Different players are involved in the game, and there is NO LINK between current prices and an attempt to lure people away from free.
In fact the whole situation has been misunderstood by the pundits. What's happening is, songs cost JUST AS MUCH as they did when they were (and still are... this is silly) being bought on a CD. What is different is who is profiting by standing between the artist and her audience. The old guard, by raising this recent trial balloon, is indicating their desire to regain a chunk of that money. They want their free ride back.
Those cards may no longer be manufactured as of the new year. Good luck finding one.
I got the pcHDTV while it was still available. Not so I could "steal" or "pirate". So I could continue to exercise my Fair Use rights in the face of stupid pet tricks at the FCC.
This doesn't relieve the Bush adminstration of any responsibility for what happens on their watch and is therefore irrelevant, unless you want to inject hyperbole into the discussion and divide opinion along party lines. Get real.
But years ago Streitwieser and Heathcock had a no nonsense thourough introduction to organic chemistry. I know it's gone through several new editions since then, and although I haven't looked at it I'm sure it has been *coff*ruined*coff* uh, modularized...
IBM is very unwilling to allow Intel to use this technology to solve their heat problems.
I was under the impression that patents were intended to be used to protect an inventor's investment of time and capital while encouraging him to publish his innovations.
I don't think using a patent monopoly as a club to beat down competitors is looked on very kindly in a judicial proceeding.
But then, intel is an ally of MS, who's been attacking IBM by proxy in the courts...
The police would (I hope) not perform such a sting operation because the stakes are so small (what, $0.99 for that copy?) and because damage is hard to prove (the downloader wasn't necessarily going to buy a legit copy and may have been acting in good faith (oops, made a mistake your honor, sorry)).
The police are going to go after large scale distributors of copyrighted material. Proving damage is still harder but I think the judge might lean toward the owner on that one.
This isn't even relevant to the question of criminalizing corporate behavior.
A fly-by-night is already doing something illegal.
What this would prevent is the entrenchment of those unethical and illegal companies. And an unethical company that is not a fly by night is given the choice of acting ethically or becoming another one of those fly-by-night companies. Oooh, the poor company, how could we even think of it?
The poeple who should be getting pissed about this is MS
Are you joking? This is the Proof of Concept of Microsoft's business model! This is exactly what Microsoft wanted when they put DRM in your computer. The niggling details about who's software is actually in control of it were not in the specification (because that was also a part of the specification.)
especially since the Crusades (which was a defensive war, contrary to popular belief - the Arabian leader sacked the holiest of Christian churches, which was basically without defense, making Europe mad - the first Crusade was retaliatory)
Hahah. Like the crusaders weren't above sacking a christian city themselves. Take Constantinople for example.
The crusades were the barest pretext to rape and pillage the rich east.
The political reasons include patent and copyright issues.
Those are legal reasons, not "political". You have a loose conception of these issues, it seems, and will have problems assessing any job, let alone Linus'.
You can use the mailing list archives for the kernel to look up all Linus' rants against whatever if you choose.
but his position doesn't really fit the "manager" role to a T... He's not anyone's boss...
But they specifically said "manager", not "boss".
he can't "fire" a kernel hacker
No, but I don't think that is necessarily a duty of a manager. In spite of that I think you are still wrong: he can (and does) stop accepting people's code if they aren't doing a job to his satisfaction.
or direct them
uh, that's just wrong. There are many examples of Linux saying "yes" or "no" to attempts to introduce functionality into the kernel, and he gives it authority by including or refusing to include the code into the kernel.
he can just decide to accept or not accept patches.
That's a distinction without merit, my friend.
That lack of "direction" is somewhat of a problem, noone knows where linux is headed.
And that is a carefully disquised non-sequitur. Linux direction is driven by 1. what people want it to do, and 2. what Linus (and others) think is appropriate for Linux to do.
Psst. All that weirdness is usually a hint that it was part of an astroturf campaign by Microsoft, itself, and probably in anticipation of their (presumably) upcoming "Rent Our Software, Ye Dweebs" advertising campaign.
If the Americans here could stop foaming at the mouth for a few minutes and listen to what the Germans here are trying to tell them they would realize that this not only makes complete sense, but also shows how much more sane the German system is.
Why is it sane that I should be forced to compensate a guild for something that is already my right by first sale, and for which that guild could never possibly have profited from?
Yes, that's the point. In Germany, copying for private purposes is explicitly allowed by law
I think you missed the point of your post's parent, in that if one is already permitted to copy material for private purposes, this levy is de facto consideration for all other copying and hey, copy away!
Is it possible for the council members to be recalled by their respective governments, and replaced with ones more representative of each country's sentiments? I understand something like that happened to (Monti? anti-trust commissioner or something?) in Italy. But that turned out to be a bad thing, a revenge tactic by Berlusconi.
Slashdot Mirror
If you didn't play WoW constantly you would not have called what you learned "tangible". :)
MO'G doesn't need even to maintain a pretense of objectivity or integrity: She's an analyst.
Remember that next time you are reading Gartner.
The US Fish and Game is probably better versed in predator-prey relationships than some anti-gubmint alarmist on
piracy fire has not been put out yet.
Different players are involved in the game, and there is NO LINK between current prices and an attempt to lure people away from free.
In fact the whole situation has been misunderstood by the pundits. What's happening is, songs cost JUST AS MUCH as they did when they were (and still are... this is silly) being bought on a CD. What is different is who is profiting by standing between the artist and her audience. The old guard, by raising this recent trial balloon, is indicating their desire to regain a chunk of that money. They want their free ride back.
Those cards may no longer be manufactured as of the new year. Good luck finding one.
I got the pcHDTV while it was still available. Not so I could "steal" or "pirate". So I could continue to exercise my Fair Use rights in the face of stupid pet tricks at the FCC.
This doesn't relieve the Bush adminstration of any responsibility for what happens on their watch and is therefore irrelevant, unless you want to inject hyperbole into the discussion and divide opinion along party lines. Get real.
You are anonymous, so you won't see this.
But years ago Streitwieser and Heathcock had a no nonsense thourough introduction to organic chemistry. I know it's gone through several new editions since then, and although I haven't looked at it I'm sure it has been *coff*ruined*coff* uh, modularized...
It's the number of the geek...
IBM is very unwilling to allow Intel to use this technology to solve their heat problems.
I was under the impression that patents were intended to be used to protect an inventor's investment of time and capital while encouraging him to publish his innovations.
I don't think using a patent monopoly as a club to beat down competitors is looked on very kindly in a judicial proceeding.
But then, intel is an ally of MS, who's been attacking IBM by proxy in the courts...
I'm sure there must be other (legitimate) ways to see it such that FOX doesn't receive on single dime...
The police would (I hope) not perform such a sting operation because the stakes are so small (what, $0.99 for that copy?) and because damage is hard to prove (the downloader wasn't necessarily going to buy a legit copy and may have been acting in good faith (oops, made a mistake your honor, sorry)).
The police are going to go after large scale distributors of copyrighted material. Proving damage is still harder but I think the judge might lean toward the owner on that one.
This isn't even relevant to the question of criminalizing corporate behavior.
A fly-by-night is already doing something illegal.
What this would prevent is the entrenchment of those unethical and illegal companies. And an unethical company that is not a fly by night is given the choice of acting ethically or becoming another one of those fly-by-night companies. Oooh, the poor company, how could we even think of it?
The poeple who should be getting pissed about this is MS
Are you joking? This is the Proof of Concept of Microsoft's business model! This is exactly what Microsoft wanted when they put DRM in your computer. The niggling details about who's software is actually in control of it were not in the specification (because that was also a part of the specification.)
especially since the Crusades (which was a defensive war, contrary to popular belief - the Arabian leader sacked the holiest of Christian churches, which was basically without defense, making Europe mad - the first Crusade was retaliatory)
Hahah. Like the crusaders weren't above sacking a christian city themselves. Take Constantinople for example.
The crusades were the barest pretext to rape and pillage the rich east.
The political reasons include patent and copyright issues.
Those are legal reasons, not "political". You have a loose conception of these issues, it seems, and will have problems assessing any job, let alone Linus'.
You can use the mailing list archives for the kernel to look up all Linus' rants against whatever if you choose.
I'm not sure why the CEO of SCO is not in that list
Snarl McSnide hasn't been crushed by the (ongoing?) SEC investigation. yet.
Congratulations, you were marked +4, insightful.
but his position doesn't really fit the "manager" role to a T... He's not anyone's boss...
But they specifically said "manager", not "boss".
he can't "fire" a kernel hacker
No, but I don't think that is necessarily a duty of a manager. In spite of that I think you are still wrong: he can (and does) stop accepting people's code if they aren't doing a job to his satisfaction.
or direct them
uh, that's just wrong. There are many examples of Linux saying "yes" or "no" to attempts to introduce functionality into the kernel, and he gives it authority by including or refusing to include the code into the kernel.
he can just decide to accept or not accept patches.
That's a distinction without merit, my friend.
That lack of "direction" is somewhat of a problem, noone knows where linux is headed.
And that is a carefully disquised non-sequitur. Linux direction is driven by 1. what people want it to do, and 2. what Linus (and others) think is appropriate for Linux to do.
Psst. All that weirdness is usually a hint that it was part of an astroturf campaign by Microsoft, itself, and probably in anticipation of their (presumably) upcoming "Rent Our Software, Ye Dweebs" advertising campaign.
LAMP (Linux Apache Mysql Php)
Uh, you misspelled P.e.r.l, there.
No problemo.
If the Americans here could stop foaming at the mouth for a few minutes and listen to what the Germans here are trying to tell them they would realize that this not only makes complete sense, but also shows how much more sane the German system is.
Why is it sane that I should be forced to compensate a guild for something that is already my right by first sale, and for which that guild could never possibly have profited from?
Yes, that's the point. In Germany, copying for private purposes is explicitly allowed by law
I think you missed the point of your post's parent, in that if one is already permitted to copy material for private purposes, this levy is de facto consideration for all other copying and hey, copy away!
Isn't that what they call... the CIA?
Thanks for the correction re: simple, although I disagree that "standard majority" is clear.
Yes, that is clear. Thank you.
Is it possible for the council members to be recalled by their respective governments, and replaced with ones more representative of each country's sentiments? I understand something like that happened to (Monti? anti-trust commissioner or something?) in Italy. But that turned out to be a bad thing, a revenge tactic by Berlusconi.