All of the Oz books published before 1923 are public domain in the US, because every copyright from that period had expired before the Congress started rubber-stamping renewals. Everything L. Frank Baum wrote (at least by himself) has been in the public domain in the EU since the end of 1989 (70 years after he died). Likewise with the original character designs by illustrator W. W. Denslow, who died in 1915. However, the MGM movie (produced in 1939) and everything original that was introduced by it (e.g. "Somewhere....") is very much under copyright in the US and the EU (and probably everywhere else, since most countries follow one or the other model).
The only thing that could still be "owned" about the original books are the trademark rights, which could be maintained indefinitely if they're continually exercised. I'm pretty sure MGM has done its job in maintaining "The Wizard of Oz" and the distinctive likenesses of Judy Garland, Margaret Hamilton, Bolger, Haley, Lahr, etc. as trademarks, and they're powerful enough to get away with claiming just "Oz" as a trademark if they set their legal will to it.
The bottom line is that anyone could produce a bunch of movies based on the books without buying the rights from anyone... but they'd have a really dicey time marketing it without running into MGM's trademark enforcement suits.
Seriously, does anyone know of a 3D model of the inside of a Shuttle? I have a graphic novel I'm working on which could benefit greatly from the ability to set up some 3D scenes to use for reference drawing the interiors.
I don't suppose it's occurred to Microsoft that.info is a perfectly valid TLD used by a significant number of legitimate web sites, and a perfectly appropriate string to include in an IM discussion.
I'm "missing out" on something I never liked the taste of (or the smell, in case you ask). Would you say that all the men who've never slept with another guy are just "missing out" on it?
I'm the kind of person that responds strongly to a challenge. So somebody told me that if I wasn't a coffee drinker yet, by the end of college I'd have to be, because a math major is so tough I would have to stay up very late. I was going to need coffee to do that. Well, merely because they said that, I never drank coffee in college, never got addicted to it, never needed it. That's the stubborn side of my personality -- which I try to use for good.
This is pretty much what happened with me. In my case, it was my father who told me that I'd learn to like coffee in college. I'd already tried a sip of it once, and hadn't liked it... plus I had to prove to Dad that he was wrong. A quarter century later, I still haven't had another sip of it. I've had opportunities to prove Dad wrong about other things in the meantime, but this was my first victory, so I'm holding onto it.:)
I don't currently have a MythTV box; I was considering building one as an ATSC-capable replacement for the TiVo S1 when the analog transmitters go dark. Your proposed solution is clever, but writing custom data conversion scripts (among other things, I'd have to translate the cable-service channels in the TiVo database into the local ATSC subchannels) and maintaining two boxes is more trouble than I'm interested in undertaking just to watch a half dozen TV series and the odd movie; the no-maintenance simplicity of the TiVo S1 has been the main value of it to me.
Thanks for telling me how I could have transferred the subscription previously but can't anymore, by buying a box that was way overpriced. And how I could transfer it currently with a box that doesn't do what I said I want it to do. (All of which I already knew from researching with this nifty new tool called the Web.) That was incredibly helpful.
I'm a TiVo Series 1 user who doesn't consider anything on cable worth coughing up $30+/month for, so I get all the TV I need over the air. Given the imminent demise of free programing data for MythTV, and the continuing absence of those legendary digital-to-analog converters the Feds promised us, this may turn out to be my best option for when the analog transmitters go dark. If only I could transfer the "lifetime service" from my Series 1 to one of these... Still, it's cheaper to pay TiVo for an EPG than to subscribe to cable.
The availability of certain parliamentary bills on the internet triggers a desire in me to strangle members of parliament in their sleep. By this bill's own argument, any legislation likely arouse such base impulses should be banned from publication as well.
I could recognize my parents' handwriting easily. (All that time practicing writing notes from them for the teacher to let me out of class early, you know.) But my dad's secretary would be even better at recognizing his. She's the only one who could reliably interpret it, after all. Sure, that'd be an advantage to this system if you're the sort who gives your secretary your passwords anyways, but what if just maybe the secretary isn't supposed to have access to your confidential personnel files?
No, it means they didn't take the question seriously/literally. Obviously no one's going to give them a million quid, so they're free to agree to "No, never in a million years, I'd rather drink arsenic, and you'll have to pry it from my cold dead fingers with a jackhammer," and other metaphorical exaggerations to indicate emphatically that "Having a mobile phone is very important to me." If they simply valued communication with their friends, they'd take the million pounds and use it to buy some other means of keeping in touch with them. It's not as if mobile phones are the only means of communicating with your friends, kiddies.
Turning off (or even hibernating) a DVR manages to completely miss the point of a DVR: automated recording. If I wanted to manually turn on a device every time I needed to record a TV show, I'd still use a VCR instead of owning a TiVo.
Looks like ice to me. The lighter strip along the edge of the left "fork" looks similar to the microfracturing that happens when ice on the surface of a puddle expands and pushes against a steep edge. And in the middle of the photo (the right "fork"), the angular darker lines look like stress lines, also caused by ice expanding as it freezes.
I have an old G3 iBook with 320MB of RAM, and NeoOffice 2.0 is rather slow on it. Instead I still have NeoOffice 1.2 installed on it, and although the UI is little clunkier and it's based on the old OOo 1.x code base, it's patched to open the ODF file formats, which is my main requirement. Neo 1.2's hardware requirements are lower, so it runs well enough, and serves me nicely as the portable alternative to my PowerMac G5 (which runs Neo 2.1 just fine).
He means that NeoOffice is a fork. The developers began with a snapshot of the source and started modifying it, so updates and fixes to the original have to be incorperated by hand.
It's not quite that bad. The developers of NeoOffice have been careful not to make too many changes that delve into the core of OOo, so they're really just re-attaching the Aqua UI to the front of each new OOo release. There were some pretty long delays back when they were still developing the Aqua toolkit that NeoOffice now uses, but now that it's mostly in place, NeoOffice should be able to keep pace with OOo much more easily. Granted, there will always be a delay between a release of OOo and the corresponding Neo, but I expect them to be much shorter than in the past. And does anyone think that OOo Aqua - when it's stable - is going to have same-day-as-Win-and-Lin releases, either?
Copying is copying, whether you do it digitally, mechanically, or "by hand/eye/ear". If I copy a copyright-protected painting "by eye" and duplicate it on canvas "by hand", I'm still copying it. I'm just doing it the hard way. If I took that copy and published prints of it, that'd be an obvious copyright infringement. So why would copying a composition "by ear" - and then publishing the result - be any different?
I can see why somebody might think that copyright law doesn't cover derivative works like this, but to anyone who actually understands it, it obviously does. Anyone who insists otherwise, is either claiming to know more about copyright than they actually do, or trying to misrepresent it because they disagree with it. Pick one: fools or liars. Because they're quite simply incorrect.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, just listen to the Libertarian Mercantilists cheering the economic opportunities this opens up.
A lobotomy, of course. :)
A presidential appearance is rapidly becoming a Free-Speech-Free Zone.
All of the Oz books published before 1923 are public domain in the US, because every copyright from that period had expired before the Congress started rubber-stamping renewals. Everything L. Frank Baum wrote (at least by himself) has been in the public domain in the EU since the end of 1989 (70 years after he died). Likewise with the original character designs by illustrator W. W. Denslow, who died in 1915. However, the MGM movie (produced in 1939) and everything original that was introduced by it (e.g. "Somewhere....") is very much under copyright in the US and the EU (and probably everywhere else, since most countries follow one or the other model).
The only thing that could still be "owned" about the original books are the trademark rights, which could be maintained indefinitely if they're continually exercised. I'm pretty sure MGM has done its job in maintaining "The Wizard of Oz" and the distinctive likenesses of Judy Garland, Margaret Hamilton, Bolger, Haley, Lahr, etc. as trademarks, and they're powerful enough to get away with claiming just "Oz" as a trademark if they set their legal will to it.
The bottom line is that anyone could produce a bunch of movies based on the books without buying the rights from anyone... but they'd have a really dicey time marketing it without running into MGM's trademark enforcement suits.
Seriously, does anyone know of a 3D model of the inside of a Shuttle? I have a graphic novel I'm working on which could benefit greatly from the ability to set up some 3D scenes to use for reference drawing the interiors.
I don't suppose it's occurred to Microsoft that .info is a perfectly valid TLD used by a significant number of legitimate web sites, and a perfectly appropriate string to include in an IM discussion.
I'm "missing out" on something I never liked the taste of (or the smell, in case you ask). Would you say that all the men who've never slept with another guy are just "missing out" on it?
The security code on my house alarm is 789456123... no one would ever guess that!
The solution is the same as for Global Thermonuclear War: "The only winning move is not to play."
I don't currently have a MythTV box; I was considering building one as an ATSC-capable replacement for the TiVo S1 when the analog transmitters go dark. Your proposed solution is clever, but writing custom data conversion scripts (among other things, I'd have to translate the cable-service channels in the TiVo database into the local ATSC subchannels) and maintaining two boxes is more trouble than I'm interested in undertaking just to watch a half dozen TV series and the odd movie; the no-maintenance simplicity of the TiVo S1 has been the main value of it to me.
Thanks for telling me how I could have transferred the subscription previously but can't anymore, by buying a box that was way overpriced. And how I could transfer it currently with a box that doesn't do what I said I want it to do. (All of which I already knew from researching with this nifty new tool called the Web.) That was incredibly helpful.
I'm a TiVo Series 1 user who doesn't consider anything on cable worth coughing up $30+/month for, so I get all the TV I need over the air. Given the imminent demise of free programing data for MythTV, and the continuing absence of those legendary digital-to-analog converters the Feds promised us, this may turn out to be my best option for when the analog transmitters go dark. If only I could transfer the "lifetime service" from my Series 1 to one of these... Still, it's cheaper to pay TiVo for an EPG than to subscribe to cable.
Go ahead and mod this -1 Pedantic, but:
"9/11" was the mass murder of 3000 people; "911" is a phone number.
The availability of certain parliamentary bills on the internet triggers a desire in me to strangle members of parliament in their sleep. By this bill's own argument, any legislation likely arouse such base impulses should be banned from publication as well.
I could recognize my parents' handwriting easily. (All that time practicing writing notes from them for the teacher to let me out of class early, you know.) But my dad's secretary would be even better at recognizing his. She's the only one who could reliably interpret it, after all. Sure, that'd be an advantage to this system if you're the sort who gives your secretary your passwords anyways, but what if just maybe the secretary isn't supposed to have access to your confidential personnel files?
...the animated corpse of Howard Hughes. He's building the lander out of wood.
No, it means they didn't take the question seriously/literally. Obviously no one's going to give them a million quid, so they're free to agree to "No, never in a million years, I'd rather drink arsenic, and you'll have to pry it from my cold dead fingers with a jackhammer," and other metaphorical exaggerations to indicate emphatically that "Having a mobile phone is very important to me." If they simply valued communication with their friends, they'd take the million pounds and use it to buy some other means of keeping in touch with them. It's not as if mobile phones are the only means of communicating with your friends, kiddies.
Turning off (or even hibernating) a DVR manages to completely miss the point of a DVR: automated recording. If I wanted to manually turn on a device every time I needed to record a TV show, I'd still use a VCR instead of owning a TiVo.
In my case, the first thing they'd have to do is take down Slashdot. Yeah, like that'd work. :)
Looks like ice to me. The lighter strip along the edge of the left "fork" looks similar to the microfracturing that happens when ice on the surface of a puddle expands and pushes against a steep edge. And in the middle of the photo (the right "fork"), the angular darker lines look like stress lines, also caused by ice expanding as it freezes.
I have an old G3 iBook with 320MB of RAM, and NeoOffice 2.0 is rather slow on it. Instead I still have NeoOffice 1.2 installed on it, and although the UI is little clunkier and it's based on the old OOo 1.x code base, it's patched to open the ODF file formats, which is my main requirement. Neo 1.2's hardware requirements are lower, so it runs well enough, and serves me nicely as the portable alternative to my PowerMac G5 (which runs Neo 2.1 just fine).
In the meantime, you can use NeoOffice.org, which is a mature, stable, and full-featured non-X11 port of OpenOffice to OS X.
Copying is copying, whether you do it digitally, mechanically, or "by hand/eye/ear". If I copy a copyright-protected painting "by eye" and duplicate it on canvas "by hand", I'm still copying it. I'm just doing it the hard way. If I took that copy and published prints of it, that'd be an obvious copyright infringement. So why would copying a composition "by ear" - and then publishing the result - be any different?
I can see why somebody might think that copyright law doesn't cover derivative works like this, but to anyone who actually understands it, it obviously does. Anyone who insists otherwise, is either claiming to know more about copyright than they actually do, or trying to misrepresent it because they disagree with it. Pick one: fools or liars. Because they're quite simply incorrect.