If you can't afford a lawyer after you commit a crime, you get one. I don't believe you get one if you get sued, though. However, private organizations such as the ACLU, or EFF provide lawyers for people when winning the case furthers there agendas (a cynical way of putting it. I am definitely for the ACLU and EFF's agendas:) Actually, the EFF might provide legal assistance in this case)
US to sign a short and simple email to the US government which reads: [bla bla bla]
Sorry, most ISP cant' really afford to leave the country, and who's the biggest ISP? AOL-Time Warner? yeh, they really want to stop copyright [mis]enforcement...
I think that's a bad Idea, a very bad one, actually.
I posted about this in another post, but I guess I'll do it again.
Imagine you write some code. And Microsoft steals it. Now, you don't know whether or not MS stole your code because you can't see it, but your pretty sure they did. Would you really want to try to sue them, if it meant you would have to pay Microsoft's legal fees?
Or imagine that some company dumps toxic waste in a poor neighborhood, Corps do this occasionally, and sometimes the win the suits. Do you think that the poor community could afford to pay Generic Megacorps legal fees when they loose? Probably not. The bad guy isn't always rich, and the Good Guys don't always win.
BUT, Generic Megacorp, or Microsoft could still threaten to, and actually sue whenever they wanted. After all, they have tons of money, and could afford to take the risk of a loss. All this would do would make it more difficult for people without money to sue, without really impacting people with money. And that's exactly what we don't want.
Oh for god sakes, the dummies thing is a completely different matter. It didn't involve copyrights at all, but rather trademarks. And no one is stopping you from saying the words "for dummies" (If they were, you couldn't say "IDG" ether, now could you?). Rather, they are stopping people from Titling things with the words "for dummies" in them. There is a pretty big difference, and they really have a valid point. Not to mention that were ok with the title "for dummiesZ"
. Should I be able to call anything I want "Linux"?
Or Solaris? And why aren't all of you people pissed at ESR for when he tried to trademark "Open Source" for himself?
Though the intent of translating the pages was humor,
ever try 'back translations' with babelfish? Where you translate from English to some other language then back again. It's really pretty funny: P
This is a horrible precedent.
No precedent has been set whatsoever, at least no legal precedent. Remember, no case has been lost here. These guys just didn't want any trouble, so they pulled the pages. I wouldn't have done it without a little more provocation, but its there decision, really. But, no legal precedent has been made. It's the same thing as settling the case. Without a judge's ruling no precedent is set.
Can you imagine how trying to use this in a court case would go?
Defendant: "This is a parody, and therefore fair use."
Plaintiff: "The last time someone translated our page we sent 'em a letter and they got scared and took down the page"
Just because someone caved at the first whiff of potential legal maneuvering, doesn't mean anything at all. Other then the fact that the people at rworld.org are wussies (witch is there choice).
No precedent has been set, other then that you can probably scare people off with a letter with a lot of legal crap in it. But we've known that for a long time.
Imagine for a second that you write some cool code, and that Microsoft steals it. Are you going to sue MS? Do you think you have a chance at winning? Do you think for a second that you could pay Microsoft's court costs? Just because you think the case is clear-cut, doesn't mean you'll win. I think looser pays is a sever disincentive for people without a lot of money to sue. On the other hand, M$ would have nothing to worry about when suing you.
To be honest, and I know this seems counter intuitive, is that the solution to lawsuits is more lawsuits. If someone pulls a frivolous lawsuit, you could sue them for it. There would be restrictions on this kind of suit though; you wouldn't be able to do it all the time. Lawyers would have to figure out how to do it. Maybe it wouldn't, I don't know.
What I think what we need, and wouldn't lead to any real problems I don't think Is laws stating that you can't send threatening legal letters that distort the law. For instance, if you wanted a parody taken down, a lawyer would have to discus the reasons why you could keep the page up. In other words, misinterpreting the law to threaten someone would be against the law.
This has got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. I swear to god, some people have got such an idiotic attachment to there 'intellectual property' what the hell is that? I mean, If this were illegal so would be babelfish, and any kind of proxy server. How does converting a document into a 'dialect' differ from converting something to another language?
The people who threatened this person are probably a lot like the people who had a problem with ThirdVoice, The same people who have a problem with people linking to there sites, idiots (The same people who had a problem with there comments being quoted in the Hellmouth book to, IMHO). What the hell is the problem here? They didn't loose any add revenue did they?
I've tried to understand why people who invest enough into there websites to consider it 'intellectual property' are willing to go so far as to try to destroy everything that the web is.
My favorite quote on the topic comes from Chuck D "People who have a problem with copying [IP] are people who are afraid that they won't be able to create anymore"
Actualy, Joy isn't a billionare. And while you may injoy the fortunes of owning some SUNW, Joy dosn't. He cashed out as soon as he could, and is only worth 10 million or so. Ellison, on the otherhand is a billionare.
Not really, just scan the whole hard drive for files less then a certan size and scan for email address. linus & co would get a lot of copies, though:P
Look, if you paid people for 24 hours to do *nothing*, then I'm pretty sure you could claim that you lost that money (or most of it, anyway). I mean, if you paid someone to write some code, but you didn't give them a computer...
And lets not forget those missing.jpg's and.mp3's. It would be pretty bad for a porn site, or something.
Now go back to the IE window and change the ".gif" to ".vbs". It'll execute just fine. This is just the same as executing it from the desktop.
I should point out, that when you do this, your actualy running the second file. The one that you called.vbs. You're not actualy running the code in the gif file.
What the fuck!?! This is amazingly stupid, even for Microsoft, I mean; it isn't even a user option. And they didn't block.DOC files ether, witch I'm sure can contain as much malicious code as a PhotoCD file. Why the hell would they simply ban those file extensions.
I mean, why not let the user, or admin simply configure those options himself. or for god sakes, change the default option from "shell-execute' when you double-click on it.
Of course, if they would have blocked, it would have fucked up winword (not that this dosn't mess up a lot of their other programs). whoever thought this up at MS should be fired.
Would it have killed them to write 'on-die' and 'L1/l2' so that we might have some clue as to what there talking about?
On top of that, I still don't know what there talking about really. "Current Athlons, meanwhile, contain no integrated secondary cache, while the Celerons and Pentium III do. "
That dosn't seeme right to me at all, are they saying that the Athlon has no L2 cache, or something else? no one knows...
Sure, the average person isn't going to know what L1 and L2 cache are, or what on-die means. But how does replacing those with meaningless terms help?
IIRC, under the terms of the treaty, you're still allowed to use nukes for 'peaceful purposes', Russia did a lot of those. So it still would have been 'legal' to blow up the mountain.
(delmoi, posting annon) It stands for Media Acess control. I know this from a post right below yours. I'm learning all the time, and if I thoght I knew everything, it would only mean that I had shut my mind down. And I don't think I'm being 'network elietst' ether. I didn't contribute anything to the 'old' 'net, my fist web page went up in something like 1996. But that dosn't mean I can't appreciate the degredation. Just look at the spelling in this post for example.
And not all work is done best/fastest in a GUI ether. Witch is why people like to have CLI's with there GUI's. I hate to setup a server from the GUI, I wouldn't want to use photoshop from a CLI. MacOS dosn't have a CLI, but when it does, I think you'll probably find yourself using it a lot.
I didn't know about hypertext, but the mouse and the GUI were defenetly invented by the same guy, Doglass Egglebart. what the hell would the point of a Mouse without a GUI be?
Parc did not think up the GUI, and Tim-barners Lee defenetly didn't invent hypertext.
And there is a huge gap in the story in the film. It claims that MS gave DOS to IBM, when they first gave them OS/2, and then released DOS in competition.
What the FUCK!?!?!?
If you're going to complain about people getting there facts wrong, you should at least try to get the facts correct yourself.
IBM initially wanted to put the CP/M OS on there PC's, witch were going to compete with the Apple II, the first widely developed PC. They were going to put MS Basic on the system for a development environment. (Intergalactic) Digital Research, the company that made CP/M wasn't really that interested in licensing the OS to IBM (or something), so Microsoft bought QDOS (quick and dirty OS) renamed it DOS (Disk Operating System), and licensed it to IBM. IBM didn't get an exclusive license, and the rest is history
OS/2 was worked on by both MS and IBM as there 'high-end' OS, but M$ abandoned the project for Windows. IBM tried to support OS/2, but ultimately failed.
Slashdot Mirror
Give money to the EFF( Electronic Frontere foundation). That's what there for. I would, if I had any.
If you can't afford a lawyer after you commit a crime, you get one. I don't believe you get one if you get sued, though. However, private organizations such as the ACLU, or EFF provide lawyers for people when winning the case furthers there agendas (a cynical way of putting it. I am definitely for the ACLU and EFF's agendas :) Actually, the EFF might provide legal assistance in this case)
US to sign a short and simple email to the US government which reads: [bla bla bla]
Sorry, most ISP cant' really afford to leave the country, and who's the biggest ISP? AOL-Time Warner? yeh, they really want to stop copyright [mis]enforcement...
I think that's a bad Idea, a very bad one, actually.
I posted about this in another post, but I guess I'll do it again.
Imagine you write some code. And Microsoft steals it. Now, you don't know whether or not MS stole your code because you can't see it, but your pretty sure they did. Would you really want to try to sue them, if it meant you would have to pay Microsoft's legal fees?
Or imagine that some company dumps toxic waste in a poor neighborhood, Corps do this occasionally, and sometimes the win the suits. Do you think that the poor community could afford to pay Generic Megacorps legal fees when they loose? Probably not. The bad guy isn't always rich, and the Good Guys don't always win.
BUT, Generic Megacorp, or Microsoft could still threaten to, and actually sue whenever they wanted. After all, they have tons of money, and could afford to take the risk of a loss. All this would do would make it more difficult for people without money to sue, without really impacting people with money. And that's exactly what we don't want.
Oh for god sakes, the dummies thing is a completely different matter. It didn't involve copyrights at all, but rather trademarks. And no one is stopping you from saying the words "for dummies" (If they were, you couldn't say "IDG" ether, now could you?). Rather, they are stopping people from Titling things with the words "for dummies" in them. There is a pretty big difference, and they really have a valid point. Not to mention that were ok with the title "for dummiesZ"
. Should I be able to call anything I want "Linux"?
Or Solaris? And why aren't all of you people pissed at ESR for when he tried to trademark "Open Source" for himself?
Though the intent of translating the pages was humor,
:P
ever try 'back translations' with babelfish? Where you translate from English to some other language then back again. It's really pretty funny: P
This is a horrible precedent.
No precedent has been set whatsoever, at least no legal precedent. Remember, no case has been lost here. These guys just didn't want any trouble, so they pulled the pages. I wouldn't have done it without a little more provocation, but its there decision, really. But, no legal precedent has been made. It's the same thing as settling the case. Without a judge's ruling no precedent is set.
Can you imagine how trying to use this in a court case would go?
Defendant: "This is a parody, and therefore fair use."
Plaintiff: "The last time someone translated our page we sent 'em a letter and they got scared and took down the page"
Judge: "So?"
Plaintiff: "Um..."
Defendant: "Can I sue for a bogus lawsuit?"
Judge: "Um, sure! You get $10,000,000!"
Well... maybe not quite like that
Just because someone caved at the first whiff of potential legal maneuvering, doesn't mean anything at all. Other then the fact that the people at rworld.org are wussies (witch is there choice).
No precedent has been set, other then that you can probably scare people off with a letter with a lot of legal crap in it. But we've known that for a long time.
Imagine for a second that you write some cool code, and that Microsoft steals it. Are you going to sue MS? Do you think you have a chance at winning? Do you think for a second that you could pay Microsoft's court costs? Just because you think the case is clear-cut, doesn't mean you'll win. I think looser pays is a sever disincentive for people without a lot of money to sue. On the other hand, M$ would have nothing to worry about when suing you.
To be honest, and I know this seems counter intuitive, is that the solution to lawsuits is more lawsuits. If someone pulls a frivolous lawsuit, you could sue them for it. There would be restrictions on this kind of suit though; you wouldn't be able to do it all the time. Lawyers would have to figure out how to do it. Maybe it wouldn't, I don't know.
What I think what we need, and wouldn't lead to any real problems I don't think Is laws stating that you can't send threatening legal letters that distort the law. For instance, if you wanted a parody taken down, a lawyer would have to discus the reasons why you could keep the page up. In other words, misinterpreting the law to threaten someone would be against the law.
This has got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. I swear to god, some people have got such an idiotic attachment to there 'intellectual property' what the hell is that? I mean, If this were illegal so would be babelfish, and any kind of proxy server. How does converting a document into a 'dialect' differ from converting something to another language?
The people who threatened this person are probably a lot like the people who had a problem with ThirdVoice, The same people who have a problem with people linking to there sites, idiots (The same people who had a problem with there comments being quoted in the Hellmouth book to, IMHO). What the hell is the problem here? They didn't loose any add revenue did they?
I've tried to understand why people who invest enough into there websites to consider it 'intellectual property' are willing to go so far as to try to destroy everything that the web is.
My favorite quote on the topic comes from Chuck D "People who have a problem with copying [IP] are people who are afraid that they won't be able to create anymore"
These people are pathetic.
Actualy, Joy isn't a billionare. And while you may injoy the fortunes of owning some SUNW, Joy dosn't. He cashed out as soon as he could, and is only worth 10 million or so. Ellison, on the otherhand is a billionare.
pine, mutt, kmail, balsa, communicator, LDAP, etc address books.
:P
Not really, just scan the whole hard drive for files less then a certan size and scan for email address. linus & co would get a lot of copies, though
So the only real solution is to place some restrictions on it.
Yeh, some restrictions. Not an outright ban!
Um, photoshop does those little preview icons in windows.
Look, if you paid people for 24 hours to do *nothing*, then I'm pretty sure you could claim that you lost that money (or most of it, anyway). I mean, if you paid someone to write some code, but you didn't give them a computer...
.jpg's and .mp3's. It would be pretty bad for a porn site, or something.
And lets not forget those missing
Now go back to the IE window and change the ".gif" to ".vbs". It'll execute just fine. This is just the same as executing it from the desktop.
.vbs. You're not actualy running the code in the gif file.
I should point out, that when you do this, your actualy running the second file. The one that you called
What the fuck!?! This is amazingly stupid, even for Microsoft, I mean; it isn't even a user option. And they didn't block .DOC files ether, witch I'm sure can contain as much malicious code as a PhotoCD file. Why the hell would they simply ban those file extensions.
I mean, why not let the user, or admin simply configure those options himself. or for god sakes, change the default option from "shell-execute' when you double-click on it.
Of course, if they would have blocked, it would have fucked up winword (not that this dosn't mess up a lot of their other programs). whoever thought this up at MS should be fired.
"primary cache" "integreated cache"???
Would it have killed them to write 'on-die' and 'L1/l2' so that we might have some clue as to what there talking about?
On top of that, I still don't know what there talking about really. "Current Athlons, meanwhile, contain no integrated secondary cache, while the Celerons and Pentium III do. "
That dosn't seeme right to me at all, are they saying that the Athlon has no L2 cache, or something else? no one knows...
Sure, the average person isn't going to know what L1 and L2 cache are, or what on-die means. But how does replacing those with meaningless terms help?
We haven't been back since.
Except, we have.
And then of course: the people suggesting these things probably knew absolutely nothing about nuclear physics.
Do You know anything about nuclear physics?
IIRC, under the terms of the treaty, you're still allowed to use nukes for 'peaceful purposes', Russia did a lot of those. So it still would have been 'legal' to blow up the mountain.
(delmoi, posting annon) It stands for Media Acess control. I know this from a post right below yours. I'm learning all the time, and if I thoght I knew everything, it would only mean that I had shut my mind down. And I don't think I'm being 'network elietst' ether. I didn't contribute anything to the 'old' 'net, my fist web page went up in something like 1996. But that dosn't mean I can't appreciate the degredation. Just look at the spelling in this post for example.
Not all work is done best/fastest from a cli.
And not all work is done best/fastest in a GUI ether. Witch is why people like to have CLI's with there GUI's. I hate to setup a server from the GUI, I wouldn't want to use photoshop from a CLI. MacOS dosn't have a CLI, but when it does, I think you'll probably find yourself using it a lot.
I didn't know about hypertext, but the mouse and the GUI were defenetly invented by the same guy, Doglass Egglebart. what the hell would the point of a Mouse without a GUI be?
Parc did not think up the GUI, and Tim-barners Lee defenetly didn't invent hypertext.
And there is a huge gap in the story in the film. It claims that MS gave DOS to IBM, when they first gave them OS/2, and then released DOS in competition.
What the FUCK!?!?!?
If you're going to complain about people getting there facts wrong, you should at least try to get the facts correct yourself.
IBM initially wanted to put the CP/M OS on there PC's, witch were going to compete with the Apple II, the first widely developed PC. They were going to put MS Basic on the system for a development environment. (Intergalactic) Digital Research, the company that made CP/M wasn't really that interested in licensing the OS to IBM (or something), so Microsoft bought QDOS (quick and dirty OS) renamed it DOS (Disk Operating System), and licensed it to IBM. IBM didn't get an exclusive license, and the rest is history
OS/2 was worked on by both MS and IBM as there 'high-end' OS, but M$ abandoned the project for Windows. IBM tried to support OS/2, but ultimately failed.
Actualy, when talking about ethernet cards, a MAC is an address. I'm sure the 'A' stands for Address, and M probably for macine. C == 'code'?
Just beacuse your getting something done, dosn't mean your doing it in the most efficent manner. In the case of MacOS, you are not.
I am certan, that when MacOSX comes out with a command line, you'll use it a lot. Regardless of the quality of the GUI.