Sorry, different industry. The music industry is a customer of the copy protection industry. The customer (RIAA) agreed to "never again threaten publishers of scientific research," and in this case they've kept their word. It's the maker of the copy protection scheme that's suing him, not the RIAA.
They know how to reach me (thanks to their registration process), but so far I have not seen any apology.
Even so, if they were to personally telephone to say how sorry they are, I'd tell them to kiss my ass. I'll do my taxes with paper and pencil before I'll trust any of their software again.
Pressing the shift key is not a violation of the DMCA. Telling someone to press the shift key is a violation of the DMCA.
But they can't have it both ways -- either pressing the shift key doesn't do a damn thing, in which case the student "falsely damaged" their reputation but did not violate the DMCA, or pressing the shift key breaks their 'copy protection' scheme, in which case he may have violated the DMCA but he did not damage their reputation, their lame product did. But not both.
Easier said than done. If tobacco companies had been required in the 1960s to label cigarettes with their true ingredients (the stuff they add at the factory, such as shelac) their sales would have been much lower. Oh, wait, I forgot -- they still don't have to list that crap on the package. Just like game publishers don't -- and won't -- have to tell you they use Macrovision.
Do you think Phoenix will keep their prices the same for this new bios? I expect it to cost Dell, et al quite a bit more because Dell will have no choice -- without the Phoenix bios the latest Windows won't boot.
Oh, yeah, I'm sure Dell and HP and Gateway and all the rest are going to LOVE a requirement to pay a Phoenix tax as well as the Microsoft tax! Not to mention what AMI and Award will think of this.
Don't laugh. I attended a seminar about getting churches online, and they said the biggest problem most churches face is that the kid who made their web site graduates high school and goes off to collage, leaving nobody behind to maintain it.
That sounds good, until you find some Microsoft security hole has allowed a spammer to use your PC to send their filth for them. This approach would only DOS another of the spammer's victims (this includes the hapless ISP who didn't know they had a spammer as a customer, and all of that ISP's legitimate customers). That's worse than the blacklist vigilantes.
You're right, Bayesian filters are not the "only" way to go, but I think they'll prove to be the most effective in the long run. Any bets on how long we'll have to wait for Microsoft to include one in Outlook Express? Meanwhile, most folks can only hope their ISP is good at spam blocking.
No kidding. Comcast gives us seven email addresses, so I set one up for each of us. My three month old gets spam, and nobody has EVER used that account (except me sending a test email when I first set it up). These scum just take a brute-force approach to generating email addresses, and don't care how many are undeliverable. They come with opt-out buttons, but all those do is confirm they found a valid address, and they never send from the same address twice, so adding them to a filter list doesn't work either. Bayesian filters on the content is the only way to go.
No shit. They've sure scared me straight! Now that I understand the penalties for downloading copyrighted music I've turned to shoplifting CDs - the penalties for shoplifting are orders of magnitude lower, and usually you just get community service.
What does his agreement with the ISP say? If it says they own the domain, he's screwed. The domain should have been registered in his name in the first place; the fact that it was registered in the ISP's name should have been his first clue.
BTW, domain name disputes cost $1000 to $2000. So if the ISP is asking less than $1000, that may be your cheapest route out of this mess, as morally repugnant as that sounds.
Bochs isn't finished. Give the guy a break. Either help him finish it or don't bitch because it won't run your pet obscure OS. Would you rather open source projects wait until 1.0 to release their code?
that means that if I don't want political solicitation phone calls, then those people can't call me.
While I agree with your position, I believe Congress would say that if you don't want political solicitation phone calls, unplug your phone.
Of course, that's the telemarketer's position, too:-)
My point is that this is Yet Another Law where Congress has exempted themselves. They can do this because they make the laws. They gave us campaign finance reform, too, but you'd better believe the system still gives incumbents an advantage.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, different industry. The music industry is a customer of the copy protection industry. The customer (RIAA) agreed to "never again threaten publishers of scientific research," and in this case they've kept their word. It's the maker of the copy protection scheme that's suing him, not the RIAA.
Even so, if they were to personally telephone to say how sorry they are, I'd tell them to kiss my ass. I'll do my taxes with paper and pencil before I'll trust any of their software again.
But they can't have it both ways -- either pressing the shift key doesn't do a damn thing, in which case the student "falsely damaged" their reputation but did not violate the DMCA, or pressing the shift key breaks their 'copy protection' scheme, in which case he may have violated the DMCA but he did not damage their reputation, their lame product did. But not both.
How are you going to know which games to boycott?
But can it patch holes in the wing leading edge?
Sounds familiar to me. My first date with the woman I married was to Almost Live! I met Bill backstage, too. Thanks for the memories. :-)
I mean, how hard could it be for them to un-bundle one little app?
Stellar Cartography.
Then write a book review yourself. Slashdot doesn't hide the link.
Didn't you get the memo?
Unless/until Microsoft pulls a Microsoft and switches vendors.
Oh, yeah, I'm sure Dell and HP and Gateway and all the rest are going to LOVE a requirement to pay a Phoenix tax as well as the Microsoft tax! Not to mention what AMI and Award will think of this.
Don't laugh. I attended a seminar about getting churches online, and they said the biggest problem most churches face is that the kid who made their web site graduates high school and goes off to collage, leaving nobody behind to maintain it.
You're right, Bayesian filters are not the "only" way to go, but I think they'll prove to be the most effective in the long run. Any bets on how long we'll have to wait for Microsoft to include one in Outlook Express? Meanwhile, most folks can only hope their ISP is good at spam blocking.
No kidding. Comcast gives us seven email addresses, so I set one up for each of us. My three month old gets spam, and nobody has EVER used that account (except me sending a test email when I first set it up). These scum just take a brute-force approach to generating email addresses, and don't care how many are undeliverable. They come with opt-out buttons, but all those do is confirm they found a valid address, and they never send from the same address twice, so adding them to a filter list doesn't work either. Bayesian filters on the content is the only way to go.
No shit. They've sure scared me straight! Now that I understand the penalties for downloading copyrighted music I've turned to shoplifting CDs - the penalties for shoplifting are orders of magnitude lower, and usually you just get community service.
BTW, domain name disputes cost $1000 to $2000. So if the ISP is asking less than $1000, that may be your cheapest route out of this mess, as morally repugnant as that sounds.
Bochs isn't finished. Give the guy a break. Either help him finish it or don't bitch because it won't run your pet obscure OS. Would you rather open source projects wait until 1.0 to release their code?
I didn't even know they'd found the center of ours.
There's a difference. A big difference.
Careful -- I've got the patent on Pure, Crystallised Evil.
Actually, if it's patented, they can. But they'd have to catch you first.
"Informative"? This is nothing new.
Of course, that's the telemarketer's position, too :-)
My point is that this is Yet Another Law where Congress has exempted themselves. They can do this because they make the laws. They gave us campaign finance reform, too, but you'd better believe the system still gives incumbents an advantage.