We don't like the pejorative implication of associating copyright infringement with theft, so we'll cite the most narrow definition of the term theft and show it doesn't apply to copyright infringement. We'll ignore common epressions in the English language such as "You stole my idea", "cable theft", and "identity theft", which also do not involve physically depriving someone of an object, and we'll ignore the economic impact by saying that the holder doesn't lose anything when copyright infringement occurs.
"Occasionally software providers who depend on Microsoft don't die horrible deaths, they receive a fate worse than death and end up with their company bought and working for them."
That's why Microsoft made the list of top 100 best companies to work for and Apple didn't.
"The GPLv3 can include a clause that if you accept the license you cannot distribute *any* product that prevents a user from using any of their own modified GPL-covered software."
Del simply does not accept the license, sells you a blank box, and tells you to go to Red Hat to get the software. Since Dell didn't distribute any GPLv3 software, they are not bound by GPLv3.
"But it is not in the interest of Dell, Gateway, or Apple to sell crippled computer. They need to know that doing so will lose them money. Hardware vendors should be fighting the Content providers pushing for this, not the FSF."
Apple sells iPods with DRM because it enables them to sell music online. The recording industry would refuse to allow Apple to sell online music otherwise. A normal consumer considers a computer that won't play their music at all more crippled than one that will play their music with restrictions. So a GPLv3 computer is more crippled than a Mac by a normal consumer's standards So you need to convince the recording industry and the movie industry that DRM is unnnecessary if you don't want crippled computers (crippled by your standards).
"f Microsoft succeeds in introducing TCPA everywhere, there won't be an alternative worth running. "
nonsense. There's no reason that Red Hat can't introduce a version of a Linux distro that is locked down using the TCP hardware. It will be trustworthy because you can't modify the code and expect the hardware to work. Therefore the recording industry and the movie industry will be satisified. However, the recording industry/movie industry cannot trust people not to tamper with gplv3 code, as is their right, they will refuse to sell you content that runs using gplv3 code. No one is taking away your rights. They are offering you a product under a set of conditions. If you think they are taking away your rights, then you must come to the same conclusion about gpl taking away your rights, because RMS uses the same laws to restrict use of his code.
"They call this a free contry yet I am not allowed to run around killing people. If it's a free contry why am I not free to restrict others freedom?
If it's free software, why is RMS restricting my freedom to do with it as I please? In a free country you are not allowed to arbitrarily restrict someone's freedom (as killing does). If the software is free, then that implies there are no restrictions. This is not the case for GPLed software. It is the case for public domain software such as BSD.
"As others are pointing out, George Orwell made it very clear in "1984" how the power of language can be misused to exercise control over the minds of the population. It is important to call things with their real names, so that there is no doubt about the purpose of DRM and TP."
Yes, Like RMS calling his software "free software". If it's free software, why are there all the restrictions?
"False logic. That is like saying that if tanks were more popular they would be less secure than than light armored vehicles"
If MacOS is so secure, why do they keep releasing security updates? How often have linux web servers been defaced? I don't think unix variants are as secure as you think they are.
"seriously if you have to manually download the program and enter your admin password, it is not a virus or a worm. I dont know why people keep calling it that. It is a Trojan and those have existed since the first rm -rf / script."
From the article: "Among the concerns: two "worms," programs written by unknown hackers that were designed to spread themselves to other Macs through Apple's iChat instant-messaging software and Bluetooth wireless-communications capability."
Given you can fit over 100 mp3's (at 128kB/s), that's a pretty cheap compensation for downloaded mp3s from a p2p network. And if you record other data, well that's the price you pay for socialism. Believe me, the recording industry would give back every dime collected on media for the ability to shut down the p2p traffic. They just take it because it's the best they can do in a socialist climate.
"Why can't they just ask Google for a list of keywords that they think might fall in the border areas between obscene and non-obscene results, and then ask for permission to run a simulation on them from the DOJ headquarters? The answer? Power."
If you were following this case, you'd know that originally, the DOJ showed search results using key words they made up themselves. But the courts said that wasn't good enough. They wanted to see what people were actually typing in. So now the DOJ wants anonymous search keywords and results because the courts asked for them. Google isn't protecting your privacy as much as their search algorithms.
Using WiFi equipment for metro networking seems like a stupid idea to me given the limited range of the equipment. I think Google is making a bad decision hear since there are a number of competing technologies either available or in the works that can do metro wireless far more effectively. WiFi was meant for local area network.
"Apple's already got that covered. The basic Mac mini is $499, and will likely come with a Core Solo processor soon: "
The mac mini 1.2GHz G4 is extremely slow compared to the machine in the article, which has a Sempron 2800+, plus the mac mini has only half the hard drive space
"This idea of making money by holding a monopoly on reproducing certain sound recordings is a fad. It won't last. Musicians did just fine without it for millenia (and frankly they did a little better than most of them are now)."
Before recorded music, composers survived by begging rich people to support them.
"Rights management restrictions have created a barrier for consumers, he said, making it a hurdle to transfer music to portable devices, and creating incompatibility between music services and MP3 players"
Apple's Rights management restrictions have created a barrier for consumers, he said, making it a hurdle to transfer Yahoo DRMed music to iPods, by creating incompatibility between music services and iPods.
"Sounds like organised crime - Prohibition era, organised crime distributes alcohol, makes money and gets very tetchy about someone else competing with them. Today, organised crime distributes music^H^H^H^H^Hdrugs, makes money and gets very tetchy about someone else competing with them."
Are you talking about Steve Jobs or the recording industry. It applies to both.
"Assuming an average mp3 size of 5mb, that's 12000 songs to fill up just one of those ipods. He'll only have to win about another dozen $10k cards to complete the task!"
Or he could sign up for a subscription music service. Oh wait Apple doesn't offer one or let any other company offer one for iPod users. He's SOL.
"Millions of people, they say. Maybe it's time to start listening to the will of those millions instead of listening to just a few industry-paid lobbysts."
Millions of people would prefer not to pay money for groceries either. That doesn't make it right to shoplift, or fight to make shoplifting legal.
"I know your comment was a joke, but actually in many countries there's a tax on blank media that goes to content providers. So...in many cases, blanks DO count."
Blank media tax is what socialist countries use to excuse copyright infringement. If it's ok to infringe copyright under these conditions, then I have the right to distribute modified GPLed code on these taxed disks without source code since I've paid the tax.
Slashdot Mirror
/. newspeak
We don't like the pejorative implication of associating copyright infringement with theft, so we'll cite the most narrow definition of the term theft and show it doesn't apply to copyright infringement. We'll ignore common epressions in the English language such as "You stole my idea", "cable theft", and "identity theft", which also do not involve physically depriving someone of an object, and we'll ignore the economic impact by saying that the holder doesn't lose anything when copyright infringement occurs.
"Occasionally software providers who depend on Microsoft don't die horrible deaths, they receive a fate worse than death and end up with their company bought and working for them."
That's why Microsoft made the list of top 100 best companies to work for and Apple didn't.
"The GPLv3 can include a clause that if you accept the license you cannot distribute *any* product that prevents a user from using any of their own modified GPL-covered software."
Del simply does not accept the license, sells you a blank box, and tells you to go to Red Hat to get the software. Since Dell didn't distribute any GPLv3 software, they are not bound by GPLv3.
"But it is not in the interest of Dell, Gateway, or Apple to sell crippled computer. They need to know that doing so will lose them money. Hardware vendors should be fighting the Content providers pushing for this, not the FSF."
Apple sells iPods with DRM because it enables them to sell music online. The recording industry would refuse to allow Apple to sell online music otherwise. A normal consumer considers a computer that won't play their music at all more crippled than one that will play their music with restrictions. So a GPLv3 computer is more crippled than a Mac by a normal consumer's standards So you need to convince the recording industry and the movie industry that DRM is unnnecessary if you don't want crippled computers (crippled by your standards).
"f Microsoft succeeds in introducing TCPA everywhere, there won't be an alternative worth running. "
nonsense. There's no reason that Red Hat can't introduce a version of a Linux distro that is locked down using the TCP hardware. It will be trustworthy because you can't modify the code and expect the hardware to work. Therefore the recording industry and the movie industry will be satisified. However, the recording industry/movie industry cannot trust people not to tamper with gplv3 code, as is their right, they will refuse to sell you content that runs using gplv3 code. No one is taking away your rights. They are offering you a product under a set of conditions. If you think they are taking away your rights, then you must come to the same conclusion about gpl taking away your rights, because RMS uses the same laws to restrict use of his code.
"They call this a free contry yet I am not allowed to run around killing people. If it's a free contry why am I not free to restrict others freedom?
If it's free software, why is RMS restricting my freedom to do with it as I please? In a free country you are not allowed to arbitrarily restrict someone's freedom (as killing does). If the software is free, then that implies there are no restrictions. This is not the case for GPLed software. It is the case for public domain software such as BSD.
"As others are pointing out, George Orwell made it very clear in "1984" how the power of language can be misused to exercise control over the minds of the population. It is important to call things with their real names, so that there is no doubt about the purpose of DRM and TP."
Yes, Like RMS calling his software "free software". If it's free software, why are there all the restrictions?
"False logic. That is like saying that if tanks were more popular they would be less secure than than light armored vehicles"
If MacOS is so secure, why do they keep releasing security updates? How often have linux web servers been defaced? I don't think unix variants are as secure as you think they are.
"seriously if you have to manually download the program and enter your admin password, it is not a virus or a worm. I dont know why people keep calling it that. It is a Trojan and those have existed since the first rm -rf / script."
From the article:
"Among the concerns: two "worms," programs written by unknown hackers that were designed to spread themselves to other Macs through Apple's iChat instant-messaging software and Bluetooth wireless-communications capability."
"*sigh* We don't. We think running an operating system with proper security makes us safe."
We who live in the real world know no such thing exists short of unplugging from the network.
Given you can fit over 100 mp3's (at 128kB/s), that's a pretty cheap compensation for downloaded mp3s from a p2p network. And if you record other data, well that's the price you pay for socialism. Believe me, the recording industry would give back every dime collected on media for the ability to shut down the p2p traffic. They just take it because it's the best they can do in a socialist climate.
"Why can't they just ask Google for a list of keywords that they think might fall in the border areas between obscene and non-obscene results, and then ask for permission to run a simulation on them from the DOJ headquarters? The answer? Power."
If you were following this case, you'd know that originally, the DOJ showed search results using key words they made up themselves. But the courts said that wasn't good enough. They wanted to see what people were actually typing in. So now the DOJ wants anonymous search keywords and results because the courts asked for them. Google isn't protecting your privacy as much as their search algorithms.
"Ok - that's going to inconvinience the Linux users for sure."
How so? The Samsung player also supports OGG Vorbis
Using WiFi equipment for metro networking seems like a stupid idea to me given the limited range of the equipment. I think Google is making a bad decision hear since there are a number of competing technologies either available or in the works that can do metro wireless far more effectively. WiFi was meant for local area network.
All your base are belong to us.
Since the only portable music player I can play files bought from iTMS is the iPod, I already consider the format useless and obsolete.
"Apple's already got that covered. The basic Mac mini is $499, and will likely come with a Core Solo processor soon:
"
The mac mini 1.2GHz G4 is extremely slow compared to the machine in the article, which has a Sempron 2800+, plus the mac mini has only half the hard drive space
"Meanwhile, you could have used those two years earning a decent living playing your music live."
In what world do you live in? You mean he could have waited tables for two years.
"This idea of making money by holding a monopoly on reproducing certain sound recordings is a fad. It won't last. Musicians did just fine without it for millenia (and frankly they did a little better than most of them are now)."
Before recorded music, composers survived by begging rich people to support them.
"Rights management restrictions have created a barrier for consumers, he said, making it a hurdle to transfer music to portable devices, and creating incompatibility between music services and MP3 players"
Apple's Rights management restrictions have created a barrier for consumers, he said, making it a hurdle to transfer Yahoo DRMed music to iPods, by creating incompatibility between music services and iPods.
"Sounds like organised crime - Prohibition era, organised crime distributes alcohol, makes money and gets very tetchy about someone else competing with them. Today, organised crime distributes music^H^H^H^H^Hdrugs, makes money and gets very tetchy about someone else competing with them."
Are you talking about Steve Jobs or the recording industry. It applies to both.
"Assuming an average mp3 size of 5mb, that's 12000 songs to fill up just one of those ipods. He'll only have to win about another dozen $10k cards to complete the task!"
Or he could sign up for a subscription music service. Oh wait Apple doesn't offer one or let any other company offer one for iPod users. He's SOL.
"Millions of people, they say. Maybe it's time to start listening to the will of those millions instead of listening to just a few industry-paid lobbysts."
Millions of people would prefer not to pay money for groceries either. That doesn't make it right to shoplift, or fight to make shoplifting legal.
"I know your comment was a joke, but actually in many countries there's a tax on blank media that goes to content providers. So...in many cases, blanks DO count."
Blank media tax is what socialist countries use to excuse copyright infringement. If it's ok to infringe copyright under these conditions, then I have the right to distribute modified GPLed code on these taxed disks without source code since I've paid the tax.
"New York Times backs network neutrality."
A liberal newspaper backs a socialist system. In other news, the Pope is Catholic.