That would be the company he worked for when he did the writing. You know, got paid for working for someone else and all? Hence the copyright not being his.
Well duh. The issue isn't the legal rights, those aren't under dispute, but that CBS are being dicks in enforcing those rights when to allow the script, for a series off the air for 45 years could do them no conceivable harm.
And that's why, my friend, it won't happen in the USA.
Well the artist is suing her there too, as Americans just ignore judgements made in other countries. He's got the money and he's pissed off enough to see it through.
So the guy is clearly a dickhead. But he wasn't, and didn't, incite anything. Pretty absurd him trying to claim he was hacked, looking at his history it's full of similar crap.He'll probably get chucked off his rugby team, that would be punishment enough and quite appropriate.
I'm not surprised at all that Jericho got canceled. The show could have been great, but quickly turned into a post-apocalyptic O.C. Shame really, the premise had some potential.
You (and everyone) gave up too soon. It went through a soapy stage after the great opening, but it pulled back into some hard core action in the latter half of the season, and the few that watched season 2 saw it reach greatness.
There is no room for a misstep, especially with scifi on TV. Lose momentum and you're dead. same thing happened with Sarah Connor. A patch of slow, introspective episodes and it was on the chopping block.
That assumption doesn't necessarily hold for a Doctor companion though. He could arrive on an alien planet where the aliens are around our level of technology (and coincidentally speak english!) and it could still work. It could be a little more interesting as the alien could be asking questions about earthlings...
Leela was a "primitive" warrior woman who wore a minimal cave-girl-style outfit and was very popular back in the 70s. She had a direct and often violent way of dealing with problems. Romana was a Gallifreyan.
Arguments by analogy prove nothing They just let you justify to yourself what you already want to do by making up a fairy tale and a specious equation. Your lawyer is being an asshole and using arguments comparing it to "losing your home" to make you go along with him.
In the real world, if the Tolkien trademark holders had made a deal, and signed a confidentiality agreement, it could not have led them to losing any rights. They had a choice; they chose to be assholes.
cases where the company doesn't really care that some small pub somewhere is using its trademark
If that was the case here, they could just offer to license the use of the name for a small fee, and then then there is acknowledgement of the trademark and no one loses.
So, no "Damn them for making us do this" excuse here.
.
The snooping is a natural result of voyeurism perceived as normal in this society
If I found such a phone, I would "snoop" through the address book to see if I could find a way to contact the owner.
Since the data on these phones was fake, probably the contact details were useless, so what was a good faith attempt to help the owner is counted as "snooping".
Do you know how rare it is for a web company to respond to any bug reports? I gave up on Yahoo years ago. No matter how detailed the bug report, it was either ignored or autoresponded to by a cut and paste from an irrelevant FAQ that had a few words in common with my report.I cancelled my "mail plus account" and moved on. And good luck to even find in an address to make a bug report to Google. I never did.
-- And "innocent civilians" are this minute being murdered in Syria, by their own government. As were millions of Chinese, by Mao, millions of Russians, by Stalin. Millions of Germans, by Hitler.
The lesser of two evils may still be evil, but you're a fool if you choose the other.
So how about a ban on ads showing people eating fast-food, fatty foods, junk food, etc?
You think that's a silly suggestion; I think its an excellent one. Diseases caused by over-indulgence in fast food kills a lot more people than anorexia. Full speed down the slippery slope!
I recently heard an interview with a dietician who said that the idealisation of thinness was a net positive; for every kid who ended up anorexic there were many, many more who were one their way to obesity, diabetes, heart disease;and anything that made that less likely was worth hurting some feelings.
And then when you do get to the images, they're lousy 60 kB JPEGs. How are you supposed to judge image quality from that? You click on the button that looks like "next" to see the comparison image, you get taken to a fuckng ad site.
but just because something has a FLAC extension does not mean it was created from a lossless source.
The whole idea is to use an uncompressed source. If you're an asshole, you can use a crappy 96kB MP3 and blow it up into a FLAC file. Same as people upload cam videos as DVD rips. In both case, it gets noticed fairly quickly.
Every example I cited I specifically searched for in advance to be specifically illustrative of the problem
What problem? Two links about he campsite, as a tourist venue, are on the first page.If that's what you wanted, you found it. If you were planing to go on holiday to a place that had a huge toxic waste disaster, you might want to read up on that too. So, no problem at all.
IIf I'm going to China I probably want to see Tianamen square, just as I would want to see Trafalgar square in the UK. One happened to have a massacre in it, but unless that massacre is happening *right now* I care more about directions, parking etc.
Well, duh, if you want to know about parking in Tiananmen, ASK FOR THAT. How the hell is Google, or anyone, supposed to know what you want?
a better argument in favor of Google, a commercial entitity, in reminding people about a tragedy of which another commercial entity was an innocent victim
The 217 people who were incinerated should be erased from history because a commercial entity would rather no one knew about it?
That was the most important thing that has happened at that place, it's perfectly correct that it should be one of the first things that comes up on a search for that name.
If I operated a camping ground at Auschwitz, should I sue to make the concentration camp not turn up on searches? I That wasn't my fault, why should I have to suffer the negative publicity?
Look, every time you click "reply" and post, the person who wrote the parent post will get a notification. So the person you actually are addressing is oblivious, and I keep getting notices that someone -- you -- has replied to me. But since you don't care about that, I will just put you on my bozo list and ignore you from here on.
I was addressing the "indian rope trick" freaks...
Then you should have replied to one of them, and not to me. My post is the "parent" of yours, so you were addressing me; Slashdot sent me notification that I had a response so here I am. The "freaks" don't even know you were talking to them if you reply to someone else.
Slashdot Mirror
That would be the company he worked for when he did the writing. You know, got paid for working for someone else and all? Hence the copyright not being his.
Well duh. The issue isn't the legal rights, those aren't under dispute, but that CBS are being dicks in enforcing those rights when to allow the script, for a series off the air for 45 years could do them no conceivable harm.
And that's why, my friend, it won't happen in the USA.
Well the artist is suing her there too, as Americans just ignore judgements made in other countries. He's got the money and he's pissed off enough to see it through.
So the guy is clearly a dickhead. But he wasn't, and didn't, incite anything. Pretty absurd him trying to claim he was hacked, looking at his history it's full of similar crap.He'll probably get chucked off his rugby team, that would be punishment enough and quite appropriate.
I'm not surprised at all that Jericho got canceled. The show could have been great, but quickly turned into a post-apocalyptic O.C. Shame really, the premise had some potential.
You (and everyone) gave up too soon. It went through a soapy stage after the great opening, but it pulled back into some hard core action in the latter half of the season, and the few that watched season 2 saw it reach greatness.
There is no room for a misstep, especially with scifi on TV. Lose momentum and you're dead. same thing happened with Sarah Connor. A patch of slow, introspective episodes and it was on the chopping block.
That assumption doesn't necessarily hold for a Doctor companion though. He could arrive on an alien planet where the aliens are around our level of technology (and coincidentally speak english!) and it could still work. It could be a little more interesting as the alien could be asking questions about earthlings...
There were several non-human companions; though all humanoid and played by humans. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Companion_(Doctor_Who)
Leela was a "primitive" warrior woman who wore a minimal cave-girl-style outfit and was very popular back in the 70s. She had a direct and often violent way of dealing with problems. Romana was a Gallifreyan.
The attorney had a great analogy.
Arguments by analogy prove nothing They just let you justify to yourself what you already want to do by making up a fairy tale and a specious equation. Your lawyer is being an asshole and using arguments comparing it to "losing your home" to make you go along with him.
In the real world, if the Tolkien trademark holders had made a deal, and signed a confidentiality agreement, it could not have led them to losing any rights. They had a choice; they chose to be assholes.
They are forced to either do business with these people or sue them
Exactly, but they aren't offering the first alternative.
cases where the company doesn't really care that some small pub somewhere is using its trademark
If that was the case here, they could just offer to license the use of the name for a small fee, and then then there is acknowledgement of the trademark and no one loses. So, no "Damn them for making us do this" excuse here. .
The snooping is a natural result of voyeurism perceived as normal in this society
If I found such a phone, I would "snoop" through the address book to see if I could find a way to contact the owner.
Since the data on these phones was fake, probably the contact details were useless, so what was a good faith attempt to help the owner is counted as "snooping".
There's already been a court case about this, and the company which was doing it lost. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CleanFlicks
If you RTFA, they were actually making the edit and supplying the edited version. So completely different to a bare edit list.
Do you know how rare it is for a web company to respond to any bug reports? I gave up on Yahoo years ago. No matter how detailed the bug report, it was either ignored or autoresponded to by a cut and paste from an irrelevant FAQ that had a few words in common with my report.I cancelled my "mail plus account" and moved on. And good luck to even find in an address to make a bug report to Google. I never did.
The UK isn't part of Europe, except geographically.
The lesser of two evils may still be evil, but you're a fool if you choose the other.
Who was talking about morality?
Or Thailand.
It's amusing how much people enjoy posting this quote. Although it's a nice little ditty, unfortunately Winston is quite incorrect.
Yes, obviously, because....
How about the observed fact that democracies don't go to war with each other. Dictators, kings and of course generals have no compunction.
So how about a ban on ads showing people eating fast-food, fatty foods, junk food, etc?
You think that's a silly suggestion; I think its an excellent one. Diseases caused by over-indulgence in fast food kills a lot more people than anorexia. Full speed down the slippery slope!
I recently heard an interview with a dietician who said that the idealisation of thinness was a net positive; for every kid who ended up anorexic there were many, many more who were one their way to obesity, diabetes, heart disease ;and anything that made that less likely was worth hurting some feelings.
And then when you do get to the images, they're lousy 60 kB JPEGs. How are you supposed to judge image quality from that? You click on the button that looks like "next" to see the comparison image, you get taken to a fuckng ad site.
but just because something has a FLAC extension does not mean it was created from a lossless source.
The whole idea is to use an uncompressed source. If you're an asshole, you can use a crappy 96kB MP3 and blow it up into a FLAC file. Same as people upload cam videos as DVD rips. In both case, it gets noticed fairly quickly.
Every example I cited I specifically searched for in advance to be specifically illustrative of the problem
What problem? Two links about he campsite, as a tourist venue, are on the first page.If that's what you wanted, you found it. If you were planing to go on holiday to a place that had a huge toxic waste disaster, you might want to read up on that too. So, no problem at all.
IIf I'm going to China I probably want to see Tianamen square, just as I would want to see Trafalgar square in the UK. One happened to have a massacre in it, but unless that massacre is happening *right now* I care more about directions, parking etc.
Well, duh, if you want to know about parking in Tiananmen, ASK FOR THAT. How the hell is Google, or anyone, supposed to know what you want?
http://www.google.com/webhp#&q=Tiananmen+parking
Is that hard?
Failing that, the most widely discussed information is at top, which is about the massacre.
a better argument in favor of Google, a commercial entitity, in reminding people about a tragedy of which another commercial entity was an innocent victim
The 217 people who were incinerated should be erased from history because a commercial entity would rather no one knew about it?
That was the most important thing that has happened at that place, it's perfectly correct that it should be one of the first things that comes up on a search for that name.
If I operated a camping ground at Auschwitz, should I sue to make the concentration camp not turn up on searches? I That wasn't my fault, why should I have to suffer the negative publicity?
Look, every time you click "reply" and post, the person who wrote the parent post will get a notification. So the person you actually are addressing is oblivious, and I keep getting notices that someone -- you -- has replied to me. But since you don't care about that, I will just put you on my bozo list and ignore you from here on.
I was addressing the "indian rope trick" freaks...
Then you should have replied to one of them, and not to me. My post is the "parent" of yours, so you were addressing me; Slashdot sent me notification that I had a response so here I am. The "freaks" don't even know you were talking to them if you reply to someone else.