I went into one of those Dell Cow stores one day to see if they would sell a laptop without windows, they would not. They also told me that if I re-formated the hard drive and installed Linux that my warrantee would be void, and they would not support the machine - even for hardware problems (like There's a floppy disk *stuck* in the floppy drive)
I actually do dual boot now on my x86 laptop, since I like to play games that are not available under OS X or Linux.
I have heard somewhere that if you release a program under GPL, that you still have the ability to release it under other licenses.
Example, I write a Terminal (non gui cuz I like it that way) program to manage personal finances (like quicken only non-guy fast). I release same under GPL. I can still sell a version to $company$ that is under a proprietary license. It would be a proprietary fork of my checkbook program. I could continue to develop mine under GPL, they could contine to develop theirs under their own license.
If you can opt out by removing the RFID device (perhaps with a knife) the your identity can be too easily stolen (perhaps with a knife).
On the other hand If you use something insintric, like DNA, and your identity gets stolen, you can't replace it. (Ways and methods of stealing a DNA based identity is left as an excercise for the reader)
Whether a right or a priviledge, it's codified in law. If you don't like it, get the law changed. Gather those who agree with you to lobby the lawmakers yourself.
When you buy a book, you don't sign any contracts but most reasonable people still realize it would be wrong to take the book to a copying machine and copy the whole thing to give away or to sell.
Once again "because of the selfish few sharers.." you did not answer my point about DRM.
That the law allows copyright to be too long, and that the artists don't make good deals with record companies or form their own for better deals is immaterial to that question.
Because of the few who break the social contract by shareing DRM is being forced on all of us, removing our actual fair use rights.
I myself belive that copyright is granted to too long a time, and too many of our "fair use" rights are being taken away. I think we should have the right to move music or movies from the media be buy it on into the player or players of our choice (that we ourselves own). I belive that once we buy a "performance" we should be able to sell or give away *our only copy* if we desire. DRM will restrict us from even doing that because it seeks to stop those who share.
The BORG have come around, they have been convinced to only assimilate willing subjects, and now serve on starships (usually in a BORG "ghetto" due to their specific environmental needs.) Borg actively evangelize now (hey you know you want to join us - never be alone!)
Most of the ship is actually holodeck which works correctly most of the time, when it fails hilarity ensues.
The Federation is still in a cold war with the Founders, with growing presences on both sides of the wormhole.
It was just before the internet, it was distributed by BBS and PC SIG. It's not my point. My point is what you said ",most people wont do it" (pay for it). It still comes down to the same social contract that says "I am selling you this performance, not the right to copy and sell or give away"
You own the CD - do with it as you please, attached to that CD is the performance, you own ONE of those - I think you should be able to move it between any of your own devices, to listen to it as you like. You should even be able to back up your CD. But what you do not buy when you bought that cd is the RIGHT to copy it and sell it or give it away to others.
Works the same way as Shareware, you get the right to try it out, If you use it you shoule pay the fee. Many do not.
If it is a Privilege, it is not yours to grant or take away. Society has encoded this privelidge in it's laws. You are agreeing to the "privilege" when you buy copyrighted material. The copyright holder also automatically (suposedly) agrees to your "fair use".
Try this on for size, If you don't want to agree to the accepted deal with copyrighted material, don't buy it. Don't get it from others who are breaking their agreements. No one forces anyone to buy music, I haven't in 5 to 7 years. This is how you can avoid the "force" your complain about, otherwise your just breaking your promise.
Your other scenario, I don't see anything wrong if you give your only copy of a CD to someone else in exchange for another CD, or cash, or any other thing you agree on. In this case you loose use of some performance in exchange for something you would rather have. The trouble begins if you make 3000 copies of the CD and "trade" them with other people. So what difference if you do the same thing without actually makeing physical CDs?
Because of the selfish few who obtain and "share" what is not theirs to "share" DRM is growing and being forced on all of us. Because of DRM we are slowly loosing the "fair use" rights we once had, Oh we still have them on the books, but DRM and full trusted computing will surly take them away.
I think your thinking of Patents there. Before patents, the inventor of a thing had to keep his secrets himself, they were not made available at a "patent office" for others to study and improve upon. The patent trades a limited monopoly for detailed information that competitors can study and improve.
As your article says, copyright is to help the copyright holder sell works. Why should I bother writing that software if I sell 5 copies and after that anyone who wants one just copies it from someone else? How should live? They don't need food after all they are artists they do it for FUN.
And don't talk to me about the record companies, If an artist recorded a song and at the end said "please send cash to my paypal account" and dropped it on P2P, really, honestly, who do you think would send the cash. Don't BS me, I was a shareware author, I had all of 5 people send the cash. NO ONE would send the cash, but they would all listen. Why would you do that to your favorite music artist?
PS I am a christian, one of the groups mentioned in you link, I think some guy said "thou shalt not steal", up to you to decide if Copyrigth Violation is a form of theft, for me in my life I don't do it becuase I think it is.
In other words, Any document/song/movie I have on "old trusted computer" will not copy to "new trusted computer" because, as progress marches on, the newer computer will have a different model of DRM chip.
Sure. There is always a way. And because the arms race rages, eventually our machines will be turned against us (full trusted computing) with the backing of law.
Apple has the least restrictive DRM. But each time even that little DRM is broken, a new, more restrictive DRM becomes it's replacement.
What if ALL DRM is there because of the few who violate copyright and share what they do not have a rightt to share.
Those honest working people have a right that you are ignoring. When they create somthing they get to copyright it. That's greek son Copy for Copy and RIGHT as in thier right to controll copying.
Just because it is easy to copy somthing dosn't mean that you have a right to copy it. In the act of buying a thing you make an agreement.
Some copyright owners can give away their rights (public domain), or give away parts of their rights (GPL) or keep all their rights (propritary)
but since when do you get to take anothers's rights just because you want the "Intelectual Property" for free?
So in response to this apple will need to take the next step to protect the copyright of the music.
Up until now Apple has had the least restrictive DRM available, but step by step it will get more restrictive.
Perhaps the next step, apple will have to put the DRM on before it sends the file?
Well there's still the burn it to a music CD then rip it back right? At least until the copyright holders tell apple "Don't let them burn music CDs or you get no music".
Slashdot Mirror
I went into one of those Dell Cow stores one day to see if they would sell a laptop without windows, they would not. They also told me that if I re-formated the hard drive and installed Linux that my warrantee would be void, and they would not support the machine - even for hardware problems (like There's a floppy disk *stuck* in the floppy drive)
I actually do dual boot now on my x86 laptop, since I like to play games that are not available under OS X or Linux.
I have heard somewhere that if you release a program under GPL, that you still have the ability to release it under other licenses.
Example, I write a Terminal (non gui cuz I like it that way) program to manage personal finances (like quicken only non-guy fast). I release same under GPL. I can still sell a version to $company$ that is under a proprietary license. It would be a proprietary fork of my checkbook program. I could continue to develop mine under GPL, they could contine to develop theirs under their own license.
Unless the crooks start taking even the cheap objects to get the RFIDs
Crook: Ok stip nekkid and put it in the bag!
Heh. Thanks for the advice COWARD.
Like most people I thought I did know. So I was wrong. Big Deal.
I suspect that if the logs were deleted that the FBI forensic labs would find some way to recover them.
I suppose at this point we must just agree to disagree.
If I had the talent to make music, or tell stories in motion pictures, I would hate the loss of control that copyright violation represents.
I no longer write shareware software because no one pays the shareware license fee. (well for larger values of No One).
So, the braided steel cable is easier to cut than a wrist.
Since glass is a liquid, I wonder if etched glass would just re-flow over centuries erasing the data.
Stickem up! Gimmie your cash! Now!
Oh and I'll take that Nice Watch too.
If you can opt out by removing the RFID device (perhaps with a knife) the your identity can be too easily stolen (perhaps with a knife).
On the other hand If you use something insintric, like DNA, and your identity gets stolen, you can't replace it. (Ways and methods of stealing a DNA based identity is left as an excercise for the reader)
The best solution is "NO BIG BROTER"
If you don't return a movie.
of employers leaving New York, or at least employees
So, suppose the Chineese guy steps down and is replaced by someone of more suitable background.
Having the UN Govern the Internet would still be BAD.
Whether a right or a priviledge, it's codified in law. If you don't like it, get the law changed. Gather those who agree with you to lobby the lawmakers yourself.
When you buy a book, you don't sign any contracts but most reasonable people still realize it would be wrong to take the book to a copying machine and copy the whole thing to give away or to sell.
Once again "because of the selfish few sharers.." you did not answer my point about DRM.
That the law allows copyright to be too long, and that the artists don't make good deals with record companies or form their own for better deals is immaterial to that question.
Because of the few who break the social contract by shareing DRM is being forced on all of us, removing our actual fair use rights.
I myself belive that copyright is granted to too long a time, and too many of our "fair use" rights are being taken away. I think we should have the right to move music or movies from the media be buy it on into the player or players of our choice (that we ourselves own). I belive that once we buy a "performance" we should be able to sell or give away *our only copy* if we desire. DRM will restrict us from even doing that because it seeks to stop those who share.
The romulans are still as standoffish as ever.
The BORG have come around, they have been convinced to only assimilate willing subjects, and now serve on starships (usually in a BORG "ghetto" due to their specific environmental needs.) Borg actively evangelize now (hey you know you want to join us - never be alone!)
Most of the ship is actually holodeck which works correctly most of the time, when it fails hilarity ensues.
The Federation is still in a cold war with the Founders, with growing presences on both sides of the wormhole.
It would require some sort of special wide angle lens on the webcam, You would probably want to do it with a flat screen of some sort.
It would be especially neat if the lce went all the way to the edge of the monitor, no bezel at all if that's possible.
then you have windows and Icons floating on a clear pane of glass.
It would be like the big workboard from the police station in Minority Report.
why? So I can create copyrighted works that will have their copyright violated?
It was just before the internet, it was distributed by BBS and PC SIG. It's not my point. My point is what you said ",most people wont do it" (pay for it). It still comes down to the same social contract that says "I am selling you this performance, not the right to copy and sell or give away"
You own the CD - do with it as you please, attached to that CD is the performance, you own ONE of those - I think you should be able to move it between any of your own devices, to listen to it as you like. You should even be able to back up your CD. But what you do not buy when you bought that cd is the RIGHT to copy it and sell it or give it away to others.
Works the same way as Shareware, you get the right to try it out, If you use it you shoule pay the fee. Many do not.
If it is a Privilege, it is not yours to grant or take away. Society has encoded this privelidge in it's laws. You are agreeing to the "privilege" when you buy copyrighted material. The copyright holder also automatically (suposedly) agrees to your "fair use".
Try this on for size, If you don't want to agree to the accepted deal with copyrighted material, don't buy it. Don't get it from others who are breaking their agreements. No one forces anyone to buy music, I haven't in 5 to 7 years. This is how you can avoid the "force" your complain about, otherwise your just breaking your promise.
Your other scenario, I don't see anything wrong if you give your only copy of a CD to someone else in exchange for another CD, or cash, or any other thing you agree on. In this case you loose use of some performance in exchange for something you would rather have. The trouble begins if you make 3000 copies of the CD and "trade" them with other people. So what difference if you do the same thing without actually makeing physical CDs?
Because of the selfish few who obtain and "share" what is not theirs to "share" DRM is growing and being forced on all of us. Because of DRM we are slowly loosing the "fair use" rights we once had, Oh we still have them on the books, but DRM and full trusted computing will surly take them away.
I think your thinking of Patents there. Before patents, the inventor of a thing had to keep his secrets himself, they were not made available at a "patent office" for others to study and improve upon. The patent trades a limited monopoly for detailed information that competitors can study and improve.
As your article says, copyright is to help the copyright holder sell works. Why should I bother writing that software if I sell 5 copies and after that anyone who wants one just copies it from someone else? How should live? They don't need food after all they are artists they do it for FUN.
And don't talk to me about the record companies, If an artist recorded a song and at the end said "please send cash to my paypal account" and dropped it on P2P, really, honestly, who do you think would send the cash. Don't BS me, I was a shareware author, I had all of 5 people send the cash. NO ONE would send the cash, but they would all listen. Why would you do that to your favorite music artist?
PS I am a christian, one of the groups mentioned in you link, I think some guy said "thou shalt not steal", up to you to decide if Copyrigth Violation is a form of theft, for me in my life I don't do it becuase I think it is.
In other words, Any document/song/movie I have on "old trusted computer" will not copy to "new trusted computer" because, as progress marches on, the newer computer will have a different model of DRM chip.
Buy a new computer, re buy all music.
Sure. There is always a way. And because the arms race rages, eventually our machines will be turned against us (full trusted computing) with the backing of law.
Apple has the least restrictive DRM. But each time even that little DRM is broken, a new, more restrictive DRM becomes it's replacement.
What if ALL DRM is there because of the few who violate copyright and share what they do not have a rightt to share.
Those honest working people have a right that you are ignoring. When they create somthing they get to copyright it. That's greek son Copy for Copy and RIGHT as in thier right to controll copying.
Just because it is easy to copy somthing dosn't mean that you have a right to copy it. In the act of buying a thing you make an agreement.
Some copyright owners can give away their rights (public domain), or give away parts of their rights (GPL) or keep all their rights (propritary)
but since when do you get to take anothers's rights just because you want the "Intelectual Property" for free?
So in response to this apple will need to take the next step to protect the copyright of the music.
Up until now Apple has had the least restrictive DRM available, but step by step it will get more restrictive.
Perhaps the next step, apple will have to put the DRM on before it sends the file?
Well there's still the burn it to a music CD then rip it back right? At least until the copyright holders tell apple "Don't let them burn music CDs or you get no music".
At least you have a job :^\
Anyone need a linux / novell admin?