each winning disk will likely have some unique number identifying it as a winner. The best you could do would be to duplicate someone's winning disk, and then they would just be confused as to who actually won (you could do the same with a winning scratch ticket). I'm sure it won't be crackable-- as if they would have something like:
if winning_disk:
allow_winning_door_to_open = true else:
allow_winning_door_to_open = false
foresight? I think Morse had the foresight when he came up with his code to send over telegraphs. "Morse code", as it were:
A system of distributing video and/or audio information employs digital signal processing to achieve high rates of data compression.
(i.e. the guy who operates the telegraph and translates your speech into a blip or two. Can't get much better compression than turning the sound for "A" into blip bliiiip.)
The compressed and encoded audio and/or video information is sent over standard telephone, cable or satellite broadcast channels
(telegraph was standard way back when)
to a receiver
(the guy at the other end of the telegraph)
specified by a subscriber of the service, preferably in less than real time, for later playback and optional recording on standard audio and/or video tape.
(or, if those things haven't been invented yet, paper).
your analogy is completely off. The article does not claim cd's will be replaced with other media, or that people will stop selling them, it claims the big labels may be dying, and the business model may change.
but, even if the article WAS about cd technology dying, you still haven't made any sort of argument. Yes, some technologies survive longer than people predict. But so what? This means that all technologies will survive longer than people predict??... and then the telegraph died, killed off by the telephone, and then the cassette tape died, killed off by the cd. And then the phonograph died, killed off by the cd, and the black and white television died, killed off by the color television, and the cave wall died, killed of by parchment.
Obviously bowing to record and movie industry pressure the letter includes a link to a page that gives directions on how to disable file trading on 18 P2P services from KaZaa to Xolox
don't blame OptimumOnline. This is obviously the letter's fault.
(b) EXCEPTIONS. Subsection (a) shall not apply to a copyright owner in a case in which in the course of taking an action permitted by subsection (a), the copyright owner impairs the availability within a publicly accessible peer-to-peer file trading network of a computer file or data that does not contain a work, or portion thereof, in which the copy-right owner has an exclusive right granted under section 106, except as may be reasonably necessary to impair the distribution, display, performance, or reproduction of such a work, or portion thereof, in violation of any of the exclusive rights of the copyright owner under section 10 106; 11
that is, the limitation here is that the impairment of the network has to be "reasonably necessary." So Berman is correct in saying the law wouldn't allow burning down a P2P pirate's house, but DoS and anything else "necessary" to stop a file from being transferred would be legal.
Well, I'm glad to know there are SOME limitations!
Slashdot Mirror
what?! You can still access their website? You guys let me down.
each winning disk will likely have some unique number identifying it as a winner. The best you could do would be to duplicate someone's winning disk, and then they would just be confused as to who actually won (you could do the same with a winning scratch ticket). I'm sure it won't be crackable-- as if they would have something like:
if winning_disk:
allow_winning_door_to_open = true
else:
allow_winning_door_to_open = false
A system of distributing video and/or audio information employs digital signal processing to achieve high rates of data compression.
(i.e. the guy who operates the telegraph and translates your speech into a blip or two. Can't get much better compression than turning the sound for "A" into blip bliiiip.)
The compressed and encoded audio and/or video information is sent over standard telephone, cable or satellite broadcast channels
(telegraph was standard way back when)
to a receiver
(the guy at the other end of the telegraph)
specified by a subscriber of the service, preferably in less than real time, for later playback and optional recording on standard audio and/or video tape.
(or, if those things haven't been invented yet, paper).
but, even if the article WAS about cd technology dying, you still haven't made any sort of argument. Yes, some technologies survive longer than people predict. But so what? This means that all technologies will survive longer than people predict?? ... and then the telegraph died, killed off by the telephone, and then the cassette tape died, killed off by the cd. And then the phonograph died, killed off by the cd, and the black and white television died, killed off by the color television, and the cave wall died, killed of by parchment.
Obviously bowing to record and movie industry pressure the letter includes a link to a page that gives directions on how to disable file trading on 18 P2P services from KaZaa to Xolox
don't blame OptimumOnline. This is obviously the letter's fault.
(b) EXCEPTIONS. Subsection (a) shall not apply to a copyright owner in a case in which in the course of taking an action permitted by subsection (a), the copyright owner impairs the availability within a publicly accessible peer-to-peer file trading network of a computer file or data that does not contain a work, or portion thereof, in which the copy-right owner has an exclusive right granted under section 106, except as may be reasonably necessary to impair the distribution, display, performance, or reproduction of such a work, or portion thereof, in violation of any of the exclusive rights of the copyright owner under section 10 106; 11
that is, the limitation here is that the impairment of the network has to be "reasonably necessary." So Berman is correct in saying the law wouldn't allow burning down a P2P pirate's house, but DoS and anything else "necessary" to stop a file from being transferred would be legal. Well, I'm glad to know there are SOME limitations!