Note: To constitute theft there must be a taking without the owner's consent, and it must be unlawful or felonious; every part of the property stolen must be removed, however slightly, from its former position; and it must be, at least momentarily, in the complete possession of the thief.
Getting kinda tired of seeing the definition of "theft" trotted out.
The argument always used by The Powers That Be is that people are stealing by accessing wireless networks/trading mp3s/loaning their widgets to friends/... The argument always used by the People Doing It (accessing/trading/loaning) is that the powers-that-be are operating according to outdated and archaic practices that are inapplicable to the modern world, and "gee we aren't stealing because we aren't removing every part of the property".
Um, do ya think maybe that this definition of theft might also be a little outdated or archaic and thus inapplicable to the modern world?
I still buy a lot of CDs but the difference now is that I buy most of my stuff from unsigned bands instead of stuff from the major lables
Hmmm... I wonder if any of the vaunted 10% drop in sales the RIAA is wailing about is due to exactly this effect... ie it's not that sales of CDs as a whole is down 10%, its that sales of CDs from RIAA labels is down 10%. Too bad we don't have any stats on CD sales for indie bands or non-RIAA affiliated labels. Bet they're way up......
The clients of my HTML application(s) are primarily school systems. Big rich ones with the latest greatest mostest wonderfullest hardware that money can buy (or that corporations can donate) down to dirt-poor schools with 3 Mac 030's in the back running the Oldest Browsers Known To Man. My job is to insure they they ALL can properly access the system. It is not my job to tell my clients "you have to upgrade or you can't play". I'm not being paid for that. I'm being paid to develop a system they can all use as-is.
I guess my argument with Zeldman's "conform to the standards or die" approach boils down to the fact that the browsers used by my clients often do not conform to the standards. Hey, it would be nice to be able to use CSS or XHTML. I'd love to. Make my life a WHOLE lot easier. But then I'm not meeting the requirements of my clients, which is the whole reason I'm doing this in the first place.
If the Senate also approves CSEA, the new law would also:
Specify that an existing ban on the "advertisement" of any device that is used primarily for surreptitious electronic surveillance applies to online ads. The prohibition now covers only a "newspaper, magazine, handbill or other publication."
No more ads for secret hot-chick-revealling surveillance cameras:-(
"At a hearing this month, Feinstein showed her colleagues a pirated movie that she said an aide had downloaded from a file-trading service. "
Did they arrest the aide for breaking copyright law and downloading a movie for broadcast in a public forum? Heck, might as well get Feinstein too, for trafficing in stolen goods.
What about allowing us to choose the types of ads we want blocked when we subscribe? ie for my $5 I want to let all the simple banner ads through, they don't bug me that much, but I want to block ALL popups or in-page ads over 1/8 page. Maybe more variables at the higher subscriptions levels. Just a thought....
I'm a consumer AND producer of music. (Yeah, straddling THIS particular fence really hurts sometimes). The SSSCA is harsh for the consumer, obviously, but I only began to get really nervous when I read :
The draft SSSCA creates new federal felonies,
punishable by five years in prison and fines
of up to $500,000, for "anyone who distributes
copyrighted material with 'security measures'
disabled or has a network-attached..."
Does this mean I can't distribute a non-DRM-enabled version of my own copyrighted work? Seems like the SSSCA strips away part of my rights as the copyright holder to control the use of my work as I see fit.
Any other "producers of copyrighted works" out there with insights?
--matt
Slashdot Mirror
Getting kinda tired of seeing the definition of "theft" trotted out.
The argument always used by The Powers That Be is that people are stealing by accessing wireless networks/trading mp3s/loaning their widgets to friends/... The argument always used by the People Doing It (accessing/trading/loaning) is that the powers-that-be are operating according to outdated and archaic practices that are inapplicable to the modern world, and "gee we aren't stealing because we aren't removing every part of the property".
Um, do ya think maybe that this definition of theft might also be a little outdated or archaic and thus inapplicable to the modern world?
just a thought....
Thanks, science! This would make my old cat's job a little bit easier... no more night-vision kitty goggles required ...
--matt
--matt
The clients of my HTML application(s) are primarily school systems. Big rich ones with the latest greatest mostest wonderfullest hardware that money can buy (or that corporations can donate) down to dirt-poor schools with 3 Mac 030's in the back running the Oldest Browsers Known To Man. My job is to insure they they ALL can properly access the system. It is not my job to tell my clients "you have to upgrade or you can't play". I'm not being paid for that. I'm being paid to develop a system they can all use as-is.
I guess my argument with Zeldman's "conform to the standards or die" approach boils down to the fact that the browsers used by my clients often do not conform to the standards. Hey, it would be nice to be able to use CSS or XHTML. I'd love to. Make my life a WHOLE lot easier. But then I'm not meeting the requirements of my clients, which is the whole reason I'm doing this in the first place.
--matt
When i have my glasses on, i AM dictating. When I have my glasses off, I'm NOT dictating.....
just how big IS your cubicle????
Oh, you're getting banged all right ......
From the Wired story:
"At a hearing this month, Feinstein showed her colleagues a pirated movie that she said an aide had downloaded from a file-trading service. "
Did they arrest the aide for breaking copyright law and downloading a movie for broadcast in a public forum? Heck, might as well get Feinstein too, for trafficing in stolen goods.
What about allowing us to choose the types of ads we want blocked when we subscribe? ie for my $5 I want to let all the simple banner ads through, they don't bug me that much, but I want to block ALL popups or in-page ads over 1/8 page. Maybe more variables at the higher subscriptions levels. Just a thought....
I'm a consumer AND producer of music. (Yeah, straddling THIS particular fence really hurts sometimes). The SSSCA is harsh for the consumer, obviously, but I only began to get really nervous when I read : The draft SSSCA creates new federal felonies, punishable by five years in prison and fines of up to $500,000, for "anyone who distributes copyrighted material with 'security measures' disabled or has a network-attached ..."
Does this mean I can't distribute a non-DRM-enabled version of my own copyrighted work? Seems like the SSSCA strips away part of my rights as the copyright holder to control the use of my work as I see fit.
Any other "producers of copyrighted works" out there with insights?
--matt