I'm not sure that this isn't a ploy to sell more PS3s in the US. You know, the old "better buy one now or you'll end up with an inferior one later" trick
Doesn't that also mean that if you sue them and lose, then you have to pay their legal fees?
Yes, which means that you don't get corporations filing frivolous lawsuits. Lawsuits are only filed when the complainant knows they have a genuine case - otherwise their just throwing their cash down the drain.
If I think I'll be on the hook for Megacorp's million dollars of lawyer fees if I lose, how willing would I be to sue in the first place?
You'd only do it if you have a genuine case and have suffered genuine loss - not like some of the lawsuits you hear about in the US - there's no way the McDonald's coffee lawsuit would happen here because the judge would just go "of course coffee is hot" and the complainant would then be liable for McDonald's fees.
We also have a system called "legal aid" where you can appoint your own solicitor (attorney in the US) and the state will pay your legal fees if it can be shown that you cannot afford to pay yourself. This is not the same as having a state sposored attorney in the US. You still get to chose who you want to represent you - you can, and people do, get legal aid to pay for the country's top specialist solicitors.
Finally, if the money involved is small, you'd use the small claims court where there are no lawyers fees. It costs about £100 to file a case there but there are maximum damages of £5000 that can be awarded.
And that's why the US legal system is so unfair - those with the money always win. Here in the UK, for example, if I had a genuine case against anyone - no matter how large they were - I could and would be able to afford to take them to court because I would know that if I won then I would not be paying any legal fees. This allows a much better balance of justice IMO.
I believe you can sue (in the US) a foreign company that does business in the US. The US laws have no bearing on a foreign entity, however you could probably get a ban the product, thereby preventing foreign companies from doing any business in the US. A bad situation...
What's even worse for the US is the fact that the US legal system has a "loser pays as well" system, and with all the litigation flying around at the moment (which doesn't look like it's going to end) it wouldn't surprise me if foreign companies actually do start to withdraw from doing business in the US. China is opening up, so lost revenue could be made up there. The cost of doing business in the US is currently far too high as litigation has to be factored in, and I'd be surprised if there's much new inward investment going on for exactly this reason - especially in the IT industry.
I suspect iit's only a matter of time before the great pull out starts to happen - all it will take is the first company to have the balls to do it, then I'm sure many more will follow.
So not just a "bad situation", but a disasterous situation is looming for you USians.
If you read TFA you'll see that Jobs explains exactly why they don't license their DRM. It's because a requirement of their license to sell the music of the record companies is that any holes discovered in the DRM are patched within a certain time limit. He says that by licensing the technology to a bunch of 3rd parties, that there is more chance of a particular implementation of FairPlay leaking out, yet it would still be Apple's resposibility to fix the holes - but this time for more devices and software platforms. The effectively makes it impossible for Apple to submit to 3rd party licensing because they don't have the resources to be able to take on that level of responsibility.
Not really. MS has just released a new OS that is more locked down with DRM than any other OS so far. They have been active in promoting the use of DRM and even saying it will be to the benefit of consumers. There is no way that they were forced by the industry to implement that much DRM at the heart of their latest product. I'm not hearing any info that Leopard is going to be similarly encumbered. Make no mistake, MS is a wholehearted supporter of DRM.
Jobs on the other hand is actually saying that consumers don't want it, and that they'd drop it in a heartbeat if they were allowed to. This is the complete opposite of what MS are saying, not the equivalent.
Not to mention the fact that Budvar doesn't taste like watered down horse urine, and the fact that it's actually a beer. As in made with barley and not rice, unlike the "King of Beers"
It's a fallacy that Windows supports all the hardware. It doesn't. The third-party drivers supplied by the manufacturer do. There's only a small subset of hardware that's actually supported by MS out of the box. I see no reason why Apple couldn't go down this route as well if they wanted to.
Moreover, DRM in general is going to be pushed heavily by the USG, for the "national interest." Even though it will punish consumers here, it's a way of protecting one of the only things that the U.S. exports anymore: "intellectual property."
Problem is that it's not actually illegal to crack DRM in most other countries. It may break the license agreement for the content, but the act of cracking it itself isn't illegal. In other words, the content is really only protected inside the US which kind of defeats the object - if that is indeed the object.
Absolutely. Any website built on-top of a language that can't handle UTF-8 natively is destined for trouble somewhere down the line. OK, to they've mamanged to hack in support into the web framework. That's the beginning of a huge WTF right there. When the language gets the capability natively you're going to get a real mix and match and a whole world of pain. No thank you...
I wholeheartedly agree. If I get a CV (resume) in that has the certifications at the top above the experience, it goes in the bin. If they're at the end, then I'll carry on reading. It's all about emphasis. Any candidate that emphasises their certification is always hiding something about their ability in my experience. This isn't just a knee-jerk reaction either, it's definitely a trend I've gradually noticed over the years.
I use SORBS precisely because they block dynamic IP ranges. 99% of spam comes from trojaned machines on dynamic IPs and I find this extremely effective at blocking spam. If your mailserver lives on a dynamically assigned IP then that is your problem. In my opinion a mail server should ALWAYS be on a static IP - I view it as a sign of a trusted mail server. If your ISP can't provide this, then you need to change your ISP. I'm sorry, but I have absolutely no sympathy in this situation. There is no reason for a real business to rely on dynamic IPs on their servers.
If you've got a Java capable cell phone, are addicted to Sudoku and have lots of time to spend on planes/trains/subway etc, then you could do worse than click on the link in my sig.
There are a couple of new features coming out in a few weeks when I've polished them a bit more, such as hinting and support for 128 x 128 screens.
Actually, you're the only one who seems to have gotten the irony in my posts. I don't normally post anti-religious stuff, but over the past few weeks I've been bombarded with Christian religious propaganda from all sides. It seems it can be dished out but not taken. My point being that the majority of the people in the world are not Christian, yet we in Europe/America are forced to listen to Christian rhetoric wherever we go around the end of December/beginning of January. Yet any dissenting voices are told that they are "scrooges" or should "get into the Christmas spirit". Why?
Imagine if at election time someone stood outside your house with a bullhorn shouting for your to vote Republican and at the same time cold calling you with the same message just to emphasise the point. On top of that, all your neighbours have 8 foot high inflatable effigies of George Bush and cover their houses with bright flashing lights that keep you awake at night. Then you turn on the TV/radio and every interlude/ad-break has a trailer with Dick Cheney talking up the Republican party policies, and even when get to the programmes they all have a Republican theme, etc etc etc. I'd suggest that any non-party affiliated person would be getting slightly annoyed...
I think he was just providing context for the story.
The story is about the new Gran Turismo game. How is mentioning going to church the context of the story? I don't advocate that he lies. I just don't see how mentioning it has anything at all to do with the story. On the contrary, it is the fact that as a believer he obviously thinks that he has to slip it into every conversation or anything that he writes. I don't want to read that crap. By all means believe in private. Do not believe in public. It is not warranted.
Yeah, I do. God botherers can do what they like in private. Shoving it down my throat is not appreciated. This is a case of the latter with regards to mentioning it completely out of context just to get it in. It instantly put me off reading the rest of the review.
More like said like a developer who wishes managers would get on and do what they're paid for instead of letting dev and IT fight it out for themselves.
Because legally wrangling over gray areas in copyright requires some fancy lawyering that he as an individual is unlikely financially capable of supporting. Unless he has millions and millions of disposable income sitting around waiting to be burnt.
That is a false argument because there is nothing that says he has to sue in the US. Most of Europe, for example, has a "loser pays" system so it wouldn't cost him a penny if he instigated action there provided the infringing code was being sold there. (It also tends to stop frivolous lawsuits by richer plaintiffs over poorer defendents and makes things more of a level playing field, but that's a different discussion...)
...you should make a decision and stick to it. It doesn't really matter which team is in charge, so long as one of them is and that the other team knows it.
With technology knowledge like yours, we can only hope that you're currently flipping burgers somewhere...
The give away is the "Compile once, run anywhere" comment. If you think that I'm going to develop my current project that is being deployed on an AS/400 on an AS/400 workstation (if there is such a thing), you've got to be kidding. Same with the J2ME app in my link, do you think I develop and compile on my phone?
I know I'm feeding a troll, but unfortunately there's probably someone out there who believes this crap.
How is this a troll? Is see it more as a wake up call type of post. Surely there's not anyone who can actually argue that the American system is the best in the world? It's quite clear that there are third world countries with better systems, never mind the rest of the industrialised world.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure that this isn't a ploy to sell more PS3s in the US. You know, the old "better buy one now or you'll end up with an inferior one later" trick
Bob
Doesn't that also mean that if you sue them and lose, then you have to pay their legal fees?
Yes, which means that you don't get corporations filing frivolous lawsuits. Lawsuits are only filed when the complainant knows they have a genuine case - otherwise their just throwing their cash down the drain.
If I think I'll be on the hook for Megacorp's million dollars of lawyer fees if I lose, how willing would I be to sue in the first place?
You'd only do it if you have a genuine case and have suffered genuine loss - not like some of the lawsuits you hear about in the US - there's no way the McDonald's coffee lawsuit would happen here because the judge would just go "of course coffee is hot" and the complainant would then be liable for McDonald's fees.
We also have a system called "legal aid" where you can appoint your own solicitor (attorney in the US) and the state will pay your legal fees if it can be shown that you cannot afford to pay yourself. This is not the same as having a state sposored attorney in the US. You still get to chose who you want to represent you - you can, and people do, get legal aid to pay for the country's top specialist solicitors.
Finally, if the money involved is small, you'd use the small claims court where there are no lawyers fees. It costs about £100 to file a case there but there are maximum damages of £5000 that can be awarded.
Bob
And that's why the US legal system is so unfair - those with the money always win. Here in the UK, for example, if I had a genuine case against anyone - no matter how large they were - I could and would be able to afford to take them to court because I would know that if I won then I would not be paying any legal fees. This allows a much better balance of justice IMO.
Bob
Obviously I meant "winner pays as well"...
Bob
I believe you can sue (in the US) a foreign company that does business in the US. The US laws have no bearing on a foreign entity, however you could probably get a ban the product, thereby preventing foreign companies from doing any business in the US. A bad situation...
What's even worse for the US is the fact that the US legal system has a "loser pays as well" system, and with all the litigation flying around at the moment (which doesn't look like it's going to end) it wouldn't surprise me if foreign companies actually do start to withdraw from doing business in the US. China is opening up, so lost revenue could be made up there. The cost of doing business in the US is currently far too high as litigation has to be factored in, and I'd be surprised if there's much new inward investment going on for exactly this reason - especially in the IT industry.
I suspect iit's only a matter of time before the great pull out starts to happen - all it will take is the first company to have the balls to do it, then I'm sure many more will follow.
So not just a "bad situation", but a disasterous situation is looming for you USians.
Bob
If you read TFA you'll see that Jobs explains exactly why they don't license their DRM. It's because a requirement of their license to sell the music of the record companies is that any holes discovered in the DRM are patched within a certain time limit. He says that by licensing the technology to a bunch of 3rd parties, that there is more chance of a particular implementation of FairPlay leaking out, yet it would still be Apple's resposibility to fix the holes - but this time for more devices and software platforms. The effectively makes it impossible for Apple to submit to 3rd party licensing because they don't have the resources to be able to take on that level of responsibility.
Bob
Not really. MS has just released a new OS that is more locked down with DRM than any other OS so far. They have been active in promoting the use of DRM and even saying it will be to the benefit of consumers. There is no way that they were forced by the industry to implement that much DRM at the heart of their latest product. I'm not hearing any info that Leopard is going to be similarly encumbered. Make no mistake, MS is a wholehearted supporter of DRM.
Jobs on the other hand is actually saying that consumers don't want it, and that they'd drop it in a heartbeat if they were allowed to. This is the complete opposite of what MS are saying, not the equivalent.
Bob
Not to mention the fact that Budvar doesn't taste like watered down horse urine, and the fact that it's actually a beer. As in made with barley and not rice, unlike the "King of Beers"
Bob
It's a fallacy that Windows supports all the hardware. It doesn't. The third-party drivers supplied by the manufacturer do. There's only a small subset of hardware that's actually supported by MS out of the box. I see no reason why Apple couldn't go down this route as well if they wanted to.
Bob
Moreover, DRM in general is going to be pushed heavily by the USG, for the "national interest." Even though it will punish consumers here, it's a way of protecting one of the only things that the U.S. exports anymore: "intellectual property."
Problem is that it's not actually illegal to crack DRM in most other countries. It may break the license agreement for the content, but the act of cracking it itself isn't illegal. In other words, the content is really only protected inside the US which kind of defeats the object - if that is indeed the object.
Bob
Absolutely. Any website built on-top of a language that can't handle UTF-8 natively is destined for trouble somewhere down the line. OK, to they've mamanged to hack in support into the web framework. That's the beginning of a huge WTF right there. When the language gets the capability natively you're going to get a real mix and match and a whole world of pain. No thank you...
Bob
I wholeheartedly agree. If I get a CV (resume) in that has the certifications at the top above the experience, it goes in the bin. If they're at the end, then I'll carry on reading. It's all about emphasis. Any candidate that emphasises their certification is always hiding something about their ability in my experience. This isn't just a knee-jerk reaction either, it's definitely a trend I've gradually noticed over the years.
Bob
That's why I use the The Co-operative Bank
Bob
I use SORBS precisely because they block dynamic IP ranges. 99% of spam comes from trojaned machines on dynamic IPs and I find this extremely effective at blocking spam. If your mailserver lives on a dynamically assigned IP then that is your problem. In my opinion a mail server should ALWAYS be on a static IP - I view it as a sign of a trusted mail server. If your ISP can't provide this, then you need to change your ISP. I'm sorry, but I have absolutely no sympathy in this situation. There is no reason for a real business to rely on dynamic IPs on their servers.
Bob
Aside from your obvious racist attitude, the concept of zero and the rules governing it for modern mathematics were first described in India. Since this is the first axiom for natural numbers it could be argued that the Indians were actually the first to be able to count as we understand it today.
Bob
If you've got a Java capable cell phone, are addicted to Sudoku and have lots of time to spend on planes/trains/subway etc, then you could do worse than click on the link in my sig.
There are a couple of new features coming out in a few weeks when I've polished them a bit more, such as hinting and support for 128 x 128 screens.
Bob
Actually, you're the only one who seems to have gotten the irony in my posts. I don't normally post anti-religious stuff, but over the past few weeks I've been bombarded with Christian religious propaganda from all sides. It seems it can be dished out but not taken. My point being that the majority of the people in the world are not Christian, yet we in Europe/America are forced to listen to Christian rhetoric wherever we go around the end of December/beginning of January. Yet any dissenting voices are told that they are "scrooges" or should "get into the Christmas spirit". Why?
Imagine if at election time someone stood outside your house with a bullhorn shouting for your to vote Republican and at the same time cold calling you with the same message just to emphasise the point. On top of that, all your neighbours have 8 foot high inflatable effigies of George Bush and cover their houses with bright flashing lights that keep you awake at night. Then you turn on the TV/radio and every interlude/ad-break has a trailer with Dick Cheney talking up the Republican party policies, and even when get to the programmes they all have a Republican theme, etc etc etc. I'd suggest that any non-party affiliated person would be getting slightly annoyed...
Bob
I think he was just providing context for the story.
The story is about the new Gran Turismo game. How is mentioning going to church the context of the story? I don't advocate that he lies. I just don't see how mentioning it has anything at all to do with the story. On the contrary, it is the fact that as a believer he obviously thinks that he has to slip it into every conversation or anything that he writes. I don't want to read that crap. By all means believe in private. Do not believe in public. It is not warranted.
Bob
Yeah, mod me down as a troll. That's what all you believers do isn't it? La la la, I can't hear you...
Bob
Yeah, I do. God botherers can do what they like in private. Shoving it down my throat is not appreciated. This is a case of the latter with regards to mentioning it completely out of context just to get it in. It instantly put me off reading the rest of the review.
Bob
....said like a true PHB.
More like said like a developer who wishes managers would get on and do what they're paid for instead of letting dev and IT fight it out for themselves.
Bob
Because legally wrangling over gray areas in copyright requires some fancy lawyering that he as an individual is unlikely financially capable of supporting. Unless he has millions and millions of disposable income sitting around waiting to be burnt.
That is a false argument because there is nothing that says he has to sue in the US. Most of Europe, for example, has a "loser pays" system so it wouldn't cost him a penny if he instigated action there provided the infringing code was being sold there. (It also tends to stop frivolous lawsuits by richer plaintiffs over poorer defendents and makes things more of a level playing field, but that's a different discussion...)
Bob
...you should make a decision and stick to it. It doesn't really matter which team is in charge, so long as one of them is and that the other team knows it.
Bob
With technology knowledge like yours, we can only hope that you're currently flipping burgers somewhere...
The give away is the "Compile once, run anywhere" comment. If you think that I'm going to develop my current project that is being deployed on an AS/400 on an AS/400 workstation (if there is such a thing), you've got to be kidding. Same with the J2ME app in my link, do you think I develop and compile on my phone?
I know I'm feeding a troll, but unfortunately there's probably someone out there who believes this crap.
Bob
How is this a troll? Is see it more as a wake up call type of post. Surely there's not anyone who can actually argue that the American system is the best in the world? It's quite clear that there are third world countries with better systems, never mind the rest of the industrialised world.
Bob