Give Voyager some credit. I stomached the entire 7 years and some episodes here and there were quite good. However, after half a season of Enterprise, I couldn't take it anymore. Enterprise simply blows goats. It is Star Trek designed to immitate pop-culture and failing.
As much as context menus should not replace functionality of visual controls, visual controls should not replace the functionality of context menus -- which is exactly what happens due to Apple's single button mouse. If some prefer using a single mouse button, fine -- as long as that preference doesn't slow me down. I would much prefer the inclusion of two buttons as a default to prevent the trend of dumbing-down controls and thereby slowing users who know what they are doing.
The world is already overpopopulated. Why should it be society's duty to support private individuals' desires to have children? If I decide not to have a child for moral reasons, don't expect me to pay for your child indirectly through taxes and lower wages.
Thank you for your condescension in informing me about basic economics. However, you have completely missed the boat.
No matter how hard you attempt to justify it, copyright infringment is not theft. When you steal an item from someone, you take said item from them. When you pirate software/media, the original owner retains full access to the item in question. You merely have an unauthorized copy. The act of making an unauthorized copy has always been termed copyright infringement.
As for courts calling it theft, I challenge you to present even one example of an American court that has claimed copyright infringement is the same as theft. (I'll give you a hint: save your time and don't bother looking, because there arn't any)
Your nifty list unfortunately begins with the false assumption that I believe that copyright protection should be entirely abolished, which is not the case. I do believe, however, that the copyright duration should be scaled back to what it was originally, before Disney et all began bribing Congress. And more importantly, I believe that copyright should only apply to commercial use of material. In other words, that the individual should be legally allowed to make copies of material for their own use.
"When was the last time you saw a CxO commit the same kind of crimes that a regular person would."
Enron robbed millions of people of their retirement funds. When was the last time you saw a regular person do something so evil?
I've helped to make your post more accurate by replacing a few words.
What the hell is it with america and this complete disregard of peoples' rights these days? Everything should be free, right? Did you ever grow adult? Nothing's free and that's the way it should be!
Profit and greed are the sole engines of corruption.
"Yes. And what will happen after they realize that the file has nothing to do with Microsoft?"
It doesn't matter. By that time legal fees alone would have put you in debt, not to mention all the time you would have had to take off work to defend yourself. Even if they drop the case, you still lose.
"It's still theft."
No it isn't. It's copyright infringement.
"He doesn't give a damn about the effects of hs crime either."
What effect does piracy have if you wouldn't have otherwise bought the software?
"I guess we shouldn't go after people who may have commited a murder either."
If by we, you mean the people, then indeed we should go after people who may have commited a murder. But at the same time, the family of the victim shouldn't receive the right to attack someone who may have commited a murder, which is effectively what would happen.
"Presumption of innocence doesn't apply here"
Presumption of innocence does apply here, unless you are naive enough to believe that once the BSA have your name they are going to leave you alone. In reality, once they have someone's name, they will go after that person, provoking significant legal expenses and hardship. Even if you win in court, you still lose a lot of money, time, and energy.
The problem with the way the BSA/RIAA/MPAA want the system to run is that they effectively punish the person before the court case even begins, regardless of guilt.
Slashdot Mirror
In other news, if a victim walks near a road and gets hit by a drunk driver, he only has himself to blame. *rolls eyes*
Give Voyager some credit. I stomached the entire 7 years and some episodes here and there were quite good. However, after half a season of Enterprise, I couldn't take it anymore. Enterprise simply blows goats. It is Star Trek designed to immitate pop-culture and failing.
Maybe it just isn't like in the old days, but IMO Stargate is a good sci-fi show.
Holding down a button takes time. Your time may be worthless, but it's not for other people.
As much as context menus should not replace functionality of visual controls, visual controls should not replace the functionality of context menus -- which is exactly what happens due to Apple's single button mouse. If some prefer using a single mouse button, fine -- as long as that preference doesn't slow me down. I would much prefer the inclusion of two buttons as a default to prevent the trend of dumbing-down controls and thereby slowing users who know what they are doing.
The president of Harvard, like any other academic institution, is paid to promote eduction.
The world is already overpopopulated. Why should it be society's duty to support private individuals' desires to have children? If I decide not to have a child for moral reasons, don't expect me to pay for your child indirectly through taxes and lower wages.
Thank you for your condescension in informing me about basic economics. However, you have completely missed the boat.
No matter how hard you attempt to justify it, copyright infringment is not theft. When you steal an item from someone, you take said item from them. When you pirate software/media, the original owner retains full access to the item in question. You merely have an unauthorized copy. The act of making an unauthorized copy has always been termed copyright infringement.
As for courts calling it theft, I challenge you to present even one example of an American court that has claimed copyright infringement is the same as theft. (I'll give you a hint: save your time and don't bother looking, because there arn't any)
Your nifty list unfortunately begins with the false assumption that I believe that copyright protection should be entirely abolished, which is not the case. I do believe, however, that the copyright duration should be scaled back to what it was originally, before Disney et all began bribing Congress. And more importantly, I believe that copyright should only apply to commercial use of material. In other words, that the individual should be legally allowed to make copies of material for their own use.
Woah, talk about anal retentive.
"When was the last time you saw a CxO commit the same kind of crimes that a regular person would." Enron robbed millions of people of their retirement funds. When was the last time you saw a regular person do something so evil?
I've helped to make your post more accurate by replacing a few words.
What the hell is it with america and this complete disregard of peoples' rights these days? Everything should be free, right? Did you ever grow adult? Nothing's free and that's the way it should be!
Profit and greed are the sole engines of corruption.
"Yes. And what will happen after they realize that the file has nothing to do with Microsoft?"
It doesn't matter. By that time legal fees alone would have put you in debt, not to mention all the time you would have had to take off work to defend yourself. Even if they drop the case, you still lose.
"It's still theft." No it isn't. It's copyright infringement. "He doesn't give a damn about the effects of hs crime either." What effect does piracy have if you wouldn't have otherwise bought the software?
"I guess we shouldn't go after people who may have commited a murder either."
If by we, you mean the people, then indeed we should go after people who may have commited a murder. But at the same time, the family of the victim shouldn't receive the right to attack someone who may have commited a murder, which is effectively what would happen.
"Presumption of innocence doesn't apply here"
Presumption of innocence does apply here, unless you are naive enough to believe that once the BSA have your name they are going to leave you alone. In reality, once they have someone's name, they will go after that person, provoking significant legal expenses and hardship. Even if you win in court, you still lose a lot of money, time, and energy.
The problem with the way the BSA/RIAA/MPAA want the system to run is that they effectively punish the person before the court case even begins, regardless of guilt.