That is such a classic interaction. I sometimes just ask to talk to a supervisor right away because I know that no matter what they are the only ones who will actually resolve anything.
Speaking of protection... I spent yesterday on the phone with Infogrames because the latest patch (1.21) of Civ III PTW prevents me from playing the game even after I revert back to the last patch. I still haven't gotten it to work and I ended up just removing all traces of PTW and reinstalling only up to 1.14.
I explained to the guy that I have bought pretty much every Civ title every made and it is really frustrating to have to deal with this especially since I know for a fact that bootleg copies exist in spite of the protection. He gave me the same canned "this is the policy" answer.
AOL is trying to get away from the whole dial up ISP business and move into the pay-for-content business. Dial up is a dead saturated market but the hope is that they can make money by offering the huge amount of highly valuable content they have behind them exclusively to subscribers.
Why are you so against consumer labeling? On obvious things (like your ladder example) it is silly but on something like this most consumers have no clue. I would say that I am the only person in my office who even knows that copy protection exists.
When you buy a product there is an "implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose." In the case of a cd it is that you can listen to the music anywhere on any type of cd player. If a CD will not play in my computer then it is violating that warranty. In order to avoid this the vendor must clearly label that it may not work in all devices and if it does not work in my device I may request a full refund.
Says who? This has been the case since they did away with different currency in each state. On little ticket items it isn't a big deal but when you buy a car or furniture they have to collect tax by law.
Just because you wish something doesn't make it so.
Aren't cartoons done in a segmented fashion? You don't get all of the actors in one room. Each one records there segment and then everything is spliced later on. Actually, there is no reason that you couldn't do exactly like you suggest and find somebody who is willing to do some low end computer animation.
What the hell are you talking about? This isn't about the US government creating a new tax. This is about the states getting together to make it easier for online businesses to collect the taxes they should have been collecting already. If I live in a state that doesn't have a sales and use tax then I wouldn't have to worry about this.
And I don't know what evidence you have that some companies get to keep a portion of the sales tax they collect but I would love to see it. I am not even sure what laws you are talking about them pushing through. Companies that are pushing for this are doing it because they already collect sales tax and would like it to be easier.
Ma & Pa B&M shops have always had to deal with sales tax. Why should an online business be any different?
Do you have a reason for this? I can understand not wanting to pay federal tax but state and local taxes have such a visible benefit to my day to day life, especially after this big storm that just came through. I also prefer shopping locally (within my county) because I know that the taxes those businesses pay benefit me directly.
It really is very simple. Sales and Use tax is paid on behalf of the purchaser to the state in which they reside. It all comes down to shipping address. Where you ship it is where you pay for it. Now if you live in New York and have it shipped to a friend in New Jersey you can get away without paying the tax on it but at no point is the tax paid to two states.
You actually can get a tax refund for any taxes paid in the state of Oregon while you are visiting as long as you then pay the Use tax in California. You will also notice that if you buy something like furniture the store will ask you what state you live in so that they charge you the proper sales tax. I recently bought a dining room set in Connecticut but they charged me NY taxes.
Sure. Double your shipping charge so that you can get out of paying the tax. Legally, of course, you are still obliged to pay use tax to your state (if they require it). These are not new taxes but just ways of enforcing already existing taxes.
I don't know even where to begin. People don't walk becaus they can't drive. Most people who live in Manhattan don't even own cars. There is no need for them. There are subways and buses that take you pretty much anywhere (except for the East Side but someday there will be a 2nd avenue line). People walk from public transportation to their office.
There are some people who drive into the city but most of the traffic in the city is cabs, trucks, and buses and those are three things that aren't going to be replace by segways. I can just see some tourists coming in from the airport with their luggage being dragged behind them on its rollers.
As for safety, cars and bicycles don't ride on the sidewalk (at least not legally). There is only interaction between pedestrians and automobiles when people cross the street. With segways the idea is that pedestrians and segways would be interwoven.
There is a big difference between being realistic and being closed minded.
Have you ever been to New York? Foot traffic can often be just as bad as automobile traffic, especially during the summer. I dread having to go anywhere near Time Square during the summer. The sidewalks are overflowing with people. Now imagine it if everybody was just a little bit wider and a lot more inflexible.
Or do you assume that they can eliminate automobile traffic completely? What about the trucks and buses? Do you suppose that Segways will eliminate the need for these, too?
What about safety? Do you know how many times I have almost plowed into somebody while walking because they stopped short to look in a window or answer their cell phone? Can you imagine that disaster?
I recommend you get out of your ivory tower and actually take a walk sometime and see what it is really like out there.
During the blizzard that may be true but afterwords it is a totally different story. Today the roads and sidewalks in Manhattan are relatively clear (at least in midtown) and you could get around on foot, bike or car no problem but I have no idea how you would get around on a segway.
First of all, it is supposed to be used on the sidewalk. Right now there are small, one-person wide spaces for people to get from sidewalk to road. There is no way for a segway to fit.
As for riding in the street. A bike has high, skinny wheels which can actually cut through a few inches of snow, more if you have a mountain bike. The segway is low riding with smaller, wider tires. Even if it can get through the snow your feet would be covered in slush after two minutes.
Finally, a bike is light enough to life over your head if you need to get past a snow bank. I'd like to see you do that in a segway.
Actors and Actresses is something different. That is about casting a part. But if a company that makes porn forces the same restrictions on all of its employees that is illegal. And don't preface your comments with "um." That implies a condescending attitude.
HBO dates back to 1973. I am not sure if there wasn't anything before HBO but I am hardly an expert. It doesn't really matter, though, since digital cable doesn't date back nearly that far.
They own the company and should be able to run it anyway they want.
In that case, they should be able to hire only big breasted, white women and make fellatio part of the job description. If there are laws to prevent discrimination based on other factors then why not on credit worthiness?
If they are asking for your credit history then it is safe to assume that they will not hire you if you have bad credit. Unless they can prove a specific correlation between bad credit and bad work habits then I think they have no right to do so.
Personally, I don't have bad credit (never miss a payment) but I am pretty far into debt. This doesn't mean I am a bad employee. On the contrary I like to think that I am pretty highly regarded (and I have the bonuses and reviews to back it up).
Where in the Constitution is Freedom of Privacy stated? You may be able to infer it from other amendments but it is not nearly as clearly stated as Freedom of Speech.
It is an interesting case because there is no measurable cost associated with receiving telemarketing calls to your land line besides your time. In the case of faxes, cell phones, and even email there is a cost that you must pay when you are contacted (paper, airtime, etc.).
The other side is that I would argue that it only would be a violation of Freedom of Speech if a law was passed that said they couldn't make phone calls at all.
Just some clarification. Taking the idea of a story (say a boy raised in the jungle) and turning it into a movie is not a derivative work. The original author taking the original book and adding a new chapter called "Boy gets eaten by bear. Story at 11" would be. Read the circular I refenced above. It doesn't specifically mention public domain works but it does say that only an author or his designee can create a true derivative work. If you were to right a new chapter to Jungle Book that chapter would just be a new copyrightable work.
You really answered your own question. If you are reproducing the original work then you are fine but if you try to sell a new movie starring Bugs Bunny then you better hold on for the legal attack. That really is the difference between a trademark and a copyright.
It's all about control. The idea is that when they finally do re-release "Pinocchio" they will throw all sorts of useless added scenes and everybody will flock to the theatre to see it and the store to buy it. After all, miss it now and don't see it again for 20 years.
It is a business plan that really only Disney can pull off because of their "American Icon" status. If Pinocchi ever reaches Public Domain, though, it is all over because anybody can get the original. The silly thing is that Disney has peopled so brainwashed that they probably could still sell the public domain movie just like Barnes and Noble still sells Public Domain books.
A) Treasure Planet may be based on Treasure Island but that does not make it a derivative work any more than Romeo and Juliet is a derivative work of "Tristan und Isolde". If RLS gave them permission to take the original Treasure Island and add a new chapter to it then that would be a derivative work. Read this for more info about derivative works (warning - pdf).
B) This is true but moot in light of...
C) An image can be trademarked also. "A trademark is a word, name, symbol or device which is used in trade with goods to indicate the source of the goods and to distinguish them from the goods of others. "
If people could make derivative works featuring the early Disney characters
People can never create derivative works of disney characters for three reasons:
First, a derivative work can only be created by the original artist or someone they give permission to.
Second, the copyright on the original movies may expire but not on the artwork of the characters as long as Disney keeps using and changing them.
Finally, Disney characters, such as Mickey Mouse, are also trademarked and therefore can never be used as long as Disney continues to maintain that Trademark. Trademarks never expire on their own accord.
Disney is more concerned with not being able to re-release their movies every twenty years and then locking them up again. This is what they have done in the past and it creates a new revenue stream each time because collectors always want the latest version.
The name Mickey Mouse is not Copyrighted and it will never be. You can not copyright a word or name. You can only trademark them in regards to specific uses. Don't be fooled by the morons who use the phrase "Intellectual Property" and group Copyright, Trademarks, and Patents together. They are three very different things. Copyrights are actually controlled by the Library of Congress whereas Patents and Trademarks are handled by the US Patents and Trademarks Office (USPTO).
Writing software is difficult, too. Yet is seems that there are thousands of applications out there that were written without the help of any major software company. Sure a lot of them are crap but the good ones often have a way of standing out.
You are still wrapped up in the idea of physical publishing. Physically producing a book is a difficult task that requires time and money but writing a book only needs a talented author and some friends who are willing to proof read.
And why would anyone want to use eg.Mickey Mouse (TM) for Non-Disney purposes?
This is about Copyrights and not Trademarks. Trademarks do not expire unless you let them. Steamboat Willy would have entered the public domain but that does not mean you could have started using Mickey Mouse in advertising.
Slashdot Mirror
That is such a classic interaction. I sometimes just ask to talk to a supervisor right away because I know that no matter what they are the only ones who will actually resolve anything.
Speaking of protection... I spent yesterday on the phone with Infogrames because the latest patch (1.21) of Civ III PTW prevents me from playing the game even after I revert back to the last patch. I still haven't gotten it to work and I ended up just removing all traces of PTW and reinstalling only up to 1.14.
I explained to the guy that I have bought pretty much every Civ title every made and it is really frustrating to have to deal with this especially since I know for a fact that bootleg copies exist in spite of the protection. He gave me the same canned "this is the policy" answer.
AOL is trying to get away from the whole dial up ISP business and move into the pay-for-content business. Dial up is a dead saturated market but the hope is that they can make money by offering the huge amount of highly valuable content they have behind them exclusively to subscribers.
Why are you so against consumer labeling? On obvious things (like your ladder example) it is silly but on something like this most consumers have no clue. I would say that I am the only person in my office who even knows that copy protection exists.
When you buy a product there is an "implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose." In the case of a cd it is that you can listen to the music anywhere on any type of cd player. If a CD will not play in my computer then it is violating that warranty. In order to avoid this the vendor must clearly label that it may not work in all devices and if it does not work in my device I may request a full refund.
Says who? This has been the case since they did away with different currency in each state. On little ticket items it isn't a big deal but when you buy a car or furniture they have to collect tax by law.
Just because you wish something doesn't make it so.
Aren't cartoons done in a segmented fashion? You don't get all of the actors in one room. Each one records there segment and then everything is spliced later on. Actually, there is no reason that you couldn't do exactly like you suggest and find somebody who is willing to do some low end computer animation.
What the hell are you talking about? This isn't about the US government creating a new tax. This is about the states getting together to make it easier for online businesses to collect the taxes they should have been collecting already. If I live in a state that doesn't have a sales and use tax then I wouldn't have to worry about this.
And I don't know what evidence you have that some companies get to keep a portion of the sales tax they collect but I would love to see it. I am not even sure what laws you are talking about them pushing through. Companies that are pushing for this are doing it because they already collect sales tax and would like it to be easier.
Ma & Pa B&M shops have always had to deal with sales tax. Why should an online business be any different?
Do you have a reason for this? I can understand not wanting to pay federal tax but state and local taxes have such a visible benefit to my day to day life, especially after this big storm that just came through. I also prefer shopping locally (within my county) because I know that the taxes those businesses pay benefit me directly.
It really is very simple. Sales and Use tax is paid on behalf of the purchaser to the state in which they reside. It all comes down to shipping address. Where you ship it is where you pay for it. Now if you live in New York and have it shipped to a friend in New Jersey you can get away without paying the tax on it but at no point is the tax paid to two states.
You actually can get a tax refund for any taxes paid in the state of Oregon while you are visiting as long as you then pay the Use tax in California. You will also notice that if you buy something like furniture the store will ask you what state you live in so that they charge you the proper sales tax. I recently bought a dining room set in Connecticut but they charged me NY taxes.
Sure. Double your shipping charge so that you can get out of paying the tax. Legally, of course, you are still obliged to pay use tax to your state (if they require it). These are not new taxes but just ways of enforcing already existing taxes.
I don't know even where to begin. People don't walk becaus they can't drive. Most people who live in Manhattan don't even own cars. There is no need for them. There are subways and buses that take you pretty much anywhere (except for the East Side but someday there will be a 2nd avenue line). People walk from public transportation to their office.
There are some people who drive into the city but most of the traffic in the city is cabs, trucks, and buses and those are three things that aren't going to be replace by segways. I can just see some tourists coming in from the airport with their luggage being dragged behind them on its rollers.
As for safety, cars and bicycles don't ride on the sidewalk (at least not legally). There is only interaction between pedestrians and automobiles when people cross the street. With segways the idea is that pedestrians and segways would be interwoven.
There is a big difference between being realistic and being closed minded.
Look at New York, downtown.
Have you ever been to New York? Foot traffic can often be just as bad as automobile traffic, especially during the summer. I dread having to go anywhere near Time Square during the summer. The sidewalks are overflowing with people. Now imagine it if everybody was just a little bit wider and a lot more inflexible.
Or do you assume that they can eliminate automobile traffic completely? What about the trucks and buses? Do you suppose that Segways will eliminate the need for these, too?
What about safety? Do you know how many times I have almost plowed into somebody while walking because they stopped short to look in a window or answer their cell phone? Can you imagine that disaster?
I recommend you get out of your ivory tower and actually take a walk sometime and see what it is really like out there.
During the blizzard that may be true but afterwords it is a totally different story. Today the roads and sidewalks in Manhattan are relatively clear (at least in midtown) and you could get around on foot, bike or car no problem but I have no idea how you would get around on a segway.
First of all, it is supposed to be used on the sidewalk. Right now there are small, one-person wide spaces for people to get from sidewalk to road. There is no way for a segway to fit.
As for riding in the street. A bike has high, skinny wheels which can actually cut through a few inches of snow, more if you have a mountain bike. The segway is low riding with smaller, wider tires. Even if it can get through the snow your feet would be covered in slush after two minutes.
Finally, a bike is light enough to life over your head if you need to get past a snow bank. I'd like to see you do that in a segway.
Actors and Actresses is something different. That is about casting a part. But if a company that makes porn forces the same restrictions on all of its employees that is illegal. And don't preface your comments with "um." That implies a condescending attitude.
HBO dates back to 1973. I am not sure if there wasn't anything before HBO but I am hardly an expert. It doesn't really matter, though, since digital cable doesn't date back nearly that far.
They own the company and should be able to run it anyway they want.
In that case, they should be able to hire only big breasted, white women and make fellatio
part of the job description. If there are laws to prevent discrimination based on other factors then why not on credit worthiness?
If they are asking for your credit history then it is safe to assume that they will not hire you if you have bad credit. Unless they can prove a specific correlation between bad credit and bad work habits then I think they have no right to do so.
Personally, I don't have bad credit (never miss a payment) but I am pretty far into debt. This doesn't mean I am a bad employee. On the contrary I like to think that I am pretty highly regarded (and I have the bonuses and reviews to back it up).
To play Devil's advocate:
Where in the Constitution is Freedom of Privacy stated? You may be able to infer it from other amendments but it is not nearly as clearly stated as Freedom of Speech.
It is an interesting case because there is no measurable cost associated with receiving telemarketing calls to your land line besides your time. In the case of faxes, cell phones, and even email there is a cost that you must pay when you are contacted (paper, airtime, etc.).
The other side is that I would argue that it only would be a violation of Freedom of Speech if a law was passed that said they couldn't make phone calls at all.
Just some clarification. Taking the idea of a story (say a boy raised in the jungle) and turning it into a movie is not a derivative work. The original author taking the original book and adding a new chapter called "Boy gets eaten by bear. Story at 11" would be. Read the circular I refenced above. It doesn't specifically mention public domain works but it does say that only an author or his designee can create a true derivative work. If you were to right a new chapter to Jungle Book that chapter would just be a new copyrightable work.
You really answered your own question. If you are reproducing the original work then you are fine but if you try to sell a new movie starring Bugs Bunny then you better hold on for the legal attack. That really is the difference between a trademark and a copyright.
It's all about control. The idea is that when they finally do re-release "Pinocchio" they will throw all sorts of useless added scenes and everybody will flock to the theatre to see it and the store to buy it. After all, miss it now and don't see it again for 20 years.
It is a business plan that really only Disney can pull off because of their "American Icon" status. If Pinocchi ever reaches Public Domain, though, it is all over because anybody can get the original. The silly thing is that Disney has peopled so brainwashed that they probably could still sell the public domain movie just like Barnes and Noble still sells Public Domain books.
A) Treasure Planet may be based on Treasure Island but that does not make it a derivative work any more than Romeo and Juliet is a derivative work of "Tristan und Isolde". If RLS gave them permission to take the original Treasure Island and add a new chapter to it then that would be a derivative work. Read this for more info about derivative works (warning - pdf).
...
B) This is true but moot in light of
C) An image can be trademarked also. "A trademark is a word, name, symbol or device which is used in trade with goods to indicate the source of the goods and to distinguish them from the goods of others. "
If people could make derivative works featuring the early Disney characters
People can never create derivative works of disney characters for three reasons:
First, a derivative work can only be created by the original artist or someone they give permission to.
Second, the copyright on the original movies may expire but not on the artwork of the characters as long as Disney keeps using and changing them.
Finally, Disney characters, such as Mickey Mouse, are also trademarked and therefore can never be used as long as Disney continues to maintain that Trademark. Trademarks never expire on their own accord.
Disney is more concerned with not being able to re-release their movies every twenty years and then locking them up again. This is what they have done in the past and it creates a new revenue stream each time because collectors always want the latest version.
The name Mickey Mouse is not Copyrighted and it will never be. You can not copyright a word or name. You can only trademark them in regards to specific uses. Don't be fooled by the morons who use the phrase "Intellectual Property" and group Copyright, Trademarks, and Patents together. They are three very different things. Copyrights are actually controlled by the Library of Congress whereas Patents and Trademarks are handled by the US Patents and Trademarks Office (USPTO).
Writing software is difficult, too. Yet is seems that there are thousands of applications out there that were written without the help of any major software company. Sure a lot of them are crap but the good ones often have a way of standing out.
You are still wrapped up in the idea of physical publishing. Physically producing a book is a difficult task that requires time and money but writing a book only needs a talented author and some friends who are willing to proof read.
And why would anyone want to use eg.Mickey Mouse (TM) for Non-Disney purposes?
This is about Copyrights and not Trademarks. Trademarks do not expire unless you let them. Steamboat Willy would have entered the public domain but that does not mean you could have started using Mickey Mouse in advertising.