay for Win2000, XP, 2003, etc.
Regarding Linux, your statement is quite true for those of who customize/maintain our own commercially-unsupported Linux distributions. However, if you purchase and use one of the commercial enterprise-level Linux distibutions from Redhat, Mandrake, or SUSE (w/ the associated support contract), you can end up violating the terms of the support agreement if you attempt to apply unapproved kernel upgrades yourself. Coupled with the emerging EOL (end-of-life) policies of the aforementioned companies, folks who have entered into these deals are ending up in a very Microsoft-like situation. The only real difference is the cost, which is going to evolve over time on both the Linux and Windows fronts in the ongoing war of marketshare.
Well, if I don't have that right, I guess I better stop paying taxes for the support and upkeep of said roads. In my opinion, protesting by blocking roads/highways does nothing except hurt innocent people who are trying to get to work and make a living, as well as create the potential for uncontrolled havoc and violence. There's plenty of other places (parks and campuses come to mind) for people to protest without disrupting the life of John Q.
Just think of the Slashdot potential for this. Someday, we may very well be able to post using high-quality audio/video clips instead of text messages.