Maybe I am missing something but this isn't a EULA issue. They aren't going after you for violation of the EULA. They are going after BNetD because, in their opinion, they are developing a device for the circumvention of copyright protection under the DCMA.
Oh yeah. Napster really rates up there with mass extermination of jews and 1 billion people living behind the Great Firewall of China.
Napster and Bnet (don't know about theunderdog - guess it was censored too well) are not about censorship. They are about greed.
Definition of censoring - "to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable" (from Merriam Webster). I guess you could consider that Blizzard from the lost sales due to piracy objectionable but it is hardly censorship.
Everything is more visible today. You may not have noticed but we live in a society obsessed with information. Just the fact that you are reading this site is a perfect example. Things that would have been buried even only 20 years ago become frontpage news. Do you think that presidents didn't get blowjobs from interns before Monica Lewinsky? Do you think that Sandra Levy is the first Senator's lover that disappeared? Do you think that priests just started molesting little boys recently?
Information is everywhere. The only thing that acts as a censor to information is the shear volume of it. There is so much out there, and so much that is bullshit, that it becomes difficult to see the truth.
The Spanish Inquisition joke would be appropriate now. How can he think that we are more censored than ever before. He has obviously never even picked up a history book let alone read it. maybe he's never heard of slavery, Salem witch trials, Spanish Inquisition, McCarthy and the Red Scare, Hitler, Stalin. I could go on for hours. I don't know why I even start reading a Jon Katz article. I see more intelligence out of my cat. At least he knows who feeds him.
And C was developed by Dennis Ritchie and Bell Labs from B and BCPL. Thus is the evolution of computers.
It reminds me of that classic Irving Berlin song:
Anything you can do, I can do better I can do any thing better than you No you can't. Yes I can. No you can't. Yes I can. No you can't. Yes I can, yes I can.
Not sure about recycling but the Liberty Science Center in New Jersey was taking donations of old computer parts for learning purposes. I am not sure if they still do or not. Check around your area to see if there is a similar program.
Whether I think "work-for-hire" is legitimate or not makes no difference. Here is copyright law:
In the case of works made for hire, the employer and not the employee is considered to be the author.
A "work made for hire" is-
(1) a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment; or
(2) a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire. For the purpose of the foregoing sentence, a "supplementary work" is a work prepared for publication as a secondary adjunct to a work by another author for the purpose of introducing, concluding, illustrating, explaining, revising, commenting upon, or assisting in the use of the other work, such as forewords, afterwords, pictorial illustrations, maps, charts, tables, editorial notes, musical arrangements, answer material for tests, bibliographies, appendixes, and indexes, and an "instructional text" is a literary, pictorial, or graphic work prepared for publication and with the purpose of use in systematic instructional activities.
Unlike most people on slashdot I don't go off espousing my opinions on everything using my gut reaction. I am only stating the facts. It is up to you to determine what you think is right or wrong. I can not make that determination for you.
They can sue at any time they want. The issue of course is whether they win. I think the barratry argument is weak at best. I doubt the RIAA belived going into this that the labels didn't hold the copyrights. Either way I don't see this as a case "solely to harass."
There is no misuse of process since it has already been determined that Napster allowed copyright infringement and that was held up on appeal. There may be anti-trust issues at hand but that is up to the Justice Department to pursue.
Copyrights may revert back on current artists but their contracts will still be valid and future artists will have new contracts that will have the "work-for-hire" status without a doubt.
Original Poster said - "They're still trying with their fledgling solaris"
I said - "What do you mean by fledgling? Solaris dates back to 1991. I would hardly [translate to NOT] call that a fledgling operating system."
hisholiness said - "What do you mean back to 1991? SunOS dates back to 1982!"
I said - "But it wasn't called Solaris now was it? Either way my point is more than valid."
Ignorant, Asshole, shithead AC (That's you) said - "So no, your point is not valid. SunOS (as included in Solaris) is _not_ a fledgling operating system."
In summary, I said it is not a fledgling OS and you disagreed by saying that it is not a fledgling OS. You might be the dumbest person on Slashdot. Congratulations.
Not really. Napster would still be violating copyright laws. It would just be the artists who would have to follow up. Napster wouldn't be rewarded just because the labels are scum.
The argument that the Napster lawyers are making is that the labels don't actually hold the copyrights anyway since the artists were essentially working under contract as freelancers. If this is the case then the copyrights would revert back to the artists.
Re:Why I won't buy til the last minutes of an auct
on
When Good Ebay'ers Go Bad
·
· Score: 2, Informative
But the trick is that using the system I described you pretty much can't overbid. Once your bid is equal to the persons max bid you stop. If you did go over then you just say it was a non-paying bidder and leave negative feedback for yourself.
Please know that I am in no way endorsing this and I have never used the bid to max method for evil purposes.
I would think that you could find a way to log in if you really wanted to. I know a few dozen people who have accounts that would help me look. I don't doubt that they are morons but if you are that screwed then I think you would try everything to get a phone number.
All of this might seem relatively plausible in this case to somebody who never read the article. Somebody who did would know that this guy really did disapear leaving behind a wife and business. He discussed these sales with his wife and even arranged to meet someboy.
The other trick is that you would have to use a real email address since Ebay won't let you use Hotmail, Yahoo, etc without a credit card.
Re:Why I won't buy til the last minutes of an auct
on
When Good Ebay'ers Go Bad
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
You can get to the max bid by bidding up the minimum increment over and over.
Let's say somebody's max is $50 and the current is $20. The increment is $1. If you bid $21 it will say you have been outbid and the current bid is $22. When you get to $50 it will still tell you that you have been outbid because bids are first come, first serve but it will then say that the current bid is $50 and not $51. You know right them what the other person's maximum is.
The reason this is different is because he ran a real store with real employee and a real wife. He was doing business legit for 3 years on Ebay. He was friendly with some of his recurring customers. He was even supposed to meet two of his buyers in Phoenix.
This is far from the traditional scam. I can't imagine that anybody would go through all of that for ~$250K. I think that this guy either got in trouble with his online gambling or had some other secret addiction.
This guy actually arranged to meet two of his buyers in a Phoenix airport to take them to the estate auction. He had a real brick and mortar store with staff. The guy even left his wife behind. Escrow is the only thing that would have saved these people because even a government background check would have probably cleared this guy.
In a way they are going after pirates. By forcing you onto their servers they are making sure that pirates can't play online (excluding direct TCP/IP).
It's too bad that there isn't a way to get Blizzard to compromise but I feel that a lot of this is totally out of their hands. I work for a small subsidiary (1600+ employees) of a very large company (80,000+ employees) and I know that when it comes to certain things we just have to go with the flow.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, modifying your own copy of the software in order to make it interoperate with other software is perfectly legal.
Legal when? Maybe before the DCMA. Now if you modify your software to circumvent copy protection than you are doing something "illegal."
Maybe I am missing something but this isn't a EULA issue. They aren't going after you for violation of the EULA. They are going after BNetD because, in their opinion, they are developing a device for the circumvention of copyright protection under the DCMA.
Oh yeah. Napster really rates up there with mass extermination of jews and 1 billion people living behind the Great Firewall of China.
Napster and Bnet (don't know about theunderdog - guess it was censored too well) are not about censorship. They are about greed.
Definition of censoring - "to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable" (from Merriam Webster). I guess you could consider that Blizzard from the lost sales due to piracy objectionable but it is hardly censorship.
Everything is more visible today. You may not have noticed but we live in a society obsessed with information. Just the fact that you are reading this site is a perfect example. Things that would have been buried even only 20 years ago become frontpage news. Do you think that presidents didn't get blowjobs from interns before Monica Lewinsky? Do you think that Sandra Levy is the first Senator's lover that disappeared? Do you think that priests just started molesting little boys recently?
Information is everywhere. The only thing that acts as a censor to information is the shear volume of it. There is so much out there, and so much that is bullshit, that it becomes difficult to see the truth.
The Spanish Inquisition joke would be appropriate now. How can he think that we are more censored than ever before. He has obviously never even picked up a history book let alone read it. maybe he's never heard of slavery, Salem witch trials, Spanish Inquisition, McCarthy and the Red Scare, Hitler, Stalin. I could go on for hours. I don't know why I even start reading a Jon Katz article. I see more intelligence out of my cat. At least he knows who feeds him.
And C was developed by Dennis Ritchie and Bell Labs from B and BCPL. Thus is the evolution of computers.
It reminds me of that classic Irving Berlin song:
Anything you can do, I can do better
I can do any thing better than you
No you can't. Yes I can. No you can't.
Yes I can. No you can't. Yes I can, yes I can.
You could at least give credit where credit is due:
"Everything that can be invented has been invented."
Charles H. Duell, U.S. Commissioner of Patents, in 1899.
Not sure about recycling but the Liberty Science Center in New Jersey was taking donations of old computer parts for learning purposes. I am not sure if they still do or not. Check around your area to see if there is a similar program.
Whether I think "work-for-hire" is legitimate or not makes no difference. Here is copyright law:
In the case of works made for hire, the employer and not the employee is considered to be the author.
A "work made for hire" is-
(1) a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment; or
(2) a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire. For the purpose of the foregoing sentence, a "supplementary work" is a work prepared for publication as a secondary adjunct to a work by another author for the purpose of introducing, concluding, illustrating, explaining, revising, commenting upon, or assisting in the use of the other work, such as forewords, afterwords, pictorial illustrations, maps, charts, tables, editorial notes, musical arrangements, answer material for tests, bibliographies, appendixes, and indexes, and an "instructional text" is a literary, pictorial, or graphic work prepared for publication and with the purpose of use in systematic instructional activities.
Unlike most people on slashdot I don't go off espousing my opinions on everything using my gut reaction. I am only stating the facts. It is up to you to determine what you think is right or wrong. I can not make that determination for you.
They can sue at any time they want. The issue of course is whether they win. I think the barratry argument is weak at best. I doubt the RIAA belived going into this that the labels didn't hold the copyrights. Either way I don't see this as a case "solely to harass."
There is no misuse of process since it has already been determined that Napster allowed copyright infringement and that was held up on appeal. There may be anti-trust issues at hand but that is up to the Justice Department to pursue.
Copyrights may revert back on current artists but their contracts will still be valid and future artists will have new contracts that will have the "work-for-hire" status without a doubt.
So let's review the thread asshole.
Original Poster said - "They're still trying with their fledgling solaris"
I said - "What do you mean by fledgling? Solaris dates back to 1991. I would hardly [translate to NOT] call that a fledgling operating system."
hisholiness said - "What do you mean back to 1991? SunOS dates back to 1982!"
I said - "But it wasn't called Solaris now was it? Either way my point is more than valid."
Ignorant, Asshole, shithead AC (That's you) said - "So no, your point is not valid. SunOS (as included in Solaris) is _not_ a fledgling operating system."
In summary, I said it is not a fledgling OS and you disagreed by saying that it is not a fledgling OS. You might be the dumbest person on Slashdot. Congratulations.
But it wasn't called Solaris now was it? Either way my point is more than valid.
There is a distinction between the copyright on the physical music - the sheet music essentially and the copyright on the performance.
Not really. Napster would still be violating copyright laws. It would just be the artists who would have to follow up. Napster wouldn't be rewarded just because the labels are scum.
The argument that the Napster lawyers are making is that the labels don't actually hold the copyrights anyway since the artists were essentially working under contract as freelancers. If this is the case then the copyrights would revert back to the artists.
But the trick is that using the system I described you pretty much can't overbid. Once your bid is equal to the persons max bid you stop. If you did go over then you just say it was a non-paying bidder and leave negative feedback for yourself.
Please know that I am in no way endorsing this and I have never used the bid to max method for evil purposes.
What do you mean by fledgling? Solaris dates back to 1991. I would hardly call that a fledgling operating system.
I would think that you could find a way to log in if you really wanted to. I know a few dozen people who have accounts that would help me look. I don't doubt that they are morons but if you are that screwed then I think you would try everything to get a phone number.
Not sure. I think it would depend on the increment.
All of this might seem relatively plausible in this case to somebody who never read the article. Somebody who did would know that this guy really did disapear leaving behind a wife and business. He discussed these sales with his wife and even arranged to meet someboy.
The other trick is that you would have to use a real email address since Ebay won't let you use Hotmail, Yahoo, etc without a credit card.
You can get to the max bid by bidding up the minimum increment over and over.
Let's say somebody's max is $50 and the current is $20. The increment is $1. If you bid $21 it will say you have been outbid and the current bid is $22. When you get to $50 it will still tell you that you have been outbid because bids are first come, first serve but it will then say that the current bid is $50 and not $51. You know right them what the other person's maximum is.
The reason this is different is because he ran a real store with real employee and a real wife. He was doing business legit for 3 years on Ebay. He was friendly with some of his recurring customers. He was even supposed to meet two of his buyers in Phoenix.
This is far from the traditional scam. I can't imagine that anybody would go through all of that for ~$250K. I think that this guy either got in trouble with his online gambling or had some other secret addiction.
This guy actually arranged to meet two of his buyers in a Phoenix airport to take them to the estate auction. He had a real brick and mortar store with staff. The guy even left his wife behind. Escrow is the only thing that would have saved these people because even a government background check would have probably cleared this guy.
In a way they are going after pirates. By forcing you onto their servers they are making sure that pirates can't play online (excluding direct TCP/IP).
It's too bad that there isn't a way to get Blizzard to compromise but I feel that a lot of this is totally out of their hands. I work for a small subsidiary (1600+ employees) of a very large company (80,000+ employees) and I know that when it comes to certain things we just have to go with the flow.