To search things Google needs an archive of the site. Read the ruling. It basically says Google can't build such an archive, because it is "copying". So what would you suggest Google do?
Sure, but they could just put a small iframe to foo.html and mark that page as cacheable, on that page have a small image, dynamically generated, to [unique_id].gif and mark the image uncacheable on your server. Now when you visit, your cached copy of foo.html tries to download [unique_id].gif every visit.
It is worth noting that it has been speculated that the only reason for the introduction of the absurd GPLv3 is that Linux won't be able to convert to it, but Hurd will since the FSF demands copyrights to everything. It is Hurd's only chance in hell, and, if true, it is a dirty move.
It still sorta matters. The GPL is mainly a distribution thing. Under the GPLv3 someone wouldn't be able to distribute a CD with the a GPLed blob together with a proprietary blob that communicated with each other. It doesn't matter what the government defines derived work as in this case, because the point is they won't have authorization from the copyright holder to distribute it any more. However, I don't think the GPLv3 will be able to do a damn thing about webservices, etc..
The GPL has always relied on placing its limits squarely on the right of someone to redistribute the copyrighted item. For instance, I could sell GPLed programs and include with the sale a proprietary patch-set that wasn't applied to the GPLed code (in source form, in binary form I would likely be distributing a derived work). The purchaser could then apply the patchset to the code, and as long as they didn't distribute the conglomeration, they would be fine (I would be fine regardless).
Do you have a mouse on your computer? The wiimote isn't much more than a pointer. It's gyros are really inaccurate and only used in sudden movements. It can be accurately weilded and used like a sword like everyone first imagined.
How much will it cost for you to fund Opera for a development and release of a port for the PS3? More than 10-25. Also... there is no tax items shipped to you online except if you live in the state where that company does business. Regardless, PS3 and 360 would have tax as well.
To say they are turning a profit on each console is a bit optimistic. They are going to be making a profit on each console *if* they hit some projected number of sales. For instance, if they only sold 1 console, they would not make a profit on it.
Considering that they give a razor to almost every single american (male) on their 18th birthday I don't know how it could be possible that they don't make a loss on the razors.
A stupid ruling against AOL practically made this illegal. After said ruling, the owners of Ultima Online were sued for a very similar thing to what you describe. However, there is hope because I believe both entities were sued for providing some compensation but not treating them as employees. So, a new company could do it, but they couldn't compensate at all (I think all UO did was let the people play the game for free). Oh well, that's what you get in a world full of lawyers.
I don't wish they were criminal: holding civil cases to a criminal standard is absurd; desputes between parties go completely (unfairly) in favor of the one who didn't 'bring charges'. Instead, I wish they had a requirement that damages must be actual: statutory damages of $750 a song (you could rob a whole store's CD section, burn the CDs, and the store could only sue you for the equivalent of 20 shared songs) are completely absurd. Unfortunately we can't attack this with case law (although I would argue that it is unconstitutional on reasonable punishment charges--even if they typically only apply to criminal cases).
I think the important bit is that if they categorically don't go after anyone without a masters then they wouldn't have contacted him in the first place.
Mp3 frames are fairly short. You examine the last frame and fine where it goes silent. Store the time differential from the beggining of the frame to this point. Skip this bit during play. It will mess up some few songs that care a beat between two songs but that have a complete silence between the beat; but it will just mess up the timing ever so slightly during that one beat which is much less distracting than an audible pause between flowing songs.
A undisclosed settlement doesn't mean anything. They might have settled with just paying his incurred legal fees up to that point. Anyway, we don't know what it was, so we can't use it as an argument for one side or the other. There are plenty of other cases you could have picked.
Funny, everything you mentioned *was* in the submission. In fact, from reading your post, it isn't even clear that you read the article. I think you should have done a search and replace on your post before posting it: s/submission/headline
Slashdot Mirror
I'll settle for a middle ground: it just randomly picks things.
To search things Google needs an archive of the site. Read the ruling. It basically says Google can't build such an archive, because it is "copying". So what would you suggest Google do?
Sure, but they could just put a small iframe to foo.html and mark that page as cacheable, on that page have a small image, dynamically generated, to [unique_id].gif and mark the image uncacheable on your server. Now when you visit, your cached copy of foo.html tries to download [unique_id].gif every visit.
Here's another(video lectures). Make sure to read the book as well. Both the book and the videos are free.
It is worth noting that it has been speculated that the only reason for the introduction of the absurd GPLv3 is that Linux won't be able to convert to it, but Hurd will since the FSF demands copyrights to everything. It is Hurd's only chance in hell, and, if true, it is a dirty move.
You have to emphasize that you want these types of developers when you hire, and you have to, *gasp*, pay more.
Redhat has never told me to 'fuck off'. And for all the OS people that have, I've never been paying them for support.
C-64 emulator: good luck getting a rom without infringing copyright.
It is in the mac mini picture. Duh.
It still sorta matters. The GPL is mainly a distribution thing. Under the GPLv3 someone wouldn't be able to distribute a CD with the a GPLed blob together with a proprietary blob that communicated with each other. It doesn't matter what the government defines derived work as in this case, because the point is they won't have authorization from the copyright holder to distribute it any more. However, I don't think the GPLv3 will be able to do a damn thing about webservices, etc..
The GPL has always relied on placing its limits squarely on the right of someone to redistribute the copyrighted item. For instance, I could sell GPLed programs and include with the sale a proprietary patch-set that wasn't applied to the GPLed code (in source form, in binary form I would likely be distributing a derived work). The purchaser could then apply the patchset to the code, and as long as they didn't distribute the conglomeration, they would be fine (I would be fine regardless).
Do you have a mouse on your computer? The wiimote isn't much more than a pointer. It's gyros are really inaccurate and only used in sudden movements. It can be accurately weilded and used like a sword like everyone first imagined.
How much will it cost for you to fund Opera for a development and release of a port for the PS3? More than 10-25. Also... there is no tax items shipped to you online except if you live in the state where that company does business. Regardless, PS3 and 360 would have tax as well.
To say they are turning a profit on each console is a bit optimistic. They are going to be making a profit on each console *if* they hit some projected number of sales. For instance, if they only sold 1 console, they would not make a profit on it.
Considering that they give a razor to almost every single american (male) on their 18th birthday I don't know how it could be possible that they don't make a loss on the razors.
"people could volunteer to be virtual caregivers"
A stupid ruling against AOL practically made this illegal. After said ruling, the owners of Ultima Online were sued for a very similar thing to what you describe. However, there is hope because I believe both entities were sued for providing some compensation but not treating them as employees. So, a new company could do it, but they couldn't compensate at all (I think all UO did was let the people play the game for free). Oh well, that's what you get in a world full of lawyers.
I don't wish they were criminal: holding civil cases to a criminal standard is absurd; desputes between parties go completely (unfairly) in favor of the one who didn't 'bring charges'. Instead, I wish they had a requirement that damages must be actual: statutory damages of $750 a song (you could rob a whole store's CD section, burn the CDs, and the store could only sue you for the equivalent of 20 shared songs) are completely absurd. Unfortunately we can't attack this with case law (although I would argue that it is unconstitutional on reasonable punishment charges--even if they typically only apply to criminal cases).
I'm guessing you read about this DRM emphasis on Slashdot.. I remember vividly a series of submissions about it.
This book also goes by another name: Cliff's Notes: Interviewing With Steve Yegge Style Interviewers. It's like all the guy talks about.
I think the important bit is that if they categorically don't go after anyone without a masters then they wouldn't have contacted him in the first place.
Mp3 frames are fairly short. You examine the last frame and fine where it goes silent. Store the time differential from the beggining of the frame to this point. Skip this bit during play. It will mess up some few songs that care a beat between two songs but that have a complete silence between the beat; but it will just mess up the timing ever so slightly during that one beat which is much less distracting than an audible pause between flowing songs.
I have to disagree with you, it is easily one of the worst movies I've ever seen. It wasn't a mistake that it got a 5.3 on IMDB.
I find it hard to believe that you aren't lost to history as well (I know I am).
I wonder if his pounds even includes the massive ac adaptor--my laptop is pretty light without a battery or an ac adaptor..
A undisclosed settlement doesn't mean anything. They might have settled with just paying his incurred legal fees up to that point. Anyway, we don't know what it was, so we can't use it as an argument for one side or the other. There are plenty of other cases you could have picked.
Funny, everything you mentioned *was* in the submission. In fact, from reading your post, it isn't even clear that you read the article. I think you should have done a search and replace on your post before posting it: s/submission/headline