Although I'm not a censorship kind of guy you have to look at your argument. If they HAVE parents AND those parents agree that it is acceptable for them to play say GTA3 or Carmageddon or any other 1 of a 100 games then that parent will buy/rent the game for that minor anyway.
It's not legal for a minor to buy pornographic magazines but as far as I know there is nothing stopping that minor's father/mother from buying it for them for them to have in their own home.
So yes, there should be a reconsideration on what does and does not fall under protected speech but the Parental argument just as easily swings the other way
Point 1: Article Description "Last year, recordable discs outsold CDs for the first time. With so many people copying music, is the record industry toast?"
This implies that there is a direct relationship between Recordable CD sales and People copying music.
Let's look at what this statement implies
1. That every recordable CD bought last year was used for copying music.
2. IF #1 is the case that each copy has the ability to hurt the record industry thus people are not making fair-use copies.
3. Nobody made copies of software, backups of documents, archives of images, backup of websites - software - images - hard drives or anything else with the bought CDs but rather were copying music.
Point 2: 2nd paragraph "The issue is CD burning - the act of duping a CD for free on your computer. It's become the central worry of a music industry that slumped last year and continues to dive alarmingly, as more and more consumers feel entitled to burn CDs and often distribute copies to friends."
This implies that
1. the industry slump is directly related to "consumers [who] feel entitled to burn CDs"
2. that "... [consumers] often distribute copies to friends."
Point 3: Hilary Rosen given 2 paragraphs here to talk about this 'shameful' act and more near the end of the article "Even Harvard Law School students are getting into the act. When Hilary Rosen, the head of the Recording Industry Association of America, lectured at Harvard last week, she asked how many of the law students had illegally downloaded music. About one-third of them put their hands up. But when she asked how many had burned CDs for friends, the vast majority raised their hands"
Note that first. the above paragraphs were discussing consumers.. now we are discussing 'illegally' downloaded music. This article portrays both consumers and those that illegally download music as being one and the same
Point 4: The term "Burning" only referring to music "But record-label representatives say that home taping was never as prevalent as CD burning"
and
"There's a ''sex appeal'' to burning CDs, says Crow, adding that it is a social event for young people, just as listening to 45s was once a social event for their parents."
Burning encompasses more than just music yet the focus here is showing burning = music = theft
Point 5: RIAA commissioned statistics used without any counter studies introduced
"Ownership of CD burners...has nearly tripled since 1999. Last year, according to a study by Peter Hart Research Associates (commissioned by the RIAA).....And the same study found that 23 percent of consumers bought less music last year because they downloaded or copied most of it for free. "
Point 6: Once again CD sales directly related to burning "''Obviously, something is being done with those blank CDs,'' says Mike Dreese, owner of the Boston-based Newbury Comics record chain and prophetic coauthor two years ago of a widely distributed essay, ''Disc burning equals death.''"
Point 7: Newbury Comics record chain owner giving statistics and predictions showing a direct relationship to CD burners and lower Prerecorded sales
"Dreese notes that CD sales were down 4 percent last year from the year before. They are down 9 percent so far in 2002 and he predicts a 13 percent overall decline this year, based on how many consumers will buy new CD burners."
Point 8: Copy protection referred to positively with no counter points or issues that it involves being discussed
"''None of the [copy-prevention technologies] totally work yet, but the best minds in the business are spending copious amounts of time to find a solution,'' says Ron Fair, president of A&M Records. ".. note the word solution
Point 9: near midway to the end of the article. we see the other side.. which STILL portrays burning as bad
note the following quotes
"It's a complex issue that is far from cut-and-dried in the eyes of many observers, including some artists. ''I see it from two different sides,'' says Boyd Tinsley of the Dave Matthews Band. ''It sucks because musicians will make a lot less money'' from CD burning, he says. ''But, on the other hand, it's a cool thing because kids gets exposed to so much music through the Internet - and that's a good thing.''" - Why don't they use other artists who don't have a problem with it?
"''Burning a CD is a good thing,'' he says, ''because you get to see if you like the band, and then you can go to their shows, where you help them by buying tickets and merchandise. I'm not trying to rip off the band. And a lot of times, kids will buy the CDs after they've burned a CD, just to support the band.''" - Actually, those who do have this perspective of finding out if you "like" the band only do it with mp3's. Not burned CDs. You don't burn an entire CD to find if you like the band. This is a flagrant misuse of some peoples way of making music buying decisions.
Point 10: During the counter point part of the article. We see Rosen debunking those beliefs ( which are not legit anyway ) "The RIAA's Rosen, however, sees some of this as bogus logic. ''It's in vogue to diss record companies. That gives fans the license to say, `Well, we're only hurting record companies. We're not hurting the artists,''' she says. ''People sometimes think `If an artist is well known enough and I've heard of them, they have a lot of money and I don't care. And if an artist is unknown, they ought to be grateful to me for spreading their name around.' So they create this sort of rationalization.''" ---
Quote "Vivendi Rep: Yes. The fact that it is not only pirated server software but also pirated game software will do nothing but hurt BNetD in the courts. "
How is it pirated server software? Did somebody at BnetD get access to the server apps/source code of Blizzard?
This isn't an Advertisement [buy waxo wax polish] but rather an apologetic excuse for why he's running banner ads [20% off at macy's] just like this is nothing more than an innocent [law and order - are you watching?] post in response to your question
Q. May I date just anyone? A. No, anybody you date must have a valid license to drive in your state. If the person does not come with a license then you must not date them. It's not just a convenience that they have a license - It's legally required
Q. Do I need the person's parent's permission? A. Yes, if the person you are dating has parents then it is legally required that you receive their clothing, space and all belongings given to that person by their parents.
Q. Can I marry a person A. That depends on whether you were married in the MS (c) Window of Bliss (tm) temple. If you were not then you are probably not legitimately married. Please click here [http://legally_married.microsoft.com/are_you_legi t.html] for more information on finding out if you are legally married.
But by doing that you eliminate congress' way of A. Introducing bills unnoticed
Patriot bill
RIAA + Several bills
Hollings
B. Having the power to dilute a bills power by adding and adding more and more laws that the bill drafter doesn't want/approve of
Tax breaks and unemployment benefits
The list goes on and on. Why, if we did that then we might as well say that congress can't hire criminals or those with criminal backgrounds.
Which is why in WW1 and WW2 we had to be there to cover their front lines. If it wasn't for American intervention there would be no more french controlled Paris. Of course we did come late in the action but the point is that they were at a standstill or even worse ready to break
This is interesting but I feel Java is far from dead. It's not a useless language. what it needs is the following... and here's my suggestions on how they can be achieved
Optimized JVM's that do more than just work. solution? Open source
Designed to work more efficiently and seamlessly as a desktop language. solution? Open source
Greater programmer support in windows development. solution? see above, Open source
"people who are anti-big-corporation are going to be more likely to use something like IRC"
should say
"We are very disturbed that people have an avenue to express their First amendment rights. We as a corporation want the right to swindle, steal and lie without other people expressing their concerns about it to others"
This is interesting. BUT. when you consider the cost of the materials, the tools needed, the time it will take to complete this the guy could have done a small contract job for some joblo company and made the money needed for a better system.
In a surprising turn for the online community directions provider MapQuest sues Maps.com for giving the same directions to disneyworld.
MapQuest CEO states "It's a blatant and obvious ripoff of our map generating code. How else could they know to take the various highways and interstates. We refuse to let competition like this infringe on our copyright of how to get to Disneyland"
in other news Microsoft sues Oracle for their use of relations and constraints in their leading database tools stating that "We use those in our Access and SQL Server products and this is a flagrant attack on our copyright. I don't see how anybody could be so disrespectful on a personal or professional level as to have sunk this low"
"That was all right at the time, because it was easy to raise money for ambitious development projects such as NOW that could take years to develop and, thus, that might not pay off for years."
and
"...Most new hires came in to work on projects that had the potential to bring in revenue sooner than NOW"
Let's see. I make a book..... 500 people buy the book. some copy it in a photocopier ( maybe even a good copy ) and give the copy to somebody. I just lost 1 sale for each person that made a copy and possibly more.
my solution?
I create a book that can't be opened without a special key, can't be read without a special set of glasses ( which is now government mandated ) can't decode the text without a special apparatus. Now those 500 I would have had are disgusted and stop reading my books.. But Hey, I won. I stopped the few that were copying my books.
I understand the fear of how easy it is that digital copies can be made but those are the same fears that were expressed over VCR's.
... then half of Slashdots post would read like this
[edited] sucks. They're [edited] OS crashes. I constantly get BSOD and it's always making me lose my work. I hate [edited] and I hate [edited][edited][edited][edited][edited][edited][e dited][edited][edited][edited][edited][edited][edi ted] and then [edited][edited][edited] also [edited][edited][edited]
We can all see how ridiculous this is. Now IANAL but Free Speech is a right as long as libel and slander are taken into consideration. I believe that the point of this lawsuit would be to prove that it isn't libel. To prove that would be to show evidence of the issues that they had. Late shipments, so on and so forth.
I can't go and say that [edited] stole money from my bank account. That would be libel. BUT I can say that I have had 7 hours / week of downtime due to crashes and so on... as long as it's true, it's not libel.
I understand the point of Elcomsoft but if one of their points is that they are not under US Jurisdiction then why are they pression so much upon First and Fifth amendments rights. Rights that only apply under US Jurisdiction?
Steve Marks "5) Your statement that all the royalties could end up in RIAA's or the labels' coffers is most misleading of all. As I've already said, 50 percent of the royalties go DIRECTLY to artists (without passing go). The provision you referenced in our agreement with the artists' groups doesn't change that -- that provision was an agreed-upon mechanism to ensure that RIAA's investments in building the infrastructure of SoundExchange won't be lost to reckless decisions by the board. Remember, RIAA (not the artist community) invested millions to establish SoundExchange, and it is now giving 50 percent of the organization over to artists. Isn't it prudent to protect that investment with some kind of safeguard remedy in the event the board, without a super-majority vote, does something to undermine that investment? In any event, no one expects that that provision will ever actually be invoked, and the artist groups agreed to it. "
"..., 50 percent of the royalties go DIRECTLY to artists (without passing go)"
AND
"Isn't it prudent to protect that investment with some kind of safeguard remedy in the event the board,..."
so... which is it? DIRECTLY without passing GO or protection of your investment? Ah... gotta love lawyers
I checked the site. Even if they did want to do CJAN why not just do www.cjan.org since it goes to the same page anyway. Why just throw away so many years of work and go to Java.... so.... April 1st + Drastic change to an Anchor site in the Perl community = Joke. Has to be
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, we knew that but for those whose common sense can get rusty from time to time like me this is verification of it.
Wil talks about how they are getting the buzz out ( and it's working ) about the channel
Wil Wheaton [boldy going where no geek has gone before] is hosting a show on the G4 network
Although I'm not a censorship kind of guy you have to look at your argument. If they HAVE parents AND those parents agree that it is acceptable for them to play say GTA3 or Carmageddon or any other 1 of a 100 games then that parent will buy/rent the game for that minor anyway.
It's not legal for a minor to buy pornographic magazines but as far as I know there is nothing stopping that minor's father/mother from buying it for them for them to have in their own home.
So yes, there should be a reconsideration on what does and does not fall under protected speech but the Parental argument just as easily swings the other way
Sneak preview
1 1
1 1 1
1 + 1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 + 1
1 1
1 1
1 1 1
1 1+1
1 1
Match Scores
l33tp0nger vs SkriptK1dd1e 13/12
at@riking vs hax0r 13/12
ashely22 vs k1ngk0ng 13/12
We find these truths to be self evident. That all men can play equal. That ping times shall be the same and framerates shall not drop below 50 FPS
John Hancock and company
Point 1: Article Description
... [consumers] often distribute copies to friends."
.. note the word solution
"Last year, recordable discs outsold CDs for the first time. With so many people copying music, is the record industry toast?"
This implies that there is a direct relationship between Recordable CD sales and People copying music.
Let's look at what this statement implies
1. That every recordable CD bought last year was used for copying music.
2. IF #1 is the case that each copy has the ability to hurt the record industry thus people are not making fair-use copies.
3. Nobody made copies of software, backups of documents, archives of images, backup of websites - software - images - hard drives or anything else with the bought CDs but rather were copying music.
Point 2: 2nd paragraph
"The issue is CD burning - the act of duping a CD for free on your computer. It's become the central worry of a music industry that slumped last year and continues to dive alarmingly, as more and more consumers feel entitled to burn CDs and often distribute copies to friends."
This implies that
1. the industry slump is directly related to "consumers [who] feel entitled to burn CDs"
2. that "
Point 3: Hilary Rosen given 2 paragraphs here to talk about this 'shameful' act and more near the end of the article
"Even Harvard Law School students are getting into the act. When Hilary Rosen, the head of the Recording Industry Association of America, lectured at Harvard last week, she asked how many of the law students had illegally downloaded music. About one-third of them put their hands up. But when she asked how many had burned CDs for friends, the vast majority raised their hands"
Note that first. the above paragraphs were discussing consumers.. now we are discussing 'illegally' downloaded music. This article portrays both consumers and those that illegally download music as being one and the same
Point 4: The term "Burning" only referring to music
"But record-label representatives say that home taping was never as prevalent as CD burning"
and
"There's a ''sex appeal'' to burning CDs, says Crow, adding that it is a social event for young people, just as listening to 45s was once a social event for their parents."
Burning encompasses more than just music yet the focus here is showing burning = music = theft
Point 5: RIAA commissioned statistics used without any counter studies introduced
"Ownership of CD burners...has nearly tripled since 1999. Last year, according to a study by Peter Hart Research Associates (commissioned by the RIAA).....And the same study found that 23 percent of consumers bought less music last year because they downloaded or copied most of it for free. "
Point 6: Once again CD sales directly related to burning
"''Obviously, something is being done with those blank CDs,'' says Mike Dreese, owner of the Boston-based Newbury Comics record chain and prophetic coauthor two years ago of a widely distributed essay, ''Disc burning equals death.''"
Point 7: Newbury Comics record chain owner giving statistics and predictions showing a direct relationship to CD burners and lower Prerecorded sales
"Dreese notes that CD sales were down 4 percent last year from the year before. They are down 9 percent so far in 2002 and he predicts a 13 percent overall decline this year, based on how many consumers will buy new CD burners."
Point 8: Copy protection referred to positively with no counter points or issues that it involves being discussed
"''None of the [copy-prevention technologies] totally work yet, but the best minds in the business are spending copious amounts of time to find a solution,'' says Ron Fair, president of A&M Records. "
Point 9: near midway to the end of the article. we see the other side.. which STILL portrays burning as bad
note the following quotes
"It's a complex issue that is far from cut-and-dried in the eyes of many observers, including some artists. ''I see it from two different sides,'' says Boyd Tinsley of the Dave Matthews Band. ''It sucks because musicians will make a lot less money'' from CD burning, he says. ''But, on the other hand, it's a cool thing because kids gets exposed to so much music through the Internet - and that's a good thing.''" - Why don't they use other artists who don't have a problem with it?
"''Burning a CD is a good thing,'' he says, ''because you get to see if you like the band, and then you can go to their shows, where you help them by buying tickets and merchandise. I'm not trying to rip off the band. And a lot of times, kids will buy the CDs after they've burned a CD, just to support the band.''" - Actually, those who do have this perspective of finding out if you "like" the band only do it with mp3's. Not burned CDs. You don't burn an entire CD to find if you like the band. This is a flagrant misuse of some peoples way of making music buying decisions.
Point 10: During the counter point part of the article. We see Rosen debunking those beliefs ( which are not legit anyway )
"The RIAA's Rosen, however, sees some of this as bogus logic. ''It's in vogue to diss record companies. That gives fans the license to say, `Well, we're only hurting record companies. We're not hurting the artists,''' she says. ''People sometimes think `If an artist is well known enough and I've heard of them, they have a lot of money and I don't care. And if an artist is unknown, they ought to be grateful to me for spreading their name around.' So they create this sort of rationalization.''"
---
I'd go on an on but there's no need.
Quote "Vivendi Rep: Yes. The fact that it is not only pirated server software but also pirated game software will do nothing but hurt BNetD in the courts. "
How is it pirated server software? Did somebody at BnetD get access to the server apps/source code of Blizzard?
This isn't an Advertisement [buy waxo wax polish] but rather an apologetic excuse for why he's running banner ads [20% off at macy's] just like this is nothing more than an innocent [law and order - are you watching?] post in response to your question
[Sig for Sale]
Q. May I date just anyone?
i t.html] for more information on finding out if you are legally married.
A. No, anybody you date must have a valid license to drive in your state. If the person does not come with a license then you must not date them. It's not just a convenience that they have a license - It's legally required
Q. Do I need the person's parent's permission?
A. Yes, if the person you are dating has parents then it is legally required that you receive their clothing, space and all belongings given to that person by their parents.
Q. Can I marry a person
A. That depends on whether you were married in the MS (c) Window of Bliss (tm) temple. If you were not then you are probably not legitimately married. Please click here [http://legally_married.microsoft.com/are_you_leg
But by doing that you eliminate congress' way of
A. Introducing bills unnoticed
Patriot bill
RIAA + Several bills
Hollings
B. Having the power to dilute a bills power by adding and adding more and more laws that the bill drafter doesn't want/approve of
Tax breaks and unemployment benefits
The list goes on and on. Why, if we did that then we might as well say that congress can't hire criminals or those with criminal backgrounds.
Not sure, but can you set up a dedicated port for application use and share the connection?
shortening in a flash\ b\b\b\b etc. etc.
\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b
Oh, the In Memory Virus writers are gonna love this stuff
Which is why in WW1 and WW2 we had to be there to cover their front lines. If it wasn't for American intervention there would be no more french controlled Paris. Of course we did come late in the action but the point is that they were at a standstill or even worse ready to break
This is interesting but I feel Java is far from dead. It's not a useless language. what it needs is the following... and here's my suggestions on how they can be achieved
Optimized JVM's that do more than just work. solution? Open source
Designed to work more efficiently and seamlessly as a desktop language. solution? Open source
Greater programmer support in windows development. solution? see above, Open source
"people who are anti-big-corporation are going to be more likely to use something like IRC"
should say
"We are very disturbed that people have an avenue to express their First amendment rights. We as a corporation want the right to swindle, steal and lie without other people expressing their concerns about it to others"
This is interesting. BUT. when you consider the cost of the materials, the tools needed, the time it will take to complete this the guy could have done a small contract job for some joblo company and made the money needed for a better system.
In a surprising turn for the online community directions provider MapQuest sues Maps.com for giving the same directions to disneyworld.
MapQuest CEO states "It's a blatant and obvious ripoff of our map generating code. How else could they know to take the various highways and interstates. We refuse to let competition like this infringe on our copyright of how to get to Disneyland"
in other news Microsoft sues Oracle for their use of relations and constraints in their leading database tools stating that "We use those in our Access and SQL Server products and this is a flagrant attack on our copyright. I don't see how anybody could be so disrespectful on a personal or professional level as to have sunk this low"
From the site...
"That was all right at the time, because it was easy to raise money for ambitious development projects such as NOW that could take years to develop and, thus, that might not pay off for years."
and
"...Most new hires came in to work on projects that had the potential to bring in revenue sooner than NOW"
Let's see.
I make a book..... 500 people buy the book. some copy it in a photocopier ( maybe even a good copy ) and give the copy to somebody. I just lost 1 sale for each person that made a copy and possibly more.
my solution?
I create a book that can't be opened without a special key, can't be read without a special set of glasses ( which is now government mandated ) can't decode the text without a special apparatus. Now those 500 I would have had are disgusted and stop reading my books.. But Hey, I won. I stopped the few that were copying my books.
I understand the fear of how easy it is that digital copies can be made but those are the same fears that were expressed over VCR's.
... then half of Slashdots post would read like this
e dited][edited][edited][edited][edited][edited][edi ted] and then [edited][edited][edited] also [edited][edited][edited]
[edited] sucks. They're [edited] OS crashes. I constantly get BSOD and it's always making me lose my work. I hate [edited] and I hate [edited][edited][edited][edited][edited][edited][
We can all see how ridiculous this is. Now IANAL but Free Speech is a right as long as libel and slander are taken into consideration. I believe that the point of this lawsuit would be to prove that it isn't libel. To prove that would be to show evidence of the issues that they had. Late shipments, so on and so forth.
I can't go and say that [edited] stole money from my bank account. That would be libel. BUT I can say that I have had 7 hours / week of downtime due to crashes and so on... as long as it's true, it's not libel.
I understand the point of Elcomsoft but if one of their points is that they are not under US Jurisdiction then why are they pression so much upon First and Fifth amendments rights. Rights that only apply under US Jurisdiction?
Steve Marks "5) Your statement that all the royalties could end up in RIAA's or the labels' coffers is most misleading of all. As I've already said, 50 percent of the royalties go DIRECTLY to artists (without passing go). The provision you referenced in our agreement with the artists' groups doesn't change that -- that provision was an agreed-upon mechanism to ensure that RIAA's investments in building the infrastructure of SoundExchange won't be lost to reckless decisions by the board. Remember, RIAA (not the artist community) invested millions to establish SoundExchange, and it is now giving 50 percent of the organization over to artists. Isn't it prudent to protect that investment with some kind of safeguard remedy in the event the board, without a super-majority vote, does something to undermine that investment? In any event, no one expects that that provision will ever actually be invoked, and the artist groups agreed to it. "
"..., 50 percent of the royalties go DIRECTLY to artists (without passing go)"
AND
"Isn't it prudent to protect that investment with some kind of safeguard remedy in the event the board,..."
so... which is it? DIRECTLY without passing GO or protection of your investment? Ah... gotta love lawyers
iM |_|zi||g 1 n0W @nD i L0>e I+
I checked the site. Even if they did want to do CJAN why not just do www.cjan.org since it goes to the same page anyway. Why just throw away so many years of work and go to Java.... so.... April 1st + Drastic change to an Anchor site in the Perl community = Joke. Has to be
NOTICE: Since you've posted to /. we have kindly modified your preferences
[Y] Spam
[Y] Pr0n
[Y] support HP merger
[Y] something..something...cowboyneal
Have a nice day