Bah, bb's [and smart phones] suck anyways. I'm so tired of whenever I catch up with the pals at the bar to have them all pull out their smart phones and show off how cool it is to read email while at the pub.... or maybe I just have to hang out with less scriptkiddie type people.... hmmm
That would be retarded and fortunately is not how both Canada and the USA work. If old works just "died" never to be seen/read/heard/played/etc again we as a whole would lose out.
Shhh, don't you recall, life was perfect under the Liberals guidance [*]. I love how easy it is for Dion to get up there and badmouth the PC for problems that the liberals either started or equally failed to resolve.
[*] Again, not claiming the PC are perfect. Just saying life wasn't perfect during their period either. And frankly, I hate how they MUST disagree on everything. It's so juvenile and a huge waste of time. We should just forgo paying MPs between resolved acts. That way they only get paid for getting shit done and not just bickering back and forth.
The levy was added during liberal time. It's nice how people forget that. Oh the big bad PC crowd they caused the 12 YEARS OF STUPIDITY that the liberals caused.
Not that I care much for the PC either. I despite most politicians. Though I'd still rank PC above liberals, liberals above NDP, and the bloc can blow me.
Yeah it's fairly easy to call it when they have a blue screen going on. The edges don't look right, the lighting is usually off. Some movies that are super hyped have a really amateurish quality when you come down to thinking about it.
For example, the "ghosts" in the water in the LOTR when the hobbit guy falls in. They look like superimposed cut-outs for crying out loud! Most "explosion" scenes are cut from horribly staged shots [e.g. the angles/scene doesn't match up with the action scene that leads into it].
This is what you get when you spend %80 of your budget on the producer, directors and couple of A list actors.
You have the right to not pursue copyrights. If I release/distribute/publish something that I own and declare that I won't pursue any rights under copyright doctrine, I can hardly sue anyone who takes it and uses it.
Either you can abandon copyright and the declaration is sufficient. OR you can't and the declaration is a license which binds to the distribution (just like GPL/BSD/MIT/etc would).
Yup you caught me. I has a low educations, and are trying to learns to read. That or it could be a TYPO IN A WORD that I rarely type. No, it must be because I'm an imbecile. How amazing perceptive, I want to subscribe to your newsletter. Where do I find the Anonymous Cowards weekly? Is it at my local newsstand?
If "nobody owned the rights" then you can't be found libel for violating someones copy rights can you? That's public domain.
The only alternative is that the government auctions the rights to private citizens to always ensure that they never fall out of protection. Which is not how it works in Canada and the USA.
Whatever, I didn't say it was bad because it's in another language. I said it's bad because it's boring, long, drawn out, and the lead character looks like a dude. And the chirping sounds every 3 seconds from the "creatures from the woods" was really annoying.
And I'm not American, I'm Canadian, bilingual and have a respect for other languages [I watched several movies in arabic [with subtitles] and enjoyed their point of view].
You must be one of them European hippies where if someone doesn't agree with you it's because they're a yankee fascist pigdog. Here's a tip, we don't all think the same over here, and that's perfectly ok.
Telling people what to do/buy/support is not how you develop a "just society." Just because you think all software should be freely available with no renumeration for the creators doesn't mean everyone else does. And it doesn't mean that your position is always right. Get over yourself.
I like the idea of free software, but I'm not totally zealot to think that proprietary software is worthless.
For example, if I spend time to highly optimize an implementation of MPEG decoding, why should I give it out as free software? Just because you're too cheap to pay me for my efforts? Because the lovey-dovey thing to do is embrace "love, peace, free software?"
Ok, I gave it out for free, will you pay my rent and buy my groceries?
I'm against people abusing the terms "open source" to leverage the good will towards their non-open products. But given there is no regulating body, there isn't much you can do about it other than make stupid faces and post on slashdot.
smoking aces, pan's labarynth, epic movie, and the rest I don't remember.
Smoking aces is gay and I fell asleep during it, pan's is in italian and i thought the lead character was a guy for the first 20 minutes, epic movie was just cheap [as in low budget and not funny].
The definition of a copyright is something for which the rights to reproduce or distribute are protected. That can't possibly be everything. What if you wrote a book, had no family and then died? Who owns it then? What of government works? etc.
So clearly public domain exists [and indeed at least in Canada/USA that's the case]. If something is public domain in Canada it isn't copyrighted. By default, all new productions are copyrighted, therefore they're not public domain. But that doesn't mean you can't relinquish your rights to copyright.
Whether I buy a movie or not is not dictated by whether I can pirate it. It's by whether I can a) play it, and b) want to watch it. Stop making shitty movies and I'll buy/rent more (speaking of renting my last 6 or so rentals were all shitty despite being "highly rated" so I'm a bit pissed off).
re: copyright, yes you can declare software as public domain in the USA. You can't have copyright without public domain, that is, copyright is defined as materials not in the public domain [and vice versa].
re: politics, I let others make up their minds. I learned long ago people don't want to be told how/where/what to buy/use/do. And since I generally don't have an endless supply of friends I let them to whatever isn't wholly immoral. One of my friends has a 360. I don't call him "evil" or whatever for supporting MSFT. It's his choice, who am I to tell him otherwise?
Getting a laser at home isn't hard. I got a linux compatible Samsung [forgot which model] for ~$130 or so. We use the same models at my office which serve 16 employees who print quite a bit.
It's a myth that you can only afford inkjets for "home use."
And yes, I agree with print shops. Recently I had a series of music books printed [from CDs I bought]. Cost me $270 to print 2200 sheets (double sided) which works out to about $0.1227 per page. The dude even spiral bound and delivered the books to boot.
I gave out software as public domain calling it "open source," is that OSI blessed? Should I be shamed for not using a license?
I make my statement by just not using software that annoys me. You won't find Windows on my desktop. You don't see a 360 by my TV, you won't see many Sony BMG CDs around my stereo, etc. I don't need a soapbox bigger than my posts to/. to comment on those that have business practices I disagree with.
Which makes me wonder, why not just sell the damn printer at a profit and then stop going so anal about the ink? People will need ink regardless of how much the printer cost.
I'd rather pay more for a proper PS printer, than less for some junk windows printer that takes 5mL ink cartridges that run out every 100 pages.
You can call your software anything you want. They don't own the term "open source" as it's too generic. Hell, MSFT could call Vista "open source" if they wanted. It's not, but there is no legal body that regulates what is "open source" and what is not.
The summary seems to suggest that they're going after people who don't brand their software correct according to it's constituent parts. For example, if you include GPL code in your program, you can't release it as a closed source proprietary software.
Legally they have no standing to say anything about software you wrote on your own without contributing code.
Slashdot Mirror
blackberry == rim == Canadian company?
... or maybe I just have to hang out with less scriptkiddie type people .... hmmm
Bah, bb's [and smart phones] suck anyways. I'm so tired of whenever I catch up with the pals at the bar to have them all pull out their smart phones and show off how cool it is to read email while at the pub.
Win. :-)
That would be retarded and fortunately is not how both Canada and the USA work. If old works just "died" never to be seen/read/heard/played/etc again we as a whole would lose out.
Tom
Seriously man, I said no too, seriously.
But seriously, what of Gentoo. I can't imagine them going along for the ride, but have they in fact said so publicly?
Tom
Shhh, don't you recall, life was perfect under the Liberals guidance [*]. I love how easy it is for Dion to get up there and badmouth the PC for problems that the liberals either started or equally failed to resolve.
[*] Again, not claiming the PC are perfect. Just saying life wasn't perfect during their period either. And frankly, I hate how they MUST disagree on everything. It's so juvenile and a huge waste of time. We should just forgo paying MPs between resolved acts. That way they only get paid for getting shit done and not just bickering back and forth.
Tom
The levy was added during liberal time. It's nice how people forget that. Oh the big bad PC crowd they caused the 12 YEARS OF STUPIDITY that the liberals caused.
Not that I care much for the PC either. I despite most politicians. Though I'd still rank PC above liberals, liberals above NDP, and the bloc can blow me.
The usual, money, sex, booze and smokes. This "legal mumbo jumbo" is out of their pervue as citizens.
Frankly, as a cannuck, I hope it passes for the sole fact that it will contribute to demonstrating how f'ing corrupt people are.
Tom
Yeah it's fairly easy to call it when they have a blue screen going on. The edges don't look right, the lighting is usually off. Some movies that are super hyped have a really amateurish quality when you come down to thinking about it.
For example, the "ghosts" in the water in the LOTR when the hobbit guy falls in. They look like superimposed cut-outs for crying out loud! Most "explosion" scenes are cut from horribly staged shots [e.g. the angles/scene doesn't match up with the action scene that leads into it].
This is what you get when you spend %80 of your budget on the producer, directors and couple of A list actors.
You have the right to not pursue copyrights. If I release/distribute/publish something that I own and declare that I won't pursue any rights under copyright doctrine, I can hardly sue anyone who takes it and uses it.
Either you can abandon copyright and the declaration is sufficient. OR you can't and the declaration is a license which binds to the distribution (just like GPL/BSD/MIT/etc would).
Tom
Or maybe it says something about the quality of movies out of Spain?
Tom
...equally poorly.
But thanks for trying.
Yup you caught me. I has a low educations, and are trying to learns to read. That or it could be a TYPO IN A WORD that I rarely type. No, it must be because I'm an imbecile. How amazing perceptive, I want to subscribe to your newsletter. Where do I find the Anonymous Cowards weekly? Is it at my local newsstand?
Thanks,
Tom
"being not copyrighted" IS PUBLIC DOMAIN.
If "nobody owned the rights" then you can't be found libel for violating someones copy rights can you? That's public domain.
The only alternative is that the government auctions the rights to private citizens to always ensure that they never fall out of protection. Which is not how it works in Canada and the USA.
Tom
Whatever, I didn't say it was bad because it's in another language. I said it's bad because it's boring, long, drawn out, and the lead character looks like a dude. And the chirping sounds every 3 seconds from the "creatures from the woods" was really annoying.
And I'm not American, I'm Canadian, bilingual and have a respect for other languages [I watched several movies in arabic [with subtitles] and enjoyed their point of view].
You must be one of them European hippies where if someone doesn't agree with you it's because they're a yankee fascist pigdog. Here's a tip, we don't all think the same over here, and that's perfectly ok.
Telling people what to do/buy/support is not how you develop a "just society." Just because you think all software should be freely available with no renumeration for the creators doesn't mean everyone else does. And it doesn't mean that your position is always right. Get over yourself.
I like the idea of free software, but I'm not totally zealot to think that proprietary software is worthless.
For example, if I spend time to highly optimize an implementation of MPEG decoding, why should I give it out as free software? Just because you're too cheap to pay me for my efforts? Because the lovey-dovey thing to do is embrace "love, peace, free software?"
Ok, I gave it out for free, will you pay my rent and buy my groceries?
I'm against people abusing the terms "open source" to leverage the good will towards their non-open products. But given there is no regulating body, there isn't much you can do about it other than make stupid faces and post on slashdot.
Tom
smoking aces, pan's labarynth, epic movie, and the rest I don't remember.
Smoking aces is gay and I fell asleep during it, pan's is in italian and i thought the lead character was a guy for the first 20 minutes, epic movie was just cheap [as in low budget and not funny].
Tom
The definition of a copyright is something for which the rights to reproduce or distribute are protected. That can't possibly be everything. What if you wrote a book, had no family and then died? Who owns it then? What of government works? etc.
So clearly public domain exists [and indeed at least in Canada/USA that's the case]. If something is public domain in Canada it isn't copyrighted. By default, all new productions are copyrighted, therefore they're not public domain. But that doesn't mean you can't relinquish your rights to copyright.
Tom
suck cock already.
Whether I buy a movie or not is not dictated by whether I can pirate it. It's by whether I can a) play it, and b) want to watch it. Stop making shitty movies and I'll buy/rent more (speaking of renting my last 6 or so rentals were all shitty despite being "highly rated" so I'm a bit pissed off).
Tom
re: copyright, yes you can declare software as public domain in the USA. You can't have copyright without public domain, that is, copyright is defined as materials not in the public domain [and vice versa].
re: politics, I let others make up their minds. I learned long ago people don't want to be told how/where/what to buy/use/do. And since I generally don't have an endless supply of friends I let them to whatever isn't wholly immoral. One of my friends has a 360. I don't call him "evil" or whatever for supporting MSFT. It's his choice, who am I to tell him otherwise?
Tom
Getting a laser at home isn't hard. I got a linux compatible Samsung [forgot which model] for ~$130 or so. We use the same models at my office which serve 16 employees who print quite a bit.
It's a myth that you can only afford inkjets for "home use."
And yes, I agree with print shops. Recently I had a series of music books printed [from CDs I bought]. Cost me $270 to print 2200 sheets (double sided) which works out to about $0.1227 per page. The dude even spiral bound and delivered the books to boot.
Tom
I gave out software as public domain calling it "open source," is that OSI blessed? Should I be shamed for not using a license?
/. to comment on those that have business practices I disagree with.
I make my statement by just not using software that annoys me. You won't find Windows on my desktop. You don't see a 360 by my TV, you won't see many Sony BMG CDs around my stereo, etc. I don't need a soapbox bigger than my posts to
Tom
Which makes me wonder, why not just sell the damn printer at a profit and then stop going so anal about the ink? People will need ink regardless of how much the printer cost.
I'd rather pay more for a proper PS printer, than less for some junk windows printer that takes 5mL ink cartridges that run out every 100 pages.
Tom
Yeah, it'd be nice if people didn't abuse the words "open source" but nobody holds a monopoly on their usage. How do you enforce this?
It's like saying it'd be nice if people stopped abusing the word "solution" when they mean "product," but who's gonna enforce that? Webster?
Tom
You can call your software anything you want. They don't own the term "open source" as it's too generic. Hell, MSFT could call Vista "open source" if they wanted. It's not, but there is no legal body that regulates what is "open source" and what is not.
Tom
The summary seems to suggest that they're going after people who don't brand their software correct according to it's constituent parts. For example, if you include GPL code in your program, you can't release it as a closed source proprietary software.
Legally they have no standing to say anything about software you wrote on your own without contributing code.
Tom