I'll admit I didn't RTFA, but what could they possibly have to gain from this? All this really does is effectively take them out of the global market. Could this be a case of the Chinese government seeing too much wealth (and by proxy, power and independence) flowing to the common Chinese citizen? Makes you wonder...
PS: And please hold off on the Microsoft comparisons; in many cases, they ARE the de-facto standard.
"I sure know some guys who d/l music, but would NEVER have bought that music if they were unable to d/l it."
Of all the justification attempts for copyright infringement, this one grates on me the worst.
If you want to listen to a certain song, you currently have several LEGAL options:
A. Buy the album (or single if available) on CD.
B. Purchase the song from an online distributor like iTunes.
C. Listen to it on the radio.
Having no intention to buy the music is NOT a valid defense for copyright infringement. There are lots of people who ARE willing to pay for it, and do so. What makes you so fucking special that you shouldn't have to?
"Again, I realize that a lot of file sharing IS illegal, but the whole blanket lawsuit thing does raise some interesting (or scary?) questions."
Can you really call these "blanket lawsuits", given that the RIAA has sued only 3,000 out of millions who are illegally downloading music?
And yes, I think the tactic has been more successful at embittering thir customers than at preventing illegal distribution of their product, and that generally these lawsuits are a Bad Thing (tm) but let's not make this something it isn't.
"You can get a handfull of large solar panels , chuck it on the roof, stick it thru a 240w inverter and blammo. You dont have to pay power bills again (factor in 10 batteries every 5 years tho)."
...all installed for the low low price of ~$35,000!
"You may have heard about recent charges in online forums that some JBoss employees, including me, were personally involved in anonymous postings on developer sites."
"Unless I'm severely out of touch, most consumers are of the opinion that we should be able to do whatever the hell we want with something once we've bought it."
I am of that opinion as well.
However there are a lot of consumers who (for whatever reason) feel they should be above the law, are entitled to things that others have to pay for, and see nothing wrong with downloading music they haven't paid for.
But nobody here wants to (correctly) blame them for the RIAA's ever-increasing restrictions on fair use. I think they are being careless in how they are defending their copyrights, but then the real wrongdoers aren't giving them much of a choice.
Now I'm admittedly unfamiliar with MovableType, so please correct me if I'm wrong. But I don't recall anything saying that their blogging services was going to be free indefinitely.
Given MobableType's popularity, this really shouldn't come as a surprise. The more people they have using their service, the more it costs to maintain a quality level of service. That's the price they pay to give blog space to anyone who wants it.
So as with any business in a capitalist society, if you don't want to go along with this pricing plan, do as the submitter suggests and go to another service.
Let me refer you to another response. To sum it up, leaders make careers out of hating the U.S. and aren't going to let us come in and change the prevailing perception of us. Look at what's happening to people who are there to build up Iraq's infrastructure (they're getting their heads cut off).
"If that means giving 100 million to arab nations to build mosques that are run by whoever is in the local area (as opposed to insisting that they adhere to what we consider "okay" islam), then you get some good PR."
If only it were that simple. You are assuming that we would be allowed to contribute to a popular cause, and that the governments in these countries are interested in fostering goodwill between their people and the United States.
I submit that the opposite is the case; that many of these people in power are there because of their hatred for the United States. Take away the hatred, and you take away their power. And what 'leader' these days (anywhere, really, but especially in the Middle East) is willing to abdicate his power for the benefit of those he represents?
Those are the barriers to peace and progress that we are over there trying to remove. Then there will be nothing impeding improvements from getting to the Iraqi people. And that scares the shit out of Arab authority figures.
If you read that, it says we consistently give the most foreign aid of any country in the world. And what did it get us? 4 hijacked planes and -3000 innocent civilians.
Didn't someone once say "He who sacrifices essential liberty for temporary security deserves neither"? (yes, it was B. Franklin, as so many others her elie to quote)
As far as I'm concerned, that goes for financial decision-making as well. What kind of freedom do we have when we have virtually no say in how 35-50% of our paycheck is spent?
It's always easier to sit back content knowing that there are people who are forced to take care of you.
Of course, as demonstrated in California recently, there is a certain point at which the producers can't keep up with 'needs' of people draining the system.
"I think it would be better spent if invested in medical research and to better the relationships with other countries"
Sorry pal, this isn't Civilization. You can't just improve relations with other countries by throwing money at them.
So until we do find a way to make everyone happy with us (yeah right!) I think it's a good idea to invest in technology that can A. make military operations less costly and B. requires that fewer soldiers be put in the line of fire when the shit DOES hit the fan.
"By your logic, we shouldn't keep anything secret from the government, either, because that only encourages them to draft freedom-repealing laws."
What the hell are you talking about?? I'm talking about a predictable response to what the xxAA's perceive as a threat to their (admittedly outdated) business model.
Are you actually expecting the xxAA's to embrace people like you who blatantly viloate copyright law? How then do you expect them to react?
And I'm not saying laws like DMCA are a good or reasonable response, but people like you aren't exactly giving them cause to be reasonable. With people like you out there, they don't have to make a case to congress; you're doing it for them.
"Ugh. To put profits so far above people's health truly is sad."
You're assuming a lot of things. I don't suppose you have any proof that pharmaceutical companies are simply hoarding R&D money, do you?
If these guys can do better than a vast corporation, then kudos to them. However this isn't justification for accusing pharmaceutical companies of holding out for profits.
Skinner: "Well, I was wrong; the anti-HIV virus is a godsend." Lisa: "But isn't that a bit shortsited? What happens when we're overrun by the anti-HIV virus?" Skinner: "No problem. We simply release wave after wave of Chinese needle snakes. They'll wipe out the the anti-HIV virus." Lisa: "But aren't the snakes even worse?" Skinner: "Yes, but we're prepared for that. We've lined up a fabulous type of gorilla that thrives on snake meat." Lisa: "But then we're stuck with gorillas!" Skinner: "No, that's the beautiful part. When wintertime rolls around, the gorillas simply freeze to death."
Well thanks for stepping up your efforts. I'm sure your contributions will be well noted when they draft the next law attempting to shut people like you down.
Seriously, what do you expect to happen? You're being 'oppressed' by the very laws you are helping to create. Don't you get it?
If you really want to send them a message, stop listening to the music/watching the movies that their copmanies are producing. I suspect, however, you just want free shit, and to hell with whoever else you may be affecting with your behavior.
That one thing would be: convincing the RIAA/MPAA to push for more restrictive and unreasonable controls over the media you buy.
The worst part is, you people who think you're fighting the xxAA's are giving them the very firepower they need to convince ignorant legislators that they need laws like the DMCA.
The only one you're helping when you download media you haven't paid for is yourself (until, of course, you get tossed in jail). But then that's all the justification most of you need to begin with.
Slashdot Mirror
PS: And please hold off on the Microsoft comparisons; in many cases, they ARE the de-facto standard.
Of all the justification attempts for copyright infringement, this one grates on me the worst.
If you want to listen to a certain song, you currently have several LEGAL options:
A. Buy the album (or single if available) on CD.
B. Purchase the song from an online distributor like iTunes.
C. Listen to it on the radio.
Having no intention to buy the music is NOT a valid defense for copyright infringement. There are lots of people who ARE willing to pay for it, and do so. What makes you so fucking special that you shouldn't have to?
Can you really call these "blanket lawsuits", given that the RIAA has sued only 3,000 out of millions who are illegally downloading music?
And yes, I think the tactic has been more successful at embittering thir customers than at preventing illegal distribution of their product, and that generally these lawsuits are a Bad Thing (tm) but let's not make this something it isn't.
...all installed for the low low price of ~$35,000!
Close though!
"You may have heard about recent charges in online forums that some JBoss employees, including me, were personally involved in anonymous postings on developer sites."
The answer to your question: YES.
Well that's what I thought about the U.S. Navy using dolphins for mine detection, but I took a lot flak from PETA for that one...
...you say as you submit yet another SCO story to Slashdot.
Open source is great and all, but isn't this statement a bit over the top? It almost sounds like he's trying to sell something. Just MHO.
....nah, couldn't bring myself to do it.
It's a sound principle, but remember to cover your asses just in case things go wrong!
I am of that opinion as well.
However there are a lot of consumers who (for whatever reason) feel they should be above the law, are entitled to things that others have to pay for, and see nothing wrong with downloading music they haven't paid for.
But nobody here wants to (correctly) blame them for the RIAA's ever-increasing restrictions on fair use. I think they are being careless in how they are defending their copyrights, but then the real wrongdoers aren't giving them much of a choice.
Given MobableType's popularity, this really shouldn't come as a surprise. The more people they have using their service, the more it costs to maintain a quality level of service. That's the price they pay to give blog space to anyone who wants it.
So as with any business in a capitalist society, if you don't want to go along with this pricing plan, do as the submitter suggests and go to another service.
Let me refer you to another response. To sum it up, leaders make careers out of hating the U.S. and aren't going to let us come in and change the prevailing perception of us. Look at what's happening to people who are there to build up Iraq's infrastructure (they're getting their heads cut off).
If only it were that simple. You are assuming that we would be allowed to contribute to a popular cause, and that the governments in these countries are interested in fostering goodwill between their people and the United States.
I submit that the opposite is the case; that many of these people in power are there because of their hatred for the United States. Take away the hatred, and you take away their power. And what 'leader' these days (anywhere, really, but especially in the Middle East) is willing to abdicate his power for the benefit of those he represents?
Those are the barriers to peace and progress that we are over there trying to remove. Then there will be nothing impeding improvements from getting to the Iraqi people. And that scares the shit out of Arab authority figures.
If you read that, it says we consistently give the most foreign aid of any country in the world. And what did it get us? 4 hijacked planes and -3000 innocent civilians.
As far as I'm concerned, that goes for financial decision-making as well. What kind of freedom do we have when we have virtually no say in how 35-50% of our paycheck is spent?
It's always easier to sit back content knowing that there are people who are forced to take care of you.
Of course, as demonstrated in California recently, there is a certain point at which the producers can't keep up with 'needs' of people draining the system.
Sorry pal, this isn't Civilization. You can't just improve relations with other countries by throwing money at them.
So until we do find a way to make everyone happy with us (yeah right!) I think it's a good idea to invest in technology that can A. make military operations less costly and B. requires that fewer soldiers be put in the line of fire when the shit DOES hit the fan.
What the hell are you talking about?? I'm talking about a predictable response to what the xxAA's perceive as a threat to their (admittedly outdated) business model.
Are you actually expecting the xxAA's to embrace people like you who blatantly viloate copyright law? How then do you expect them to react?
And I'm not saying laws like DMCA are a good or reasonable response, but people like you aren't exactly giving them cause to be reasonable. With people like you out there, they don't have to make a case to congress; you're doing it for them.
Of course, you'll have to explain how said Slashdotters managed to contract the virus in the first place :)
You're assuming a lot of things. I don't suppose you have any proof that pharmaceutical companies are simply hoarding R&D money, do you?
If these guys can do better than a vast corporation, then kudos to them. However this isn't justification for accusing pharmaceutical companies of holding out for profits.
Skinner: "Well, I was wrong; the anti-HIV virus is a godsend."
Lisa: "But isn't that a bit shortsited? What happens when we're overrun by the anti-HIV virus?"
Skinner: "No problem. We simply release wave after wave of Chinese needle snakes. They'll wipe out the the anti-HIV virus."
Lisa: "But aren't the snakes even worse?"
Skinner: "Yes, but we're prepared for that. We've lined up a fabulous type of gorilla that thrives on snake meat."
Lisa: "But then we're stuck with gorillas!"
Skinner: "No, that's the beautiful part. When wintertime rolls around, the gorillas simply freeze to death."
Seriously, what do you expect to happen? You're being 'oppressed' by the very laws you are helping to create. Don't you get it?
If you really want to send them a message, stop listening to the music/watching the movies that their copmanies are producing. I suspect, however, you just want free shit, and to hell with whoever else you may be affecting with your behavior.
The worst part is, you people who think you're fighting the xxAA's are giving them the very firepower they need to convince ignorant legislators that they need laws like the DMCA.
The only one you're helping when you download media you haven't paid for is yourself (until, of course, you get tossed in jail). But then that's all the justification most of you need to begin with.