This doesn't seem particularly related to the DMCA, except for the ability to send a take-down notice instead of a lawsuit.
Circumstances such as these are why the principle of fair use has existed since the 1700s. In US law:
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. 106 and 17 U.S.C. 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include: the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; the nature of the copyrighted work; the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.[4]
Publishing these emails seems to fall pretty squarely under news and criticism.
Very little copyrighted work is registered. Registration only serves as a verifiable record of when it was produced, and by whom. If there's another verifiable record, such as a published copy, then registration isn't even particularly useful. Which is why a lot of published work is not registered.
Have you noticed right at the top of the comment section this text?
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Whatever you right is automatically copyrighted as soon as you write it (or take a picture, or record a song). Marking it with a copyright symbol is not required, and is mostly useful to indicate who owns the copyright (who to contact for permission to use it) and to indicate that the author intends to enforce his copyright.
Haven't been to Africa hey? They two year olds are more than capable of running around free, finding cool places like bat colonies, stalking and attempting to catch (maybe even succeeding) small insects and animals, and picking up dead ones off the ground. The ones in North America used to be that capable as well, but now they seem to mostly ride around in strollers.
In Africa they're even quite good at fleecing tourists.
If a factor, such as disease, affects the reproductive success of some organisms and not others, and that difference is due to heritable factors, the population will evolve (slowly change) to one that contains a greater proportion of the successful phenotype. Your (c) is sufficient. Nobody "suddenly became immune" but nobody suggested any such thing. There's considerable evidence that the population of Europe did become more resistant overall to bubonic and pneumonic plague over time.
It does kind of sound like Microsoft though. The guy who wrote the article seems to be (poorly) paraphrasing observations from around the time Gates retired that there's a history of industry moguls achieving wild success using sometimes questionable methods and then attempting penance later in life by using their personal fortunes philanthropically in other areas.
It depends on what he does with it. The robber barons of the Industrial Age did lots of important, innovative things. They're remembered as robbers because of the way they exploited people and society in order to do them.
Sure, the US doesn't annex new territory. It just fucks up sovereign governments (democratic or otherwise, by subterfuge or invasion) and sets up puppets. Or bails entirely if the whole thing goes south. Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, half of South and Central America, a good part of Africa.
With all the rights, privileges and responsibilities associated with that position. If you're not, well, what is it the US does with non-uniformed combatants?
You need a name for that group. Something catchy. How about "League of Nations?" Or maybe something a little more modern. "United Nations?" But United Nations sounds like everybody would get involved. So maybe you want to have a smaller group of just the most important countries, specifically addressing security problems. You could call it the "Security Council" and just have the most powerful countries on it. Plus maybe a small number of rotating seats so the rest of the world had some representation. Then, for the biggest powers you could have direct lines of communication between their leaders so that they could cut through the diplomatic crap when the shit really hits the fan. Telephones would work. Better make them land lines for reliability. And make them red, because red means they're important.
In most western countries you have the right to respond to an imminent threat of physical harm with appropriate force. You do not have the right to respond to, for example, property damage. Part of that "Western political thought" is eliminating the cycle of eye-for-an-eye vengeance.
Unsecured http probably can't be saved because of it's design. But persistent connections should be easier to protect because the legitimate connections are distinguishable.
Presumably xbox and playstation use some kind of persistent connection. If not, they should.
The idea is that if you've got a bit of something that don't settle down to equilibrium, but rather keeps wiggling, it's more likely alive. Maintaining active processes is part of a reasonable definition of life, and those active processes imply movement.
Someone made up that supernatural/natural thing. Science can certainly prove the existence of god, if you care to define god in any kind of concrete terms, in principle. He might have to cooperate though.
If some dude shows up one day who can perform real magic, create planets out of thin air, and make it rain a lot, then science can examine him closely and be pretty sure god exists.
If a kid appears who can, without technological aid, turn water into wine, walk on water and reconstitute himself after dead, there's the new testament god.
Science doesn't require that the phenomenon it studies be "natural." Only that they be observable and consistent.
A first stage rocket to toss something up to 60,000 feet and well over 700 mph is a lot cheaper than an aircraft to do the same thing, and the engineering to make it carry a rocket as payload. Particularly if it's a solid rocket. The advantage of the aircraft is that it's reusable, but as NASA discovered, you have to do a LOT of flights before that makes much difference, and failure from the extra complexity often bites you in the ass before you get to that point anyway.
Airplane launched might make sense for frequent, short duration flights like Virgin is planning. Designing and building an aircraft that can launch rockets doesn't sound like an effective replacement for simple sounding rockets, which is what these guys are building.
So you think the story today about one of the Mars rovers having trouble with it's flash memory means NASA should have gone with someone who has better manufacturing quality?
All electronics eventually fail. Most of these notebooks are a) fairly old for notebook computers and b) have a problem resulting from an industry wide switch to more environmentally friendly materials. Sure, you can go buy a new one that you don't have to bake a couple of times a year. For people who want to keep their old hardware limping along there are tricks like this.
Not sure how I can make it simpler than that. Hopefully your translator does a better job this time.
Mass extinctions are only briefly bad for biodiversity. It's still a topic of debate, but mass extinctions might well be good for biodiversity in the long term.
Slashdot Mirror
This doesn't seem particularly related to the DMCA, except for the ability to send a take-down notice instead of a lawsuit.
Circumstances such as these are why the principle of fair use has existed since the 1700s. In US law:
Publishing these emails seems to fall pretty squarely under news and criticism.
Very little copyrighted work is registered. Registration only serves as a verifiable record of when it was produced, and by whom. If there's another verifiable record, such as a published copy, then registration isn't even particularly useful. Which is why a lot of published work is not registered.
Have you noticed right at the top of the comment section this text?
Whatever you right is automatically copyrighted as soon as you write it (or take a picture, or record a song). Marking it with a copyright symbol is not required, and is mostly useful to indicate who owns the copyright (who to contact for permission to use it) and to indicate that the author intends to enforce his copyright.
Haven't been to Africa hey? They two year olds are more than capable of running around free, finding cool places like bat colonies, stalking and attempting to catch (maybe even succeeding) small insects and animals, and picking up dead ones off the ground. The ones in North America used to be that capable as well, but now they seem to mostly ride around in strollers.
In Africa they're even quite good at fleecing tourists.
Hey, an all or nothing thinker!
If a factor, such as disease, affects the reproductive success of some organisms and not others, and that difference is due to heritable factors, the population will evolve (slowly change) to one that contains a greater proportion of the successful phenotype. Your (c) is sufficient. Nobody "suddenly became immune" but nobody suggested any such thing. There's considerable evidence that the population of Europe did become more resistant overall to bubonic and pneumonic plague over time.
The five people who modded him informative, and the thousands who will read his comment because of that, probably care.
It does kind of sound like Microsoft though. The guy who wrote the article seems to be (poorly) paraphrasing observations from around the time Gates retired that there's a history of industry moguls achieving wild success using sometimes questionable methods and then attempting penance later in life by using their personal fortunes philanthropically in other areas.
It depends on what he does with it. The robber barons of the Industrial Age did lots of important, innovative things. They're remembered as robbers because of the way they exploited people and society in order to do them.
You mean IR radiation? That stuff with even higher energy than radar?
Unless you're British, you've got that backwards. You guys were the colony.
Sure, the US doesn't annex new territory. It just fucks up sovereign governments (democratic or otherwise, by subterfuge or invasion) and sets up puppets. Or bails entirely if the whole thing goes south. Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, half of South and Central America, a good part of Africa.
Submarines solved that problem a long time ago.
With all the rights, privileges and responsibilities associated with that position. If you're not, well, what is it the US does with non-uniformed combatants?
You should type "man sudo" sometime.
Google inadvertently reveals they have captured enough of the Internet to erase things from it.
You need a name for that group. Something catchy. How about "League of Nations?" Or maybe something a little more modern. "United Nations?" But United Nations sounds like everybody would get involved. So maybe you want to have a smaller group of just the most important countries, specifically addressing security problems. You could call it the "Security Council" and just have the most powerful countries on it. Plus maybe a small number of rotating seats so the rest of the world had some representation. Then, for the biggest powers you could have direct lines of communication between their leaders so that they could cut through the diplomatic crap when the shit really hits the fan. Telephones would work. Better make them land lines for reliability. And make them red, because red means they're important.
In most western countries you have the right to respond to an imminent threat of physical harm with appropriate force. You do not have the right to respond to, for example, property damage. Part of that "Western political thought" is eliminating the cycle of eye-for-an-eye vengeance.
+3 Informative at the moment. Now I feel old.
Unsecured http probably can't be saved because of it's design. But persistent connections should be easier to protect because the legitimate connections are distinguishable.
Presumably xbox and playstation use some kind of persistent connection. If not, they should.
Your post should be bookmarked by all of Slashdot to use as an actual example of a slippery slope.
It finds motion. Rocks don't wiggle.
The idea is that if you've got a bit of something that don't settle down to equilibrium, but rather keeps wiggling, it's more likely alive. Maintaining active processes is part of a reasonable definition of life, and those active processes imply movement.
Someone made up that supernatural/natural thing. Science can certainly prove the existence of god, if you care to define god in any kind of concrete terms, in principle. He might have to cooperate though.
If some dude shows up one day who can perform real magic, create planets out of thin air, and make it rain a lot, then science can examine him closely and be pretty sure god exists.
If a kid appears who can, without technological aid, turn water into wine, walk on water and reconstitute himself after dead, there's the new testament god.
Science doesn't require that the phenomenon it studies be "natural." Only that they be observable and consistent.
A first stage rocket to toss something up to 60,000 feet and well over 700 mph is a lot cheaper than an aircraft to do the same thing, and the engineering to make it carry a rocket as payload. Particularly if it's a solid rocket. The advantage of the aircraft is that it's reusable, but as NASA discovered, you have to do a LOT of flights before that makes much difference, and failure from the extra complexity often bites you in the ass before you get to that point anyway.
Airplane launched might make sense for frequent, short duration flights like Virgin is planning. Designing and building an aircraft that can launch rockets doesn't sound like an effective replacement for simple sounding rockets, which is what these guys are building.
So you think the story today about one of the Mars rovers having trouble with it's flash memory means NASA should have gone with someone who has better manufacturing quality?
All electronics eventually fail. Most of these notebooks are a) fairly old for notebook computers and b) have a problem resulting from an industry wide switch to more environmentally friendly materials. Sure, you can go buy a new one that you don't have to bake a couple of times a year. For people who want to keep their old hardware limping along there are tricks like this.
Not sure how I can make it simpler than that. Hopefully your translator does a better job this time.
Mass extinctions are only briefly bad for biodiversity. It's still a topic of debate, but mass extinctions might well be good for biodiversity in the long term.
http://www.nature.com/nature/j...