Except the stations and content producers _aren't_ getting any extra money from these. What the advertisers get is more advertising than they paid for; but there's no real way for the content producers and distributors to tell how many people are watching their shows on icravetv, and adjust their rates accordingly.
Put another way, it's like if you mirrored a yahoo.com page, including the ads, but didn't link the ads back to them. Then the advertisers get more advertising, but yahoo dosen't get any more money, because the impressions are not generated by them.
Finally, it is worth pointing out that icravetv is not licensed to redistribute the TV signals. So the content producers have every right (under current law) to refuse to sell icravetv their content.
Reading from page 34 of the act, I believe this is only the case if 'the recording does not exceed the sound recording performance complement'. Not entirely sure what this means, but I think you can't play an entire copyrighted work at once. You can, however, break it up into chunks (tracks)
no no no. If you are broadcasting music your don't own then the authorities could triangulate your signal and come knocking on your door.
This is the third time I've said it in this article, but I'll say it again:
You can't distribute copyrighted material without express permission from the author. That includes broadcasting on the radio, even noncommercial radio.
Now, if you want to broadcast some Open mp3s (Ie., ones that permit distribution) or your own, then that would be fine.
Well, actually violating the GPL is a criminal offense. Copyright law is not just civil, it is criminal as well. The SPA, RIAA, and MPAA have made sure that it is a felony which can earn you up to 25 years in prison for a single unauthorized copy, and a fine up to $500,000 (IIRC), plus triple damages. So yes, there is a physical means of enforcing the GPL, and it's called the government.
_X_ lame. ___ stupid. _X_ much longer than any worthwhile thought of which you may be capable.
Your attention is drawn to the fact that:
___ what you posted/said has been done before.
(Mark only if above checked) ___ Not only that, it was also done better the last time.
___ your post was a pathetic imitation of ______________________. ___ your post referred to the newsgroup as a Board, BBoard, BBS, or list. ___ your post contained commercial advertising. ___ your post contained numerous spelling errors. ___ your post contained multiple grammatical errors. ___ YOUR POST CONTAINED EXCESSIVE CAPITALIZATION AND/OR PUNCTUATION!!!!! ___ your post was an obvious forgery.
(Mark only if above checked)
___ It was done clumsily.
_X_ you have a lame login name. ___ your machine has a stupid name. ___ you quoted an article/letter in followup and added no new text. ___ you quoted an article/letter in followup and only added ___ lines of text. ___ you quoted an article in followup and only added the line "Me, too!!!" ___ you flamed someone who has been around far longer than you. ___ you flamed someone who is far more intelligent and witty than you. ___ your lines are 80 columns wide or wider. ___ your.sig is longer than four lines.
(Mark only if above checked)
___ And your mailer truncated it.
___ your.sig is ridiculous because (check all that apply):
___ you listed ___ snail mail address(es).
(Mark only if above checked)
___ you listed a nine-digit ZIP code.
___ you listed ___ phone numbers for people to use in prank calls. ___ you included a stupid disclaimer.
(Mark only if above also)
___ your pathetic attempt at being witty in the disclaimer failed. (Mark only if above also) ___ Miserably.
___ you included:
(Mark all that apply)
___ a stupid self-quote. ___ a stupid quote from a net.nobody. ___ a Rush Limbaugh quote. ___ a Dan Quayle joke. ___ a Hitler reference ___ a reference to Beavis & Butthead. ___ lame ASCII graphic(s) (Choose all that apply):
___ USS Enterprise
___ Australia ___ The Amiga logo ___ Company logo (Mark only if above also) ___ and you stated that you don't speak for your employer.
___ Bicycle ___ Bart Simpson
Furthermore:
___ You have greatly misunderstood the purpose of alt.best.of.internet. _X_ You have greatly misunderstood the purpose of the net. _X_ You are a loser. ___ You must have spent your entire life in a Skinner box to be this clueless. _X_ This has been pointed out to you before. _X_ It is recommended that you:
(Mark all that apply) ___ stick to FidoNet and come back when you've grown up. ___ find a volcano and throw yourself in. _X_ get a gun and shoot yourself. ___ stop reading alt.best.of.internet and get a life. ___ stop sending email and get a life. ___ try reading a newsgroup for a week (or more than an hour) before posting
Both formats they posted it in are proprietary, with no decent (let alone Free Software) players for anything but Windows/Mac. I don't understand why people use these formats, when good ol' MPEG and AVI work just fine, and have players for virtually everything.
Actually, you can upgrade the kernel via RPM, just like everything else. The only thing is, redhat only releases new packages for security holes or new redhat versions.
What I'm saying, is that the design is sound, but there is one piece that should be fixed. This is very different from saying that there is a fundamental design issue.
Unfortunately, Ghostscript is a mess. I just had to do a bit of coding on it to get my printer to use the manual sheet feeder (and to print on envelopes), and I can tell you: It is a mess.
Besides being poorly documented, the 200,000 lines of C code (not including headers) calls each other without rhyme or reason. New driver coders are encouraged to make _copies_ of other drivers and then change them.
So basically, I think that ghostscript should be shot, drawn, quartered, and buried at crossroads. But we need a new PS interpreter first.:\
But I do think that the current print system works fine, aside from the faulty component of ghostscript.
Since it requires no software support (even the hardware dosen't know it's there), it should work with linux, any of the BSDs, windows, V2OS, Mach, DOS, any of the Windows (including 1.0), CP/M, App-specific OSes such as Kings Quest 1 and 2, and Zork 1-3, and any other x86 operating system you'd care to mention.
Is this really cost effective? I mean, you could probably get a better performance/cost ratio by SMPing two processors, each 3/4 the speed of the one processor you were going to overclock.
Yep, exactly. The publisher of your playstation game could put terms in such that you would not be allowed to sell it, and they could disable it remotely, and they could add more terms later if so inclined.
Why is this patent abuse? Xerox did not patent the language of graffiti, they patented the idea of using a slightly modified character set and prespecified delimiter (lifting the stylus) to aid in handwriting recognicion.
I can't see any prior art on this, nor can I see any reason why this would be obvious. Remember that it has to be obvious before you know about it, not after.
Read The Patent before you make your assertions. You can see that it is not vague, it describes graffiti in a very detailed way, including how to implement it. The only thing that I can see that 3com added that was not in the patent was internationalization, and other symbols.
Slashdot Mirror
Except the stations and content producers _aren't_ getting any extra money from these. What the advertisers get is more advertising than they paid for; but there's no real way for the content producers and distributors to tell how many people are watching their shows on icravetv, and adjust their rates accordingly.
Put another way, it's like if you mirrored a yahoo.com page, including the ads, but didn't link the ads back to them. Then the advertisers get more advertising, but yahoo dosen't get any more money, because the impressions are not generated by them.
Finally, it is worth pointing out that icravetv is not licensed to redistribute the TV signals. So the content producers have every right (under current law) to refuse to sell icravetv their content.
Reading from page 34 of the act, I believe this is only the case if 'the recording does not exceed the sound recording performance complement'. Not entirely sure what this means, but I think you can't play an entire copyrighted work at once. You can, however, break it up into chunks (tracks)
Erhm, did you actually _read_ the articles? From the beginning he's said it will be a 3-part series.
no no no.
If you are broadcasting music your don't own then the authorities could triangulate your signal and come knocking on your door.
This is the third time I've said it in this article, but I'll say it again:
You can't distribute copyrighted material without express permission from the author. That includes broadcasting on the radio, even noncommercial radio.
Now, if you want to broadcast some Open mp3s (Ie., ones that permit distribution) or your own, then that would be fine.
You are wrong about this. Copyright prohibits distribution of any kind, including broadcast, without express permission from tho owner.
Now, the owner could include a term that you can broadlast noncommercially, but that is a rare exception.
no. That would be distribution, and still illegal.
You can only broadcast content that you own or that you have licensed for radio distribution.
Well, actually violating the GPL is a criminal offense. Copyright law is not just civil, it is criminal as well. The SPA, RIAA, and MPAA have made sure that it is a felony which can earn you up to 25 years in prison for a single unauthorized copy, and a fine up to $500,000 (IIRC), plus triple damages. So yes, there is a physical means of enforcing the GPL, and it's called the government.
_X_ lame.
___ stupid.
_X_ much longer than any worthwhile thought of which you may be capable.
Your attention is drawn to the fact that:
___ what you posted/said has been done before.
___ your post was a pathetic imitation of ______________________.___ your post referred to the newsgroup as a Board, BBoard, BBS, or list.
___ your post contained commercial advertising.
___ your post contained numerous spelling errors.
___ your post contained multiple grammatical errors.
___ YOUR POST CONTAINED EXCESSIVE CAPITALIZATION AND/OR PUNCTUATION!!!!!
___ your post was an obvious forgery. _X_ you have a lame login name.
___ your machine has a stupid name.
___ you quoted an article/letter in followup and added no new text.
___ you quoted an article/letter in followup and only added ___ lines of text.
___ you quoted an article in followup and only added the line "Me, too!!!"
___ you flamed someone who has been around far longer than you.
___ you flamed someone who is far more intelligent and witty than you.
___ your lines are 80 columns wide or wider.
___ your
___ You have greatly misunderstood the purpose of alt.best.of.internet.
P.S. This is a form flame. You can get it here_X_ You have greatly misunderstood the purpose of the net.
_X_ You are a loser.
___ You must have spent your entire life in a Skinner box to be this clueless.
_X_ This has been pointed out to you before.
_X_ It is recommended that you:
Unfortunately, I am trying to _reduce_ my dependency on proprietary software. So I will not install anything new unless it is free software.
Note that I mean free as in speech, not beer.
You can't play this if you're using Linux. :(
Both formats they posted it in are proprietary, with no decent (let alone Free Software) players for anything but Windows/Mac. I don't understand why people use these formats, when good ol' MPEG and AVI work just fine, and have players for virtually everything.
Actually, you can upgrade the kernel via RPM, just like everything else. The only thing is, redhat only releases new packages for security holes or new redhat versions.
What I'm saying, is that the design is sound, but there is one piece that should be fixed. This is very different from saying that there is a fundamental design issue.
You forgot monotony. ;)
Unfortunately, Ghostscript is a mess. I just had to do a bit of coding on it to get my printer to use the manual sheet feeder (and to print on envelopes), and I can tell you: It is a mess.
:\
Besides being poorly documented, the 200,000 lines of C code (not including headers) calls each other without rhyme or reason. New driver coders are encouraged to make _copies_ of other drivers and then change them.
So basically, I think that ghostscript should be shot, drawn, quartered, and buried at crossroads. But we need a new PS interpreter first.
But I do think that the current print system works fine, aside from the faulty component of ghostscript.
Give it to the EFF. www.eff.org
Of course, switching to java would make it impossible for me to view slashdot in lynx.
Since it requires no software support (even the hardware dosen't know it's there), it should work with linux, any of the BSDs, windows, V2OS, Mach, DOS, any of the Windows (including 1.0), CP/M, App-specific OSes such as Kings Quest 1 and 2, and Zork 1-3, and any other x86 operating system you'd care to mention.
Is this really cost effective? I mean, you could probably get a better performance/cost ratio by SMPing two processors, each 3/4 the speed of the one processor you were going to overclock.
Or, am I missing something?
Yep, exactly. The publisher of your playstation game could put terms in such that you would not be allowed to sell it, and they could disable it remotely, and they could add more terms later if so inclined.
The high-tech companies you refer to would just assume keep it illegal to export source code. They only need to export binaries.
Was this document deliberately written to be obtuse, or did it just come out that way? :o
:\
There seems to be a real focus on procedural correctness without much thought to the actual issue.
Why is this patent abuse? Xerox did not patent the language of graffiti, they patented the idea of using a slightly modified character set and prespecified delimiter (lifting the stylus) to aid in handwriting recognicion.
I can't see any prior art on this, nor can I see any reason why this would be obvious. Remember that it has to be obvious before you know about it, not after.
open to a settlement, not open to using it for free.
Read The Patent before you make your assertions. You can see that it is not vague, it describes graffiti in a very detailed way, including how to implement it. The only thing that I can see that 3com added that was not in the patent was internationalization, and other symbols.
Looking at the patent, one can see that it was filed in January 1997. So it is definately still valid.