Be careful not to hurt yourself on the way down from your high horse. It would be a hindrance to buy bootlegs if someone was offering a legit product. Since Disney/Ghibli are not giving me a legal way to get them, I don't think I'm hurting them in getting bootlegs. If anything, I'm proveng them there's demand fot the movies and prompting them to release them. I bet you are also against abandonware and MAME.
In all three of them, after the title of the disc, there is a paragraph that starts with: "Availability: NOT YET RELEASED: The studio is currently not producing this title on DVD...".
Warning: mysql_connect() [function.mysql-connect]: Too many connections in/home/virtual/site23/fst/var/www/html/pnadodb/driv ers/adodb-mysql.inc.php on line 170 mysql://dietcoke:@localhost/techfocus_org failed to connectToo many connections
They should have asked him wheter slashdotting should be made illegal. Or is it covered by free speech as a form of expression?
Don't like what your country is doing? Go to another country. Don't like what your ISP is doing? Switch to a different ISP. Don't like your college's software licensing agreements? Go to a different college.
Yup. God forbids we try to change anything. You know, it never works, and nobody likes the guy making waves.
OK, roborats may have disadvantages, but is it just me, or this guy sounds amazingly derisive of the technology? Sounds to me like a cat defending his turf. I'm all for alternatives. Plus, he never makes an attempt to see the other side. Rats have advantages too; off the top of my head, (obviously) price. No matter how fine a rat it is, one rat will always cost on millionth (or less) of the cost of a robot. Also, they don't need to be rats; you could derive the technology to use, say, hummingbirds. I don't see a robot duplicating a hummingbird's flight capability and size, not to mention maneuverability. And, as I say, that's off the top of my head. I have a great respect for scientists, but it's really sad to see them involved in turf wars instead of seeking to increase cooperation. They're only humans, I guess. That's something robots would probably be better at.
Yeah, I'd love to see this used in medical environments... "Doctor? The patient on 313 is in shock... yeah, we followed your indications, 15 ml. of estricnin... What do you mean you wrote astrigent?".
You can't teach old doctors to type, and you can't teach them to handwrite nicely. And you can't teach a Tablet to understand the infamous "doctor handwriting"./playful_troll
The "yelling fire in a theater" is almost the only analogy you'll find to legal limitations in free speech, and that is because it's almost the only one that exists. Courts are EXTREMELY reluctant to declare some speech as unworthy of protection, because it's a really slippery slope. Go that way and pretty quickly you'll be burning books. To be declared unworthy of protection, speech has to have several characteristics, including to be devoid of all cultural value. If a single blind person can use this software for a good use, then it should receive free speech protection.
It's not like I could encrypt my bootleg of When Animals Attack...
Oh, man. You just confessed to owning a bootleg tape. On Slashdot. You know They monitor Slashdot, don't you? Nice knowing you, man. Please write and let us know how you're doing in Federal Pound-me-in-the-ass Prison./playful_troll
One of the best examples might be the "losing" of just about everything really useful that was written by the ancient Greeks. The "saviors" of this "technology" were the Arabs.
Yeah, those darn Muslims didn't respect the ancient Greek's copyrights. They're all terrorists, I tell you. What more proof do you need?/playful_troll
And in the words of the immortal James T. Kirk: "Get... a... LIFE!...".
(Plus, the episode was called "Protocol", in singular, the RFC was #31,415,296 and Picard didn't actually change the root password, because someone seriously goofed up; if you watch really carefully, his screen wasn't showing any Federation interfase, but a half-completed game of Solitaire. I sure hope someone got fired fot that).
Could you explain to me how you so conveniently leave out communist and other totalitarian atrocities, which are in much greater numbers?
Because they don't feel they have the right to have the world bow to them after someone sets them up the bomb (plane, whatever). Now, back to the discussion about Legos. Freakin' Legos, for God's sake. Someone needs to take themselves/the world/damn legos so seriously. (Religious nuts: Yeah, yeah, I sad "God" and "damn". I'm going to hell. See you there).
What's next, a Stirling engine running as a kinetic cooler on top of the heat exchange?
Dude, I already did that and got 3.33 GHz out of my old Pentium II. Am working on cooling the Stirling engine with liquid nitrogen. When I'm done, I'm sure I can crank that baby up to 3.34.
Hello Kitty (a cutesy Japanese pink cat with whiskers but no mouth)
It's a good thing you described it. Because, yoy know, we're geeks and none of us would know what you were talking about... Seriously, even though we're not its target demographic, anyone here doesn't know Hello Kitty? And, is that funny, or scary?
Redundant. I get "redundant" for an idiotic, (yet original), rant. Figures. I foresee this one will get Flamebait, but who knows. Crack must be real good today;)
OFFTOPIC?!?!? How in hell is that off topic? The whole Lindows case was about their ability to use the word "windows", and this action by MS appears to be a response to that. Darn. First I fed the trolls, and now I'm feeding the crack-addict-moderators. Next I'll be feeding Natalie Portman some hot grits... (hhhmmmm.... grits.... I mean, Natalie Portman....) There I go, off topic. And now I'll get modded Insightful, or Funny, or God know what.
If they had tried that before the Lindows case, they might have had a leg to stand on. But the judge's findings in that one do not bode well for MS. I'd say, stuff'em.
So, are you saying God obfuscated the world's code to insure those support contracts? Makes sense. Seems to have worked too, look at all religions and stuff. The big revelation here is, God is a computer geek. No wonder the world is buggy. Bet it's written in C++.
You clearly are very young, and I don't mean that in a disparaging or mean way. But you seem to have a very idealistic idea of justice. I agree that is how it SHOULD be, but it's not how it IS. Allow me to clarify a few points.
WRT 5 years: You don't need to spend every second of your 5 years fighting a case. That's what your lawyers are for. The case SHOULD be a minor inconvenience, with you telling your lawyers the particulars of it and them handling the legal side. No, you don't need to spend every second of the 5 years defending it. Still, it's pretty certain that during a large part of that period you'd be under injunction not to use the contested mark. After five years of that, do you still want it? Really? Because by then your product is either off the market or already established by another name. Plus, your contention that all you have to do is tell your lawyers what to do implies a very large supply of money to pay the aforementioned lawyers.
WRT $20,000: Surely, after winning the case, the prosecuting company should be forced to pay you back your legal fees in full PLUS inconvenience payments. That would discourage this kind of legal challenge. Again, I agree that's how it SHOULD be. That's not how it is. Win or lose, you're responsible for paying your lawyers, and 20K sounds cheap to me. Lawyers usually charge over $250 an hour, and they bill for every hour they spent even thinking about your case. So, in real life, even if you win, you get nothing more that the right to use the mark. No refunding of legal fees, no inconvenience charges, nothing. Sucks, yeah, but that's the way it works.
If they don't have a legit case, YOU should win. There are so many examples of why this is not true, I'll let you find them. Let me just mention Microsoft's antitrust case. Plus, it all depends on what a "legit" case is. It could very well be that the judge finds their arguments more compeling than yours, as certain as you are of your point. Again, that's the way the system works.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you for being a hindrance.
Be careful not to hurt yourself on the way down from your high horse.
It would be a hindrance to buy bootlegs if someone was offering a legit product. Since Disney/Ghibli are not giving me a legal way to get them, I don't think I'm hurting them in getting bootlegs. If anything, I'm proveng them there's demand fot the movies and prompting them to release them.
I bet you are also against abandonware and MAME.
Did you check the links you provided?
In all three of them, after the title of the disc, there is a paragraph that starts with: "Availability: NOT YET RELEASED: The studio is currently not producing this title on DVD...".
So, you just proved their point...
Actually, unless I'm mistaken, that was B1FF... ;)
(Bill McNeil's voics)
Aaahhh.... good times.
(/Bill McNeil's voice)
Warning: mysql_connect() [function.mysql-connect]: Too many connections in /home/virtual/site23/fst/var/www/html/pnadodb/driv ers/adodb-mysql.inc.php on line 170
mysql://dietcoke:@localhost/techfocus_org failed to connectToo many connections
They should have asked him wheter slashdotting should be made illegal. Or is it covered by free speech as a form of expression?
Of course, the real Grail would be to solve:
1. Karma
2. ???
3. Profit!
Sure gives a new meaning to the phrase "disaster recovery", don't it? Altough, if restoring from tape is a bitch, now imagine this one...
Don't like what your country is doing? Go to another country. Don't like what your ISP is doing? Switch to a different ISP. Don't like your college's software licensing agreements? Go to a different college.
Yup. God forbids we try to change anything. You know, it never works, and nobody likes the guy making waves.
...a Beowulf cluster of these!
;)
Hey, man, you started it
OK, roborats may have disadvantages, but is it just me, or this guy sounds amazingly derisive of the technology? Sounds to me like a cat defending his turf. I'm all for alternatives.
Plus, he never makes an attempt to see the other side. Rats have advantages too; off the top of my head, (obviously) price. No matter how fine a rat it is, one rat will always cost on millionth (or less) of the cost of a robot. Also, they don't need to be rats; you could derive the technology to use, say, hummingbirds. I don't see a robot duplicating a hummingbird's flight capability and size, not to mention maneuverability. And, as I say, that's off the top of my head.
I have a great respect for scientists, but it's really sad to see them involved in turf wars instead of seeking to increase cooperation. They're only humans, I guess. That's something robots would probably be better at.
Yeah, I'd love to see this used in medical environments...
/playful_troll
"Doctor? The patient on 313 is in shock... yeah, we followed your indications, 15 ml. of estricnin... What do you mean you wrote astrigent?".
You can't teach old doctors to type, and you can't teach them to handwrite nicely. And you can't teach a Tablet to understand the infamous "doctor handwriting".
RUSSIA goes bankrupt on YOU!
...scandalizes...
You keep saying that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.
The "yelling fire in a theater" is almost the only analogy you'll find to legal limitations in free speech, and that is because it's almost the only one that exists. Courts are EXTREMELY reluctant to declare some speech as unworthy of protection, because it's a really slippery slope. Go that way and pretty quickly you'll be burning books.
To be declared unworthy of protection, speech has to have several characteristics, including to be devoid of all cultural value. If a single blind person can use this software for a good use, then it should receive free speech protection.
It's not like I could encrypt my bootleg of When Animals Attack...
/playful_troll
Oh, man. You just confessed to owning a bootleg tape. On Slashdot. You know They monitor Slashdot, don't you?
Nice knowing you, man. Please write and let us know how you're doing in Federal Pound-me-in-the-ass Prison.
One of the best examples might be the "losing" of just about everything really useful that was written by the ancient Greeks. The "saviors" of this "technology" were the Arabs.
/playful_troll
Yeah, those darn Muslims didn't respect the ancient Greek's copyrights. They're all terrorists, I tell you. What more proof do you need?
And in the words of the immortal James T. Kirk:
"Get... a... LIFE!...".
(Plus, the episode was called "Protocol", in singular, the RFC was #31,415,296 and Picard didn't actually change the root password, because someone seriously goofed up; if you watch really carefully, his screen wasn't showing any Federation interfase, but a half-completed game of Solitaire. I sure hope someone got fired fot that).
Yeah, OK? Get a life. Dork.
Could you explain to me how you so conveniently leave out communist and other totalitarian atrocities, which are in much greater numbers?
Because they don't feel they have the right to have the world bow to them after someone sets them up the bomb (plane, whatever).
Now, back to the discussion about Legos. Freakin' Legos, for God's sake. Someone needs to take themselves/the world/damn legos so seriously.
(Religious nuts: Yeah, yeah, I sad "God" and "damn". I'm going to hell. See you there).
What's next, a Stirling engine running as a kinetic cooler on top of the heat exchange?
Dude, I already did that and got 3.33 GHz out of my old Pentium II. Am working on cooling the Stirling engine with liquid nitrogen. When I'm done, I'm sure I can crank that baby up to 3.34.
Hello Kitty (a cutesy Japanese pink cat with whiskers but no mouth)
It's a good thing you described it. Because, yoy know, we're geeks and none of us would know what you were talking about...
Seriously, even though we're not its target demographic, anyone here doesn't know Hello Kitty?
And, is that funny, or scary?
That wouldn't be "Me^3". That would be "Me*3". ;) /playful_troll
Wait, you're an artist. That explains it
Redundant. I get "redundant" for an idiotic, (yet original), rant. ;)
Figures.
I foresee this one will get Flamebait, but who knows. Crack must be real good today
OFFTOPIC?!?!? How in hell is that off topic? The whole Lindows case was about their ability to use the word "windows", and this action by MS appears to be a response to that.
Darn. First I fed the trolls, and now I'm feeding the crack-addict-moderators. Next I'll be feeding Natalie Portman some hot grits... (hhhmmmm.... grits.... I mean, Natalie Portman....)
There I go, off topic. And now I'll get modded Insightful, or Funny, or God know what.
If they had tried that before the Lindows case, they might have had a leg to stand on. But the judge's findings in that one do not bode well for MS. I'd say, stuff'em.
So, are you saying God obfuscated the world's code to insure those support contracts? Makes sense. Seems to have worked too, look at all religions and stuff.
The big revelation here is, God is a computer geek.
No wonder the world is buggy. Bet it's written in C++.
You clearly are very young, and I don't mean that in a disparaging or mean way. But you seem to have a very idealistic idea of justice. I agree that is how it SHOULD be, but it's not how it IS. Allow me to clarify a few points.
WRT 5 years: You don't need to spend every second of your 5 years fighting a case. That's what your lawyers are for. The case SHOULD be a minor inconvenience, with you telling your lawyers the particulars of it and them handling the legal side.
No, you don't need to spend every second of the 5 years defending it. Still, it's pretty certain that during a large part of that period you'd be under injunction not to use the contested mark. After five years of that, do you still want it? Really? Because by then your product is either off the market or already established by another name.
Plus, your contention that all you have to do is tell your lawyers what to do implies a very large supply of money to pay the aforementioned lawyers.
WRT $20,000: Surely, after winning the case, the prosecuting company should be forced to pay you back your legal fees in full PLUS inconvenience payments. That would discourage this kind of legal challenge.
Again, I agree that's how it SHOULD be. That's not how it is. Win or lose, you're responsible for paying your lawyers, and 20K sounds cheap to me. Lawyers usually charge over $250 an hour, and they bill for every hour they spent even thinking about your case.
So, in real life, even if you win, you get nothing more that the right to use the mark. No refunding of legal fees, no inconvenience charges, nothing. Sucks, yeah, but that's the way it works.
If they don't have a legit case, YOU should win.
There are so many examples of why this is not true, I'll let you find them. Let me just mention Microsoft's antitrust case.
Plus, it all depends on what a "legit" case is. It could very well be that the judge finds their arguments more compeling than yours, as certain as you are of your point. Again, that's the way the system works.