I'm amazed to hear the same line everywhere : "block voting" here... "regional voting" there... "Not voting for a song, but for a country" blah blah...
Am I the only one thinking that this behaviour is absolutely normal ?
See, a Finn is more likely to appreciate a Swede's song than a Romanian one - yep, that's cultural: they're closer, and *of course* more likely to have similar tastes.
The quality of the songs *do* have an influence, but cultural proximities implies this kind of behaviour.
hmmm.. can you imagine how much of the internet's infrastructure would have to be replaced for this to happen ? *every* ISP's routers, every businesses' routers, every homes' routers must be upgraded if they're supposed to reject non-trusted packets...
I'm surprised to see nobody has yet mentioned HyperSCSI, which is:
- opensource
- based on raw ethernet (supposedly faster than iSCSI or other TCP/IP-based schemes)
- has a Win2K client
Check it out, I've tested and used it since about a year and it works quite well!
--
Nicson
imagine that JoeBloe provides a web page with embedded images. He has a copyright on the whole document.
Now, IIUC fair use rights, I can re-use *portions* of his copyrighted document, let's say.. an image within that document instead of a quoted paragraph of text.
Let's say also that I mention in the IMG's ALT tag "this image (c)2001 JoeBloe".
The image would still appear in the middle of *my* article/web page/whatever, but would be properly (in a legal sense) quoted, right ?
And it's irrelevant that (quote from another comment) "people could see Kelly's images without knowing they came from Kelly's site" (emphasis added), the important point is whether or not the quoter provides information on the quoted part's copyright owner - i.e I quote BillG's "the road ahead" and provide copyright info in footnotes, readers could read my text but not the footnotes (and by doing so not knowing a quote came from BillG's book) and it's still not a copyright's violation, right ? So the user's perception is irrelevant, because the user can be wrong in assuming a quote is not attributed.
Finally, it could be argued that a web page with external links is only a kind of recipe to build a document. I provide my audience with the recipe, but it's still the readers themselves (via their browser) that will build the document, so how could I be responsible for the actions of others ?
How is this different than, say, a recipe to build a thermonuclear bomb where I tell you, among other things, on which US military base to go to get *free* radioactive material (let's assume this exists, ok?) and then you follow the recipe, get your plutonium, build a bomb, and I am charged with stealing or trafficking radioactive material ?
Anyway, just my "IANAL"'s 0.02 cents...
--
Nicson
The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance
- John Philpot Curran
Slashdot Mirror
I'm amazed to hear the same line everywhere : "block voting" here... "regional voting" there... "Not voting for a song, but for a country" blah blah...
Am I the only one thinking that this behaviour is absolutely normal ?
See, a Finn is more likely to appreciate a Swede's song than a Romanian one - yep, that's cultural: they're closer, and *of course* more likely to have similar tastes.
The quality of the songs *do* have an influence, but cultural proximities implies this kind of behaviour.
Just my 0.2 (euro) cents...
--
Nicson
hmmm.. can you imagine how much of the internet's infrastructure would have to be replaced for this to happen ? *every* ISP's routers, every businesses' routers, every homes' routers must be upgraded if they're supposed to reject non-trusted packets...
I just can't see that happening..
My 0.2 (euro) cents...
--
Nicson
I'm surprised to see nobody has yet mentioned HyperSCSI, which is:
- opensource
- based on raw ethernet (supposedly faster than iSCSI or other TCP/IP-based schemes)
- has a Win2K client
Check it out, I've tested and used it since about a year and it works quite well!
--
Nicson
What about this interpretation:
imagine that JoeBloe provides a web page with embedded images. He has a copyright on the whole document.
Now, IIUC fair use rights, I can re-use *portions* of his copyrighted document, let's say.. an image within that document instead of a quoted paragraph of text.
Let's say also that I mention in the IMG's ALT tag "this image (c)2001 JoeBloe".
The image would still appear in the middle of *my* article/web page/whatever, but would be properly (in a legal sense) quoted, right ?
And it's irrelevant that (quote from another comment) "people could see Kelly's images without knowing they came from Kelly's site" (emphasis added), the important point is whether or not the quoter provides information on the quoted part's copyright owner - i.e I quote BillG's "the road ahead" and provide copyright info in footnotes, readers could read my text but not the footnotes (and by doing so not knowing a quote came from BillG's book) and it's still not a copyright's violation, right ? So the user's perception is irrelevant, because the user can be wrong in assuming a quote is not attributed.
Finally, it could be argued that a web page with external links is only a kind of recipe to build a document. I provide my audience with the recipe, but it's still the readers themselves (via their browser) that will build the document, so how could I be responsible for the actions of others ?
How is this different than, say, a recipe to build a thermonuclear bomb where I tell you, among other things, on which US military base to go to get *free* radioactive material (let's assume this exists, ok?) and then you follow the recipe, get your plutonium, build a bomb, and I am charged with stealing or trafficking radioactive material ?
Anyway, just my "IANAL"'s 0.02 cents...
--
Nicson
The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance
- John Philpot Curran