By providing a link to a pirated file while knowing that it was a pirated file makes you an accessory to the crime. You're assisting someone in breaking the law
Let's say I don't give a shit how much money the RIAA makes, and in fact do not generally support them or their artists because I consider music from independent sources to be superior.
Sweet! Keep it up, they can't stop you from doing that.
However, I do demand that I have the right to not face legal repercussions for something I type, and I do expect as a customer that if I buy a piece of audio equipment I am not restrained from exercising my fair use rights with it.
I agree 100%. Linking to a free as in speech music file isn't a problem, but linking to one under a less restrictive liscense can become a problem. As far as your audio equipment, boy do I agree! It's poor drm implementations that are causing fair use problems. If you have a legal liscence to a file free or not, you have rights we must protect those. But the artists have rights to.
The RIAA has demonstrated they certainly aren't willingly going to compromise in terms of giving up some control over the exact nature of distribution in order to take advantage of new technology; I don't see why I should "compromise" rights I've had since birth so a music cartel whose products I mostly don't like can feel better about themselves. Saying "they have their rights" does not justify that they are using the scapegoat of digital music distribution to lay claim to new and unjust new rights, and you are apologizing for them.
Sometimes you have to be the bigger man. you shouldn't compromise your rights, and neither should they. This is why things like the EFF exist. We need to work with them to provide great technology that does everything we want, and they want. The legislature is unfortunately grey, but what we change in the next 15 years will define the next 100. I'm not apologizing, but dreaming. Harmony can exist if we work for it.
Copyright does NOT rely on preventing the free exchange of information. It gives us the OPTION! That's the beautiful thing, I can distribute my copyrighted works and give a free as in speech licsence to it. But if I want I can charge you for it. Thats true FREEDOM!
Whether it's a link, or hosting he is still acting as a gateway to the pirated files. I don't think you should be allowed to link to pirated files, why should you? And the reason that a lot of the bit torrent sites are getting torn down is because it has become a haeven for pirated software. I found more torrent trackers with illegal content them on the google than I found legit. The biggest problem with bit torrent is the lack of drm. It's a neccesity now, not an option.
It's a little different here because the norwegian is acting as conduit in providing the music files, even if they are not directly being distributed by him... Example: a guy stands on the corner of a school and a street and tells the kids they can get some crack from his friend a block down. Is that a crime? It's grey, but I sure hope he goes to jail.
I believe the files when were being distributed free as in beer. But they were not authorized by the copyright holder to distribute this files. And since this goes way outside of personal use, i think a fair use claim is pretty far fetched in this case. So the music was neither free as in beer nor free as in speech. But were being distributed as such.
I'm all for free information exchange, but if the copyright holder want's compensated for it that's his/her choice. We must learn to work with the artists and record industry, along with the movie industry and others, instead of against them. We have our rights and so do they. So can we stop complaining about this and start coming up with productive solutions to media rights and drm.
bittorrent probably isn't a good option for them with so few hits a day. the biggest advantage of bittorrent is when lots of users are running a specific torrent at once.
What I learned when I used to use IRC was how to hack linux, me and a group of other highschool kids used early versions of slackware and helped each other on learning the internals. While yes, there was a lot of warez and other illegal activity going on, at the same time communities of individuals were being developed and evolved out of the old bbs style communication. IRC wasn't they only method of discussion we used, news groups, mailing lists and others played a role. But a common bond of young geek wanabes was born there. And I for know that I would not be as knowledgable today if it weren't for IRC...
i love css, it has made my life much easier. yet it still has been the cause of many nights of frustration. centering blocks, floating images appearing sparadically, poor.. yes i say poor documentation! bad browser support, etc. css is much better than xsl but we still need something more universal and sensible.
If from start linus would have been more of a dreamer, and thought big when linux began to take off we might be in a whole nother ball park with linux today. His lack of control outside the kernel, and having no "official" distribution has created a such a segmented user base that it is very difficult to find one great solution to all. From packaging to the desktop. I don't blame linus in anyway, and respect him greatly. As by not having a standard in some ways has helped. But, currently linux just hasn't made it over the hump from geek to every day power user.. (not saying all) It's simply not easy enough to use, and it should be. Usability deffinitly wasn't the top priority with a lot of oss projects out there. Linux won't die, but it needs another revolution.
If open-source foundations begin embracing software patents and allow there use for free software with no restrictions and also collect fees from comercial software houses using these patents the open-source community benefits by having the right to use all these software patents without worrying about the corporate monsters prosecuting them and in addition creating an additional revenue stream to continue the development of open-source technology. This seems like an interesting prospect, what does the community think the pros and cons of this scenario are?
With the introduction of OS X Apple introduced KeyChain which does this as well. When will the patent everything someone else already implemented mess end?
IMHO I wouldn't count on seeing CDs dissapearing from store shelves in the near future. With SA CD and DVD Audio on the rise the downloaded versions will never match the quality. The other problem is that Generation X & Y grew up with tapes and CDs. We are all still attached to the physical part of them. Maybe our kids will never own a , but I don't think its quite time.
It seems to be getting all to common to here about new software related patents that are not inventive, but that describe a procedure or system that is already in wide spread use. There must be some way to appeal to a right-minded government official that these things are not new ideas, that the people patenting them didn't even think them up, and that thousands of pieces of software free and commercial are already implementing things like these. In this particular case its clearly obvious that this patent was filed for one reason, to make money. I don't know legalese, but some of you do. Is there any way we as a community can fight this?
I like the idea of having a logo to represent the community, but the glider from life? It's well, a little lifeless. I'm a bigger fan of animal type logos, and something with some damn color! That's just my 2 cents though.
A souped up review unit is completely different. Those souped options are always listed as options and available to the consumer, in this case the higher performing product is NOT available to the consumer hence the contraversy.
Denies the allegations of paragraph 16 and alleges that Linux is, in actuality, an unauthorized version of UNIX that is structured, assembled and designed to be technologically indistinguishable from UNIX, and practically is distinguishable only in that Linux is a 'free' version of UNIX designed to destroy proprietary operating system software.
How can Linux, which is merely a kernel, be called a version of UNIX? In theory it is possible to build a completely non-unix like operating system that runs on the linux kernel. Shouldn't they claim that GNU is the unauthorized UNIX derivitive?
The point is that if you design a solid API from the get go you shouldn't have to overhaul it every three years. Most standardized APIs last for decades with out having to release a new wonderfull version that did the same thing but has different calls. Open GL has been around for over a decade and remains consistant, not perferctly, with the original version. I just think MS should take queues from the rest of the industry on this one.
Slashdot Mirror
By providing a link to a pirated file while knowing that it was a pirated file makes you an accessory to the crime. You're assisting someone in breaking the law
The war is over, if you want it. - John Lennon
Copyright does NOT rely on preventing the free exchange of information. It gives us the OPTION! That's the beautiful thing, I can distribute my copyrighted works and give a free as in speech licsence to it. But if I want I can charge you for it. Thats true FREEDOM!
Whether it's a link, or hosting he is still acting as a gateway to the pirated files. I don't think you should be allowed to link to pirated files, why should you? And the reason that a lot of the bit torrent sites are getting torn down is because it has become a haeven for pirated software. I found more torrent trackers with illegal content them on the google than I found legit. The biggest problem with bit torrent is the lack of drm. It's a neccesity now, not an option.
It's a little different here because the norwegian is acting as conduit in providing the music files, even if they are not directly being distributed by him... Example: a guy stands on the corner of a school and a street and tells the kids they can get some crack from his friend a block down. Is that a crime? It's grey, but I sure hope he goes to jail.
I believe the files when were being distributed free as in beer. But they were not authorized by the copyright holder to distribute this files. And since this goes way outside of personal use, i think a fair use claim is pretty far fetched in this case. So the music was neither free as in beer nor free as in speech. But were being distributed as such.
I'm all for free information exchange, but if the copyright holder want's compensated for it that's his/her choice. We must learn to work with the artists and record industry, along with the movie industry and others, instead of against them. We have our rights and so do they. So can we stop complaining about this and start coming up with productive solutions to media rights and drm.
bittorrent probably isn't a good option for them with so few hits a day. the biggest advantage of bittorrent is when lots of users are running a specific torrent at once.
What I learned when I used to use IRC was how to hack linux, me and a group of other highschool kids used early versions of slackware and helped each other on learning the internals. While yes, there was a lot of warez and other illegal activity going on, at the same time communities of individuals were being developed and evolved out of the old bbs style communication. IRC wasn't they only method of discussion we used, news groups, mailing lists and others played a role. But a common bond of young geek wanabes was born there. And I for know that I would not be as knowledgable today if it weren't for IRC...
i love css, it has made my life much easier. yet it still has been the cause of many nights of frustration. centering blocks, floating images appearing sparadically, poor.. yes i say poor documentation! bad browser support, etc. css is much better than xsl but we still need something more universal and sensible.
now can get rid of one more thing in my laptop bag! yeah
If from start linus would have been more of a dreamer, and thought big when linux began to take off we might be in a whole nother ball park with linux today. His lack of control outside the kernel, and having no "official" distribution has created a such a segmented user base that it is very difficult to find one great solution to all. From packaging to the desktop. I don't blame linus in anyway, and respect him greatly. As by not having a standard in some ways has helped. But, currently linux just hasn't made it over the hump from geek to every day power user.. (not saying all) It's simply not easy enough to use, and it should be. Usability deffinitly wasn't the top priority with a lot of oss projects out there. Linux won't die, but it needs another revolution.
If open-source foundations begin embracing software patents and allow there use for free software with no restrictions and also collect fees from comercial software houses using these patents the open-source community benefits by having the right to use all these software patents without worrying about the corporate monsters prosecuting them and in addition creating an additional revenue stream to continue the development of open-source technology. This seems like an interesting prospect, what does the community think the pros and cons of this scenario are?
I wonder if the future hackers will modify this to notify of upcoming patrol cars. Bye bye speeding tickets.
Is Microsoft a SCO Investor? I thought they just paid for licenses, that would make them a customer not an investor.
Talk your about your dirty work and get rid of the traceable element. Sounds like we just made crime easier.
With the introduction of OS X Apple introduced KeyChain which does this as well. When will the patent everything someone else already implemented mess end?
IMHO I wouldn't count on seeing CDs dissapearing from store shelves in the near future. With SA CD and DVD Audio on the rise the downloaded versions will never match the quality. The other problem is that Generation X & Y grew up with tapes and CDs. We are all still attached to the physical part of them. Maybe our kids will never own a , but I don't think its quite time.
six figure, more like a seven figure income...
It seems to be getting all to common to here about new software related patents that are not inventive, but that describe a procedure or system that is already in wide spread use. There must be some way to appeal to a right-minded government official that these things are not new ideas, that the people patenting them didn't even think them up, and that thousands of pieces of software free and commercial are already implementing things like these. In this particular case its clearly obvious that this patent was filed for one reason, to make money. I don't know legalese, but some of you do. Is there any way we as a community can fight this?
I like the idea of having a logo to represent the community, but the glider from life? It's well, a little lifeless. I'm a bigger fan of animal type logos, and something with some damn color! That's just my 2 cents though.
A souped up review unit is completely different. Those souped options are always listed as options and available to the consumer, in this case the higher performing product is NOT available to the consumer hence the contraversy.
The point is that if you design a solid API from the get go you shouldn't have to overhaul it every three years. Most standardized APIs last for decades with out having to release a new wonderfull version that did the same thing but has different calls. Open GL has been around for over a decade and remains consistant, not perferctly, with the original version. I just think MS should take queues from the rest of the industry on this one.