Ripping a CD, making a seed, and uploading said files to a server on the net implies more than just a "little" intent, don't you think? You're not just "thinking" of doing it, but have actually taken the steps needed to commit the act.
Or to continue your rather flawed analogy: you've just exited your idling car and are about to enter the bank, masked and gun in hand. True, you haven't robbed the bank yet... but I doubt that a passing police officer is going to stand around and wait until you actually do so.
"defendants' attempts to dismiss as many of the theories as they can"
No kidding. Sues for "negligence, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, federal and state RICO, abuse of process, malicious prosecution, intentional infliction of emotional distress, violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, trespass, invasion of privacy, libel and slander, deceptive business practices, misuse of copyright law, and civil conspiracy."
If I were sitting on this I'd take the above as a signal they don't have a strong case on any specific point, so they're throwing everything and the kitchen sink into the suit hoping that something will stick.
When you can obtain something of value immediately, with little to no chance of being caught and punished, then it just means the potential reward dramatically outweighs the potential risk.
It's why people don't steal albums from the store. It's not that it's more ethical or moral not to do so, it's that with guards and cameras and security devices your chances of being caught and thrown in jail are much, much higher. Not worth the risk.
And you can't tell me that plenty of people wouldn't do it if they could, as the fact that all of those security measures exist argues otherwise. If they weren't needed, businesses wouldn't pay for them. As such, people are not "accepting the consequences of their actions", because at their level they perceive that there ARE no consequences.
Finally, "society as a whole" doesn't continually and blatantly break the law. Because if "society as a whole" did so I doubt Apple would have sold 3 billion-plus songs out of their online store.
What's really sad, IMHO, are all of the people who think they're automatically entitled to whatever they want, whenever they want it...
Doesn't mean it couldn't be done. I've also heard plenty of people (politicians, economists, etc.) discussing gas taxes, rationing, coupons, and so on. And that's definitely happened before.
I'd probably have a lot of fun taking a baseball bat to your car too, but often there are laws enacted to limit the amount of "fun" we can have.
Guess that's why we have taxes and regulations to act as "incentives" for people to behave rationally and unselfishly. Let's see, if we have a government-mandated 35MPG average, how about an additional yearly excise tax of, say, $200 for every MPG your car gets that's under the average? Want a Hummer or V-8 sports car that gets 12MPG? Fine. That will be an extra $4,600 this year please. And next year. And the year after that. And...
"What I enjoy is the ability to play with physics, drive fast, corner hard, and enjoy life at a higher level of performance. It really has nothing to do with showing off."
Right.
Just remember that physics has a way of playing back. I also sincerely hope that, when it does, you're the only one involved...
"Having a powerful high performance car...the speed and handling is a rush to some of us out there."
The problem is that this isn't just about you. You can drive three or maybe even four Prius's for the fuel an average sports car burns. Upcoming versions may up that to seven or eight or more. Multiply that by millions of "high-performance" cars and you end up with a significant impact on oil imports and energy usage and sufficiency.
Or are you saying that your "fun" outweighs thousands of kids fighting and dying over some oil well in the Middle East? Actions have consequences.
Besides, if you want to go to the "track" and drive fast, get a modern racing go-cart. I guarantee that sitting low and in the open will give you all of the "fast" you need.
Odd that there are millions of old 4 and 6-cylinder cars out there that seem to manage the trick just fine. My aunt's old Volkswagen Beetle even seems to make it. A Prius does 0-60 in, what? 10 seconds? And I don't seen hundreds of them lying mangled at on-ramps.
Bottom line is that you need a basic level of performance. After that you're just showing off. Not every car on the road needs to be a 'vette or Viper.
(And I'm kind of tired of the "I need a Porsche to navigate on-ramps safely" thread that manages to pop up every time efficiency is discussed.)
I know it's shocking but some people use it for just that, and get our content legally. At 3 billion plus songs, and who knows how many TV shows and movies, iTunes seems to be competing with BT just fine.
However, as you put it the question is whether or not MovieLink can be competitive, and that's debatable. Given the lengths to which their content had been locked down, then nailed down, then buried in concrete... I'd say no. BB can't effect more change than the studio's will allow, and they've been noticeably reticent in the matter.
Virtually all children who are molested or abused are molested by their parents and step-parents, or by some member of the immediate family, or by someone known to the family and in a trusted position, and then by acquaintances, and then, running dead last, by a complete stranger. In that order.
Work on the first two groups and you'll solve 50-70% of the problem right off the bat. Since the unknown stranger IS the extreme, we need to be productive and not paranoid.
"It is a LAMP-based software mill that we are talking here. Do you know what the "L" means? It means Linux."
Maybe it's Red Hat and they're paying for the Enterprise version. Maybe they're paying MySQL AB for support. Just because it's open-source doesn't mean that they (or someone like them) are not paying for it.
Just as a counterpoint (and at a risk of losing all of my karma), SQL Server and.NET "work" pretty well, and have improved fairly steadily with each iteration.
"...the people who develop and provide open source software are people who are using it in their own organizations. If the software doesn't work, they have much more to loose, their personal reputations and perhaps their jobs."
That's an assumption I'm pretty sure that's not always backed by fact. I know several OSS developers who do what they do "on the side". There job certainly isn't at stake if they decide to quit. And one only has to look at SourceForge to see all of the projects where the initial developers have gotten bored or lost interest in a project.
Then again, commercial software companies also drop products, go out of business, etc.. Though I suspect it may be a while before Microsoft and.NET disappear..NET may get RENAMED, but it probably isn't going to disappear.
Don't nuke's take an even larger "large initial outlay"? Heck, build a modern gas or oil-fired plant and you still have a large initial outlay that takes quite a while before it hits the break-even point.
"... exactly the same design decision reduces functionality to a huge degree..."
Since the same design decision made the phone small enough to actually carry in day-to-day use, I'd personally say that it INCREASES functionality to a huge degree. A phone/ipod/web device you can't or won't carry with you at all times is pretty worthless.
We're not going to have a meeting of the minds here. Do I wish that batter was user replaceable? Yes? Would I give up battery life or suffer a larger device to get it? No.
Is it planned obsolescence? No. Is it a big deal? No. I expect that by the time the battery wears out and needs to be replaced there will be a 3G, GPS, 64GB version that I'll probably want to have anyway.
How is that different from the hurricane ripping the roof off of the data center and hurling 400 blades into the next county? Or as we saw in SF, a power outage taking out an entire data center?
And it's "common knowledge" that every iPod Apple has ever produced requires Apple or a third-party to replace the battery. I suppose there could be vast numbers of people out there who've never seen, touched, or owned a pod prior to buying an iPhone. Like, maybe, five?
Slashdot Mirror
Ripping a CD, making a seed, and uploading said files to a server on the net implies more than just a "little" intent, don't you think? You're not just "thinking" of doing it, but have actually taken the steps needed to commit the act.
Or to continue your rather flawed analogy: you've just exited your idling car and are about to enter the bank, masked and gun in hand. True, you haven't robbed the bank yet... but I doubt that a passing police officer is going to stand around and wait until you actually do so.
And this has what to do with distribution via torrent over the internet? As per the original article?
If you're going that way, Spider Robinson's Mindkiller is probably required reading on the subject.
No, it's more like "I have a life and don't need to learn arcane commands written by social misfits who themselves had a deep phobia of dictionaries."
It doesn't work if you have to explain it. Some people instinctively grok elegance... and others don't. It's as simple as that.
Sounds like the old "pink elephant" problem, as in the flying carpet will fly... as long as you don't think a a pink elephant.
In this case, I want you to think of the problem, and don't think of your name, SSN, parents, pets, or anything else you want to remember.
"defendants' attempts to dismiss as many of the theories as they can"
No kidding. Sues for "negligence, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, federal and state RICO, abuse of process, malicious prosecution, intentional infliction of emotional distress, violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, trespass, invasion of privacy, libel and slander, deceptive business practices, misuse of copyright law, and civil conspiracy."
If I were sitting on this I'd take the above as a signal they don't have a strong case on any specific point, so they're throwing everything and the kitchen sink into the suit hoping that something will stick.
When you can obtain something of value immediately, with little to no chance of being caught and punished, then it just means the potential reward dramatically outweighs the potential risk.
It's why people don't steal albums from the store. It's not that it's more ethical or moral not to do so, it's that with guards and cameras and security devices your chances of being caught and thrown in jail are much, much higher. Not worth the risk.
And you can't tell me that plenty of people wouldn't do it if they could, as the fact that all of those security measures exist argues otherwise. If they weren't needed, businesses wouldn't pay for them. As such, people are not "accepting the consequences of their actions", because at their level they perceive that there ARE no consequences.
Finally, "society as a whole" doesn't continually and blatantly break the law. Because if "society as a whole" did so I doubt Apple would have sold 3 billion-plus songs out of their online store.
What's really sad, IMHO, are all of the people who think they're automatically entitled to whatever they want, whenever they want it...
Doesn't mean it couldn't be done. I've also heard plenty of people (politicians, economists, etc.) discussing gas taxes, rationing, coupons, and so on. And that's definitely happened before.
FYI: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/08/zap_alias. php
I'd probably have a lot of fun taking a baseball bat to your car too, but often there are laws enacted to limit the amount of "fun" we can have.
Guess that's why we have taxes and regulations to act as "incentives" for people to behave rationally and unselfishly. Let's see, if we have a government-mandated 35MPG average, how about an additional yearly excise tax of, say, $200 for every MPG your car gets that's under the average? Want a Hummer or V-8 sports car that gets 12MPG? Fine. That will be an extra $4,600 this year please. And next year. And the year after that. And...
"What I enjoy is the ability to play with physics, drive fast, corner hard, and enjoy life at a higher level of performance. It really has nothing to do with showing off."
Right.
Just remember that physics has a way of playing back. I also sincerely hope that, when it does, you're the only one involved...
Please reread for comprehension: "And US auto manufacturers will delay getting to that point as long as possible." US. United States.
"Having a powerful high performance car...the speed and handling is a rush to some of us out there."
The problem is that this isn't just about you. You can drive three or maybe even four Prius's for the fuel an average sports car burns. Upcoming versions may up that to seven or eight or more. Multiply that by millions of "high-performance" cars and you end up with a significant impact on oil imports and energy usage and sufficiency.
Or are you saying that your "fun" outweighs thousands of kids fighting and dying over some oil well in the Middle East? Actions have consequences.
Besides, if you want to go to the "track" and drive fast, get a modern racing go-cart. I guarantee that sitting low and in the open will give you all of the "fast" you need.
And US auto manufacturers will delay getting to that point as long as possible. R&D costs money.
Odd that there are millions of old 4 and 6-cylinder cars out there that seem to manage the trick just fine. My aunt's old Volkswagen Beetle even seems to make it. A Prius does 0-60 in, what? 10 seconds? And I don't seen hundreds of them lying mangled at on-ramps.
Bottom line is that you need a basic level of performance. After that you're just showing off. Not every car on the road needs to be a 'vette or Viper.
(And I'm kind of tired of the "I need a Porsche to navigate on-ramps safely" thread that manages to pop up every time efficiency is discussed.)
I know it's shocking but some people use it for just that, and get our content legally. At 3 billion plus songs, and who knows how many TV shows and movies, iTunes seems to be competing with BT just fine.
However, as you put it the question is whether or not MovieLink can be competitive, and that's debatable. Given the lengths to which their content had been locked down, then nailed down, then buried in concrete... I'd say no. BB can't effect more change than the studio's will allow, and they've been noticeably reticent in the matter.
Virtually all children who are molested or abused are molested by their parents and step-parents, or by some member of the immediate family, or by someone known to the family and in a trusted position, and then by acquaintances, and then, running dead last, by a complete stranger. In that order.
Work on the first two groups and you'll solve 50-70% of the problem right off the bat. Since the unknown stranger IS the extreme, we need to be productive and not paranoid.
"It is a LAMP-based software mill that we are talking here. Do you know what the "L" means? It means Linux."
Maybe it's Red Hat and they're paying for the Enterprise version. Maybe they're paying MySQL AB for support. Just because it's open-source doesn't mean that they (or someone like them) are not paying for it.
Just as a counterpoint (and at a risk of losing all of my karma), SQL Server and .NET "work" pretty well, and have improved fairly steadily with each iteration.
"...the people who develop and provide open source software are people who are using it in their own organizations. If the software doesn't work, they have much more to loose, their personal reputations and perhaps their jobs."
That's an assumption I'm pretty sure that's not always backed by fact. I know several OSS developers who do what they do "on the side". There job certainly isn't at stake if they decide to quit. And one only has to look at SourceForge to see all of the projects where the initial developers have gotten bored or lost interest in a project.
Then again, commercial software companies also drop products, go out of business, etc.. Though I suspect it may be a while before Microsoft and .NET disappear. .NET may get RENAMED, but it probably isn't going to disappear.
Don't nuke's take an even larger "large initial outlay"? Heck, build a modern gas or oil-fired plant and you still have a large initial outlay that takes quite a while before it hits the break-even point.
"... exactly the same design decision reduces functionality to a huge degree..."
Since the same design decision made the phone small enough to actually carry in day-to-day use, I'd personally say that it INCREASES functionality to a huge degree. A phone/ipod/web device you can't or won't carry with you at all times is pretty worthless.
We're not going to have a meeting of the minds here. Do I wish that batter was user replaceable? Yes? Would I give up battery life or suffer a larger device to get it? No.
Is it planned obsolescence? No. Is it a big deal? No. I expect that by the time the battery wears out and needs to be replaced there will be a 3G, GPS, 64GB version that I'll probably want to have anyway.
How is that different from the hurricane ripping the roof off of the data center and hurling 400 blades into the next county? Or as we saw in SF, a power outage taking out an entire data center?
And it's "common knowledge" that every iPod Apple has ever produced requires Apple or a third-party to replace the battery. I suppose there could be vast numbers of people out there who've never seen, touched, or owned a pod prior to buying an iPhone. Like, maybe, five?