"As of a few days ago"? The Patriot Act is still in full effect, is it not?
Yes, as of a few days ago. The maximum penalty being life part was just changed recently, as posted here on slashdot. Thus, I had to qualify the statement.
As of a few days ago if citizen do these same things they can be considered terrorists and subject to a maximum sentance of life in prison. Now who again is being helped by our lawmakers now?
I started working at a new job a few months ago. New email address, never posted anywhere only used internally. I get spam. Only 3-4 a day, but I get it. My main email which I use all over the place (amazon, bn, deepdiscountdvd/cd, etc) get only a few more pieces a day. You're answer is not the solution, sorry.
Pay attention. As other have already said before you: It doesn't make it illegal to say. The illegal part is the "official" part. Making a religious symbol part of the state mandated and state run education system.
VCRs record (I think) in analog on a magnetic tape. Thus, repeated duplication always results in inferior quality. Furthermore, repeated viewing also results in inferior quality.
Except of course for less cost and less trouble than the PVR hack you can record the output from the vcr onto your harddrive with an input capable video card and do the same thing.
Uh oh, if they read this we'll lose out encoder cards. Nevermind! Nothing to see here, nope, not a thing.. move along.
I could see many big vcr / tape companies as well as Tivo and everyone else standing up against this bill. They stand to lose a lot of money otherwise.
Which is exactly why they are [b]not[/b] trying to push a bill through. They are attempting to bypass that whole system by pressuring the FCC to make it regulatory. Clever. Evil, but clever.
They have realized that wide enforcement of the current laws is difficult to impossible (mainly due to the populous being both ill informed and disliking said laws). Instead of seeing this as a problem with the laws, and thus their business plans they are simply going to make it impossible to actually break the laws.
Neatly enough, this will also make it very, very difficult for you to become a content producer without their blessing. If you can save your own audio/video in a format you can copy you could do the same with theirs. Can't have that.
Technically it's possible. Likely even. But there's that pesky little DMCA thing that the indust.. I mean congress passed. Distributing a device to bypass a protection scheme and all that. If DeCSS can't fly with the interoperability clause no way in hell is removing a watermark.
Must be something in your setup or the physical CDs you're using. I've ripped over 100 of my CDs into.ogg (using eac and oggenc.exe) at VBR (target 128) and often can't tell if I'm listening to the cd or the computer.
Don't worry about the artists being hurt in a boycott either. Are they worried that the RIAA's ploys are going to hurt you? Are they speaking out against copyright extensions and attempts to narrow the scope of fair use? If they aren't, why should you give a shit about them?
Actually, many if not most of them probably don't know anything about the above at all. They are professional artists. For the most part they spend their time creating and performing their artform (as well they should if they ever hope to get out of debt w/ their labels). They don't deal with business well or with law well. That is why the labels are there to begin with. Many artists are surprised after the fact when they start running into the walls their contracts have put up around them. Joan Osborn is a good example. Her label killed her career. She spent years working produced a full album worth of material. Label rejected it. She made _another_ album worth. They rejected that too. Then she found out that not only did none of that music count towards finishing her contract requierments she could release it anywhere else either.
The RIAA is raping it's artists as badly as they are the fans. They are stuck too. If they want to have a hope of exposure to more than a few thousand people the RIAA is the only game in town.
This is, alas, only a semi-option. While it's true we can all live without RIAA/MPAA product if you do you are essentially removing yourself from the culture. The member companies are so large that you support them when you buy much of anything media related, including watching TV and listening to the radio (or buying stuff from their sponsors). If you can't talk to your friends/neighbors/loved ones about music, movies, television, magazines, and books then how are you participating in the same culture that they are?
So, alienate yourself from everyone around you or feed the machine? What wonderful options.
Thing is, it's not simply 'business'. It's abuse of the powers of an oligopoly. In an operational market both the artists and the fans would have other venues to sell/consume their wares. But seeing as the RIAA has a lock (and is payig for legislating to lock it tighter) on the distrobution and they all set their contracts (indentured servitude) together there are no viable options through which to market music. The internet looked like it might break that, which is why the RIAA is gunning so hard for it. When the DRM act gets passed nothing will play anywhere w/o their permission and their oligopoly will be cemented in law.
My wife is blind and uses the computer to facilitate a vast amount of her daily communication. In the DOS days, this was fairly simple. As someone who has been dealing with increasingly visual computer systems (windows for the blind is a pain, but unavoidable at this point) seeing _any_ new research into ways to make computing more friendly to the visually impared is a good thing. Taking on something as difficult as quake will be a Good Thing(tm) in the long run as the stuff they learn will make mane other takes worlds easier.
Unless you try to download one of their songs, how are they going to waste your time? They are distributing files labeled as popular songs which ar bogus. If you're not trying to get those songs it doesn't effect you.
Re:Going after users/file sharing
on
RIAA to Sue You Now
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Show me proof that more than 1% of assault rifles are used for something other than harming/killing people.
That argument doesn't fly with our government when peoples LIVES are at stake, why the hell should it when only some sleazy corps profits are?
Just because I was the one logged in doesn't mean that I clicked, even if you want to say that click is binding.
"I started the install, then my 7 year old yelled that something was going on in the living room, I left to go help him. While I was gone my 2 year old got in the computer room for a while, bashed on everything. Ran back and grabbed him up, while I was doing that my two kittens got into the room. After I got the kid out of the room I rounded up the kittens, both of whom were sitting on my keyboard and the program was installed."
Now, prove I clicked. Or somehow hold my cat to an EULA.
You missed my point completely. What the current culture deams worth saving and what people will want around 50/100/150 years from now are highly unlikely to be the same. The studios at the time thought a film has essentially zero value after it's theatrical run, so they recylced the media. Seventy five to a hundred years later we (we being the film buffs and film historical types) desperately wish we could have those pieces back. Just because something is out of the public eye/mind 10 years after it's release doesn't mean it is a worthless object.
How many artists have become famous after their deaths? Think about it...
If no one has a copy of it, it probably isn't socially relevant enough for it's loss to be a threat to society.
Unfortunately, this argument doesn't hold water. particularly in newly emerging media forms (video games for instance). Many thousands of very valuable motion pictures were lost in the early days of the medium because nobody at the time thought they would be valuable. The silver nitrate in the film was worth more than the ideas that were printed on it. In hindsight there was a great deal of amazingly important and interesting stuff that was there. It's all gone now, forever. Now the storage medium for modern materails isn't quite the same as film but can you really know for sure that 100 years from now those last few CDs containing the original Zork are going to be usable?
I'm TRYING to pay for it! My only CD players are my computer and my X-box. The stupid RIAA shits are preventing me from giving them money. The people who want to pirate it can still hop onto Kazaa and download it, no problem. How does this help?
Which means they are all legal and you shouldn't be forced to jump through hoops to have them. This makes it harder for legit users to play their media and will slow the pirates down by about 8.3 seconds.
Re:You're not serious- others may be different...
on
Warcraft III Gone Gold
·
· Score: 1
I'm sorry, but do you know anything about the story? Bnetd cannot be used to play WCIII beta. Period. It was open source. Another group broke off and added WCIII to the codebase and called it WarForge. Second, Blizzard sued for copyright infringement which is obvious and complete bullshit unless the bnetd people saw and copied the battle.net source in which case they would also have all kinds of nasty breaking and entering charges toss in the mix.
Granted I think the suit has more to do with Blizzards parent companies than the Blizzard guys, but still.
Drives don't get filled unless you throw bloated apps on them (or pirate tons of meaningless shit).
Speak for yourself. Between myself and my wife we have over 500 CDs we are in the process of putting onto my computer. Beyond even the "I can so I want to" reason my wife is blind and as such it is a LOT easier for her to mess with files and playlists than to hunt for CDs.
Slashdot Mirror
"As of a few days ago"? The Patriot Act is still in full effect, is it not?
Yes, as of a few days ago. The maximum penalty being life part was just changed recently, as posted here on slashdot. Thus, I had to qualify the statement.
As of a few days ago if citizen do these same things they can be considered terrorists and subject to a maximum sentance of life in prison. Now who again is being helped by our lawmakers now?
No, it would be PSX.
=)
I started working at a new job a few months ago. New email address, never posted anywhere only used internally. I get spam. Only 3-4 a day, but I get it. My main email which I use all over the place (amazon, bn, deepdiscountdvd/cd, etc) get only a few more pieces a day. You're answer is not the solution, sorry.
Pay attention. As other have already said before you: It doesn't make it illegal to say. The illegal part is the "official" part. Making a religious symbol part of the state mandated and state run education system.
VCRs record (I think) in analog on a magnetic tape. Thus, repeated duplication always results in inferior quality. Furthermore, repeated viewing also results in inferior quality.
Except of course for less cost and less trouble than the PVR hack you can record the output from the vcr onto your harddrive with an input capable video card and do the same thing.
Uh oh, if they read this we'll lose out encoder cards. Nevermind! Nothing to see here, nope, not a thing.. move along.
I could see many big vcr / tape companies as well as Tivo and everyone else standing up against this bill. They stand to lose a lot of money otherwise.
Which is exactly why they are [b]not[/b] trying to push a bill through. They are attempting to bypass that whole system by pressuring the FCC to make it regulatory. Clever. Evil, but clever.
They have realized that wide enforcement of the current laws is difficult to impossible (mainly due to the populous being both ill informed and disliking said laws). Instead of seeing this as a problem with the laws, and thus their business plans they are simply going to make it impossible to actually break the laws.
Neatly enough, this will also make it very, very difficult for you to become a content producer without their blessing. If you can save your own audio/video in a format you can copy you could do the same with theirs. Can't have that.
Technically it's possible. Likely even. But there's that pesky little DMCA thing that the indust.. I mean congress passed. Distributing a device to bypass a protection scheme and all that. If DeCSS can't fly with the interoperability clause no way in hell is removing a watermark.
Did you even look at the story? Their paid senators are going to the FCC for them! Yeesh!
From the dramtic-but-completely-misleading-title dept.
Must be something in your setup or the physical CDs you're using. I've ripped over 100 of my CDs into .ogg (using eac and oggenc.exe) at VBR (target 128) and often can't tell if I'm listening to the cd or the computer.
Don't worry about the artists being hurt in a boycott either. Are they worried that the RIAA's ploys are going to hurt you? Are they speaking out against copyright extensions and attempts to narrow the scope of fair use? If they aren't, why should you give a shit about them?
Actually, many if not most of them probably don't know anything about the above at all. They are professional artists. For the most part they spend their time creating and performing their artform (as well they should if they ever hope to get out of debt w/ their labels). They don't deal with business well or with law well. That is why the labels are there to begin with. Many artists are surprised after the fact when they start running into the walls their contracts have put up around them. Joan Osborn is a good example. Her label killed her career. She spent years working produced a full album worth of material. Label rejected it. She made _another_ album worth. They rejected that too. Then she found out that not only did none of that music count towards finishing her contract requierments she could release it anywhere else either.
The RIAA is raping it's artists as badly as they are the fans. They are stuck too. If they want to have a hope of exposure to more than a few thousand people the RIAA is the only game in town.
This is, alas, only a semi-option. While it's true we can all live without RIAA/MPAA product if you do you are essentially removing yourself from the culture. The member companies are so large that you support them when you buy much of anything media related, including watching TV and listening to the radio (or buying stuff from their sponsors). If you can't talk to your friends/neighbors/loved ones about music, movies, television, magazines, and books then how are you participating in the same culture that they are?
So, alienate yourself from everyone around you or feed the machine? What wonderful options.
Thing is, it's not simply 'business'. It's abuse of the powers of an oligopoly. In an operational market both the artists and the fans would have other venues to sell/consume their wares. But seeing as the RIAA has a lock (and is payig for legislating to lock it tighter) on the distrobution and they all set their contracts (indentured servitude) together there are no viable options through which to market music. The internet looked like it might break that, which is why the RIAA is gunning so hard for it. When the DRM act gets passed nothing will play anywhere w/o their permission and their oligopoly will be cemented in law.
My wife is blind and uses the computer to facilitate a vast amount of her daily communication. In the DOS days, this was fairly simple. As someone who has been dealing with increasingly visual computer systems (windows for the blind is a pain, but unavoidable at this point) seeing _any_ new research into ways to make computing more friendly to the visually impared is a good thing. Taking on something as difficult as quake will be a Good Thing(tm) in the long run as the stuff they learn will make mane other takes worlds easier.
Unless you try to download one of their songs, how are they going to waste your time? They are distributing files labeled as popular songs which ar bogus. If you're not trying to get those songs it doesn't effect you.
Show me proof that more than 1% of assault rifles are used for something other than harming/killing people.
That argument doesn't fly with our government when peoples LIVES are at stake, why the hell should it when only some sleazy corps profits are?
Just because I was the one logged in doesn't mean that I clicked, even if you want to say that click is binding.
"I started the install, then my 7 year old yelled that something was going on in the living room, I left to go help him. While I was gone my 2 year old got in the computer room for a while, bashed on everything. Ran back and grabbed him up, while I was doing that my two kittens got into the room. After I got the kid out of the room I rounded up the kittens, both of whom were sitting on my keyboard and the program was installed."
Now, prove I clicked. Or somehow hold my cat to an EULA.
You missed my point completely. What the current culture deams worth saving and what people will want around 50/100/150 years from now are highly unlikely to be the same. The studios at the time thought a film has essentially zero value after it's theatrical run, so they recylced the media. Seventy five to a hundred years later we (we being the film buffs and film historical types) desperately wish we could have those pieces back. Just because something is out of the public eye/mind 10 years after it's release doesn't mean it is a worthless object.
How many artists have become famous after their deaths? Think about it...
If no one has a copy of it, it probably isn't socially relevant enough for it's loss to be a threat to society.
Unfortunately, this argument doesn't hold water. particularly in newly emerging media forms (video games for instance). Many thousands of very valuable motion pictures were lost in the early days of the medium because nobody at the time thought they would be valuable. The silver nitrate in the film was worth more than the ideas that were printed on it. In hindsight there was a great deal of amazingly important and interesting stuff that was there. It's all gone now, forever. Now the storage medium for modern materails isn't quite the same as film but can you really know for sure that 100 years from now those last few CDs containing the original Zork are going to be usable?
I'm TRYING to pay for it! My only CD players are my computer and my X-box. The stupid RIAA shits are preventing me from giving them money. The people who want to pirate it can still hop onto Kazaa and download it, no problem. How does this help?
Which means they are all legal and you shouldn't be forced to jump through hoops to have them. This makes it harder for legit users to play their media and will slow the pirates down by about 8.3 seconds.
I'm sorry, but do you know anything about the story? Bnetd cannot be used to play WCIII beta. Period. It was open source. Another group broke off and added WCIII to the codebase and called it WarForge. Second, Blizzard sued for copyright infringement which is obvious and complete bullshit unless the bnetd people saw and copied the battle.net source in which case they would also have all kinds of nasty breaking and entering charges toss in the mix.
Granted I think the suit has more to do with Blizzards parent companies than the Blizzard guys, but still.
Drives don't get filled unless you throw bloated apps on them (or pirate tons of meaningless shit).
Speak for yourself. Between myself and my wife we have over 500 CDs we are in the process of putting onto my computer. Beyond even the "I can so I want to" reason my wife is blind and as such it is a LOT easier for her to mess with files and playlists than to hunt for CDs.