IANAL, but since you purchased the shirt before it was illegal, isn't there some sort of ex post facto to judicial case law?
And shouldn't the MPAA be forced to offer a buy back program for the shirts? After all, depriving someone of an article of clothing involves a monetary loss to a third party whereas removing the code from a web site takes, at most, a minute.
I'm sorry, but your comment amuses me greatly:-) The MPAA's entire diatribe over the DeCSS issue is that it enables piracy of DVDs when we all know that's not the case. The technology threshold is just too high for Joe Average and even Jane Hacker. (You need to be Josh.com-IPO to afford a DVD burner, iirc)
Now look at this: The lack of a CSS capable player for Linux is encouring the purchase of true pirated DVDs.
Dude... you forgot the assault by ninjas armed with super soakers (BFSG -- big f'in squirt guns) filled with hot grits! Jeez... I mean, how could you have missed that episode!?!?!
IE 5.0 for the Mac actually won't render poorly written HTML, if it's under the wrong doc-type. For example if your page carries an HTML 4.01 transitional doc-type, and you mark some text with XMP, it won't render the formatting for XMP. Strip the doc-type, or set it to an earlier doc-type in which XMP isn't obsoleted, and the XMP formatting will render.
The macs have great performance in a few key areas... I've never seen a better system for video editing. Other than that, I'm sorely disappointed with what they have to offer.
Don't forget DTP and prepress. I've used Quark on a WindowsNT workstation machine and it's not fun. It's painful. And, oh, Photoshop has the tendency to run a bit better on the Mac as, iirc, Adobe is far more agressive with its Mac optimization than its Windows optimization
Yet more ways to invade people's lives. It's bad enough that OutlookExpress runs VBS attachments by default, basically letting anyone get at your contact manager, but now we have to play wack-a-porn in our inbox?
I love it when the moderators play wack-a-troll on early comments without actually reading said comments.
Is the comparisson invalid to Nazi Germany? The author was indiscrimentally arrested for refusing to allow the police to violate his civil rights. You can't search someone's backup, purse, fanny pack, etc. as the interior is considered private property. And you don't have to tell the police anything before you talk to a lawyer.
>I think Apple is sueing for one perfect reason
>(other than Steve Jobs having his show >stolen): They don't want rumors of new
>products floating because they want to sell >out their old stuff from the shelves before hot
>new things are announced.
Not entirely true. If you buy from the Apple store up to two weeks prior of a new model release (or revision), they will upgrade your machine to the new model/revision if you send it in. My girlfriend's mom works at a print shop, and they just bought eight iMacs---of the previous release. Fortunately they bought direct from Apple and only week prior to the convention. They called Apple, sent them back, and Apple sent them new iMacs and ended up with eight faster/better/cheaper machines for the price of their original order.
AND, if you can prove that your Photoshoping is based upon your own assumptions and suppositions, no, they can't sue you.
Actually it's been done before. Remember when Palm came out with an ice-enclosed PalmPilot? A few weeks prior, some Apple employees were carting, final prerelease ice palms around that they'd gotten direct from Palm (legally). The rumors sites went nuts after they got a report, believing that Apple would be releasing a new PDA.
Crazy Meader.
If I can read Berne correctly, yes, because you knew that they were coming from AppleInsider who got them through a leak...
Of course, I'm not a lawyer, just a communication student.
> What would happen if a leak like this
> got to say the New York Times, and they
> published it. Apple wouldn't have a leg
> to stand on.
1) The NY Times probably isn't going to knowingly violate fair use as defined under the Berne Convention.
2) It doesn't matter if its the NY Times, MacOS Rumors, or Slashdot. The legal grounds are the same regardless of the company.
Regarding the car thing: This is a different situation. The pictures are snapped in public during the road testing of new vehicles and are not product glamor shots comissioned by the company itself. If Apple's engineers decided to take, say, a pre-release iBook to the park someday, and I happened to take a picture of them using it in public, Apple could do very little legally except beg me to not publicize the photo. (Or just give me an iBook to shut me up!)
Here's the pertinent portion of the Berne Convention which the U.S. Senate ratified shortly after its inception in 1967. Note that in order for a work to be usable under fair use, it has to be discovered in a legal manner which usually means that the publisher can be reasonably certain that it was obtained through legal means. In this case, it's fairly doubtful that the original publisher wasn't aware that they were publishing materials leaked in violation of an NDA.
No, it's not. The pics weren't publiclly released yet and, as such, cannot be used under fair use. It's literally the same thing as walking into GM's research facility, snapping a few pics, and publishing them.
As soon as Steve said, "And oh... one more thing" the pictures did become fair game under fair use,
At least with Linux you know what the known bugs are, what they do, and how to fix them and how to help fix them. With Microsoft, you don't know anything till its too late.
One of the reasons why copyright on typefaces is so loose is that there is an unfounded fear that typographers (generally a good natured sort, no pun intended) would attempt to assert copyright over creative works which use their type. (That's why we have licenses. Just include a nice little license stating that, as the type designer, you do not make claims over the content. simple.)
Okay, you don't like a one-button mouse. So? Buy a 3rd party aftermarket mouse; a decent one can be had for US$60, and that's a damn fine mouse.
Why is it that in the same breath, many/.'ers bemoan Apple for shipping propietary hardware while pissing and moaning about shipping a mouse to their own personal liking? Am I seeing a contradiction of some sort here?
I'm sorry, but I can't resist spouting this troll:
Is this security through obscurity directed towards piracy? Think on this: Make your program so damned hard to use without full documentation, that no one will pirate it. Doh! Of course someone will just scan-in the manual and distribute it anyway;-)
Slashdot Mirror
IANAL, but since you purchased the shirt before it was illegal, isn't there some sort of ex post facto to judicial case law?
And shouldn't the MPAA be forced to offer a buy back program for the shirts? After all, depriving someone of an article of clothing involves a monetary loss to a third party whereas removing the code from a web site takes, at most, a minute.
----
I'm sorry, but your comment amuses me greatly :-) The MPAA's entire diatribe over the DeCSS issue is that it enables piracy of DVDs when we all know that's not the case. The technology threshold is just too high for Joe Average and even Jane Hacker. (You need to be Josh .com-IPO to afford a DVD burner, iirc)
Now look at this: The lack of a CSS capable player for Linux is encouring the purchase of true pirated DVDs.
[sarcasm]Geez... who'd'a thunk it? [/sarcasm]
----
Dude... you forgot the assault by ninjas armed with super soakers (BFSG -- big f'in squirt guns) filled with hot grits! Jeez... I mean, how could you have missed that episode!?!?!
(Trolling the trolls.)
----
IE 5.0 for the Mac actually won't render poorly written HTML, if it's under the wrong doc-type. For example if your page carries an HTML 4.01 transitional doc-type, and you mark some text with XMP, it won't render the formatting for XMP. Strip the doc-type, or set it to an earlier doc-type in which XMP isn't obsoleted, and the XMP formatting will render.
----
The macs have great performance in a few key areas... I've never seen a better system for video editing. Other than that, I'm sorely disappointed with what they have to offer.
Don't forget DTP and prepress. I've used Quark on a WindowsNT workstation machine and it's not fun. It's painful. And, oh, Photoshop has the tendency to run a bit better on the Mac as, iirc, Adobe is far more agressive with its Mac optimization than its Windows optimization
----
Yet more ways to invade people's lives. It's bad enough that OutlookExpress runs VBS attachments by default, basically letting anyone get at your contact manager, but now we have to play wack-a-porn in our inbox?
----
I love it when the moderators play wack-a-troll on early comments without actually reading said comments.
Is the comparisson invalid to Nazi Germany? The author was indiscrimentally arrested for refusing to allow the police to violate his civil rights. You can't search someone's backup, purse, fanny pack, etc. as the interior is considered private property. And you don't have to tell the police anything before you talk to a lawyer.
Sorry for posting early.
----
>I think Apple is sueing for one perfect reason >(other than Steve Jobs having his show >stolen): They don't want rumors of new >products floating because they want to sell >out their old stuff from the shelves before hot >new things are announced. Not entirely true. If you buy from the Apple store up to two weeks prior of a new model release (or revision), they will upgrade your machine to the new model/revision if you send it in. My girlfriend's mom works at a print shop, and they just bought eight iMacs---of the previous release. Fortunately they bought direct from Apple and only week prior to the convention. They called Apple, sent them back, and Apple sent them new iMacs and ended up with eight faster/better/cheaper machines for the price of their original order. AND, if you can prove that your Photoshoping is based upon your own assumptions and suppositions, no, they can't sue you.
----
No, it's not. Those photos are taken in public, not leaked from inside. BIG difference.
----
Actually it's been done before. Remember when Palm came out with an ice-enclosed PalmPilot? A few weeks prior, some Apple employees were carting, final prerelease ice palms around that they'd gotten direct from Palm (legally). The rumors sites went nuts after they got a report, believing that Apple would be releasing a new PDA. Crazy Meader.
----
If I can read Berne correctly, yes, because you knew that they were coming from AppleInsider who got them through a leak... Of course, I'm not a lawyer, just a communication student.
----
Actually, Apple sold 800,000 desktop units and another 200,000 or so portables last quarter. That's a lot of translucent plastic.
----
> What would happen if a leak like this
> got to say the New York Times, and they
> published it. Apple wouldn't have a leg
> to stand on.
1) The NY Times probably isn't going to knowingly violate fair use as defined under the Berne Convention.
2) It doesn't matter if its the NY Times, MacOS Rumors, or Slashdot. The legal grounds are the same regardless of the company.
Regarding the car thing: This is a different situation. The pictures are snapped in public during the road testing of new vehicles and are not product glamor shots comissioned by the company itself. If Apple's engineers decided to take, say, a pre-release iBook to the park someday, and I happened to take a picture of them using it in public, Apple could do very little legally except beg me to not publicize the photo. (Or just give me an iBook to shut me up!)
----
Stolen material is not covered under fair use. Here & Here
----
Here's the pertinent portion of the Berne Convention which the U.S. Senate ratified shortly after its inception in 1967. Note that in order for a work to be usable under fair use, it has to be discovered in a legal manner which usually means that the publisher can be reasonably certain that it was obtained through legal means. In this case, it's fairly doubtful that the original publisher wasn't aware that they were publishing materials leaked in violation of an NDA.
----
No, it's not. The pics weren't publiclly released yet and, as such, cannot be used under fair use. It's literally the same thing as walking into GM's research facility, snapping a few pics, and publishing them.
As soon as Steve said, "And oh... one more thing" the pictures did become fair game under fair use,
----
That Glad, makers of Ziplock(tm) baggies, doesn't have a list of places where you can buy drugs in their baggies.
----
That's not a two point font. A two point font would be 1/36th of an inch high on average :-)
----
Roblimo better be careful with his limo service, then ;-)
----
At least with Linux you know what the known bugs are, what they do, and how to fix them and how to help fix them. With Microsoft, you don't know anything till its too late.
----
Follow my logic here, okay? This is graphic designer logic, so it's a bit odd:
Want a better example? Emigre's Hypnopaedia
One of the reasons why copyright on typefaces is so loose is that there is an unfounded fear that typographers (generally a good natured sort, no pun intended) would attempt to assert copyright over creative works which use their type. (That's why we have licenses. Just include a nice little license stating that, as the type designer, you do not make claims over the content. simple.)----
Those who live in glass houses shouldn't wear trade secrets ;-)
----
Does anyone have Thomas links on the pertinent bills? This sounds like a very well written troll, or truly insightful stuff.
----
Okay, you don't like a one-button mouse. So? Buy a 3rd party aftermarket mouse; a decent one can be had for US$60, and that's a damn fine mouse.
/.'ers bemoan Apple for shipping propietary hardware while pissing and moaning about shipping a mouse to their own personal liking? Am I seeing a contradiction of some sort here?
Why is it that in the same breath, many
----
I'm sorry, but I can't resist spouting this troll:
;-)
Is this security through obscurity directed towards piracy? Think on this: Make your program so damned hard to use without full documentation, that no one will pirate it. Doh! Of course someone will just scan-in the manual and distribute it anyway
----