"On the day when an American is no longer able to buy a book, read it, and then resell it to somebody else, I'm moving to Russia where freedom still lives."
Freedom in America was bought with violence.
The willingness to skewer British troops with sword and bayonet, send musket ball and cannon shot into their ranks, tar and feather their officials, burn their facilities,and sink their ships is what secured America for Americans. [...]
Um, we have a first-sale doctrine in the UK too - outside the US it's called "exhaustion of rights".
If you'd just asked about that then the wars of independence wouldn't have been necessary??!?
The good thing Google could do here is to add explicit warning or small text under the publish option that the content you publish as webpage might be indexed by search engines aswell.
You're one of those guys that calls for rear-view mirrors to say "objects in the mirror may be behind you" aren't you?
I mean blimey *news flash* "this just in, stuff on the web may be indexed by search engines, full story after this".
While it's true that many "enterprise" apps make use of ActiveX, it seems kind of stupid to design a Web app that depends on a spacific version of an application known to update every few years (like a browser)
IE did not update every few years!
I think they thought that IE was some sort of magic perfect turd or something - so perfectly formed that they dare not flush it. They left it stinking there for so many years everyone in MS had gotten used to the smell; once you're wearing breathing apparatus you hardly noticed it.
Then the divorces started happening: "I've put up with this for 7 years, if you don't stop coming home stinking of sewage I'm taking the kids and going... people at school are calling us the Hanky Family.... {sob}".
And that is why IE development restarted,... more or less....
Copyright protects your work from being copied it doesn't protect it from independently made equivalents.
Database rights require that substantial resource be used in acquisition of the contents of the db, seeking out details to be put in the db. The BBC clearly hasn't made this sort of investment and so these couple of numbers aren't protected by db rights either (see eg William Hill vs FML).
No IANAL but I do have professional experience of interpreting IP law.
Couldn't they sink and anchor a very large container (like a semi-rigid plastic water carrier perhaps), pump out the saltwater (where necessary) and fill with freshwater and cycle it? Sure the heat loss is going to be slow, but with a large enough reservoir or with on/off cycles this seems possible.
Also, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halocline, surface temperatures are lower than depth temperatures in polar regions; as salinity is lower at the surface too then moving cooling requirements North seems wise.
You joke, but the BBC have been in trouble for sending round the heavies.
We've had several letters from them threatening court and don't have a telly on the premises.
Sadly my wife responded to the last letter - I wasn't going to (no SAE) as I don't agree with spending money, however little, to stop someone threatening me with court without any evidence and through no faulty action or inaction on my part. I was looking forward to that court appearance too... "yes your honour, I don't have a TV". Wonder what I could spin my costs to; gotta be worth enough to pay off my license fee at home.
No money goes through the treasury but plenty comes from it - the treasury pays the BBC a large annual stipend from general taxation, about £300 Million GBP annually.
Of course most of that goes to pay stupid money for football coverage and on Johnathon Ross's appearance fee. But hey I'm sure we don't have anything else to spend the money on.
Do you really think the the content providers will produce shows and leave them sitting on the shelf unsold? They will sell, perhaps a year later, but they will sell. The BBC is not supposed to be about releasing a show when it's new or when the other channel has a similar show it's supposed to be about a diversity of quality programs. The FTA networks should just hold out and let the content providers starve for a bit, they'll sell without DRM if it's demanded that way.
Then they can let the market decide, if other channels want to pay and get DRM-ed shows let them. The BBC can demand, if it wants, no DRM and still meets its mandate for diversity of broadcast material. I think that the content creators will still sell to the BBC and we can stop fannying around created extra tech and wasting resources on protecting over-inflated profits in the entertainment industry.
The technology is way better than FM. The BBC didn't invent it, they just thought it would be good, so they helped push it out.
DAB wouldn't be great in a car I don't think - I have a receiver at work (shhh don't tell the PRS) and it's great when it gets a signal, a small movement of the receiver or a nearby electrical appliance and the signal either degrades to blocky noise or just dies. That's the digital way.
With FM even if you've a low signal you can still listen with the occassional pop or a bit of white noise. My DAB receiver was a gift from a group of friends, no doubt receiver prices are lower now but they're hugely expensive compared to FM and for me don't offer enough advantage for that cost - I just listen to one or two stations.
Moreover one is not allowed to record a show from the BBC to watch a second time - the only legally allowed reason to record a show is for time-shifting then the show must not be watched again. I don't think I know any adult who has not infringed copyright in this way.
Even now I'm allowed to watch Mock The Week (MTW) on iPlayer, if instead I were to record it as I watched and then watch it again (say with my wife) I would be infringing the copyright of the show's creators.
Oh, the other thing is that big BBC personalities have their own production companies who in turn work for the BBC. This means they can get a wage and get profits via a production company and that the production company can retain rights on the show, quite a racket.
Compression look up tables would either be a mathematical expression or be a technical innovation - neither of which is copyrightable (the former is not patentable under the EPC either). Copyright protects creative expressions. I'm sure someone wants you to think that their key table is copyright but it is not. It may be an industrial secret - but that's not a copyrighted work.
It may be copyright if it is published, made available to the public but I think this would be hard to show as the numbers are borne out of the algorithm and not an artistic expression.
Copyright and patents are monopolies granted in exchange for either publication of the work being protected or (in the case of patents) publication of a specification enabling the reproduction of the technical aspects of an invention.
... and don't forget when you're sacrificing the chicken you need to cut down and away otherwise the blood splatter is wrong and your license is void. It's clear as day in Section 32(1)(a)(iii)(b) subsection 14(2)a-lambda postscript 3.
Etymology is often pushed by those with an axe to grind, "homophobia" or "homophobic" is just a stick like "bigot" that people use as a replacement for an argument. The law was not homophobic unless you redefine homophobia, in which case the law was also cheesecake.
The proper argument the GP should have made was Turing "[...] was convicted under laws that discriminated unjustly based on sexual preference and was treated terribly.".
Slashdot Mirror
"On the day when an American is no longer able to buy a book, read it, and then resell it to somebody else, I'm moving to Russia where freedom still lives."
Freedom in America was bought with violence.
The willingness to skewer British troops with sword and bayonet, send musket ball and cannon shot into their ranks, tar and feather their officials, burn their facilities,and sink their ships is what secured America for Americans. [...]
Um, we have a first-sale doctrine in the UK too - outside the US it's called "exhaustion of rights".
If you'd just asked about that then the wars of independence wouldn't have been necessary??!?
That's got to be one of the best put downs I've read all week - can I copy it and put it on the Wikipedia "emergent memes" page?
Well I lol-ed, very SMBC.
The summary says this may take a lot of people by surprise,
It's surprising how many people are surprised by obvious things.
I'm surprised at that.
The good thing Google could do here is to add explicit warning or small text under the publish option that the content you publish as webpage might be indexed by search engines aswell.
You're one of those guys that calls for rear-view mirrors to say "objects in the mirror may be behind you" aren't you?
I mean blimey *news flash* "this just in, stuff on the web may be indexed by search engines, full story after this".
Turns out that 100 mbit fiber is capped at 20 gigs per month. Time to move.
Doesn't it take about 50,000 years to use 20 gigs (GigaBytes) at 100 milli-bits per second?
While it's true that many "enterprise" apps make use of ActiveX, it seems kind of stupid to design a Web app that depends on a spacific version of an application known to update every few years (like a browser)
IE did not update every few years!
I think they thought that IE was some sort of magic perfect turd or something - so perfectly formed that they dare not flush it. They left it stinking there for so many years everyone in MS had gotten used to the smell; once you're wearing breathing apparatus you hardly noticed it.
Then the divorces started happening: "I've put up with this for 7 years, if you don't stop coming home stinking of sewage I'm taking the kids and going ... people at school are calling us the Hanky Family .... {sob}".
And that is why IE development restarted, ... more or less ....
AC has no confidence in me, lol.
Copyright protects your work from being copied it doesn't protect it from independently made equivalents.
Database rights require that substantial resource be used in acquisition of the contents of the db, seeking out details to be put in the db. The BBC clearly hasn't made this sort of investment and so these couple of numbers aren't protected by db rights either (see eg William Hill vs FML).
No IANAL but I do have professional experience of interpreting IP law.
Couldn't they sink and anchor a very large container (like a semi-rigid plastic water carrier perhaps), pump out the saltwater (where necessary) and fill with freshwater and cycle it? Sure the heat loss is going to be slow, but with a large enough reservoir or with on/off cycles this seems possible.
Also, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halocline, surface temperatures are lower than depth temperatures in polar regions; as salinity is lower at the surface too then moving cooling requirements North seems wise.
Here's me thinking it was just transliterated Deutsch.
You joke, but the BBC have been in trouble for sending round the heavies.
We've had several letters from them threatening court and don't have a telly on the premises.
Sadly my wife responded to the last letter - I wasn't going to (no SAE) as I don't agree with spending money, however little, to stop someone threatening me with court without any evidence and through no faulty action or inaction on my part. I was looking forward to that court appearance too ... "yes your honour, I don't have a TV". Wonder what I could spin my costs to; gotta be worth enough to pay off my license fee at home.
No money goes through the treasury but plenty comes from it - the treasury pays the BBC a large annual stipend from general taxation, about £300 Million GBP annually.
Of course most of that goes to pay stupid money for football coverage and on Johnathon Ross's appearance fee. But hey I'm sure we don't have anything else to spend the money on.
You'd think. The BBC is not owned by us, we only have to pay for it if we want to watch TV.
Do you really think the the content providers will produce shows and leave them sitting on the shelf unsold? They will sell, perhaps a year later, but they will sell. The BBC is not supposed to be about releasing a show when it's new or when the other channel has a similar show it's supposed to be about a diversity of quality programs. The FTA networks should just hold out and let the content providers starve for a bit, they'll sell without DRM if it's demanded that way.
Then they can let the market decide, if other channels want to pay and get DRM-ed shows let them. The BBC can demand, if it wants, no DRM and still meets its mandate for diversity of broadcast material. I think that the content creators will still sell to the BBC and we can stop fannying around created extra tech and wasting resources on protecting over-inflated profits in the entertainment industry.
The technology is way better than FM. The BBC didn't invent it, they just thought it would be good, so they helped push it out.
DAB wouldn't be great in a car I don't think - I have a receiver at work (shhh don't tell the PRS) and it's great when it gets a signal, a small movement of the receiver or a nearby electrical appliance and the signal either degrades to blocky noise or just dies. That's the digital way.
With FM even if you've a low signal you can still listen with the occassional pop or a bit of white noise. My DAB receiver was a gift from a group of friends, no doubt receiver prices are lower now but they're hugely expensive compared to FM and for me don't offer enough advantage for that cost - I just listen to one or two stations.
Moreover one is not allowed to record a show from the BBC to watch a second time - the only legally allowed reason to record a show is for time-shifting then the show must not be watched again. I don't think I know any adult who has not infringed copyright in this way.
Even now I'm allowed to watch Mock The Week (MTW) on iPlayer, if instead I were to record it as I watched and then watch it again (say with my wife) I would be infringing the copyright of the show's creators.
Oh, the other thing is that big BBC personalities have their own production companies who in turn work for the BBC. This means they can get a wage and get profits via a production company and that the production company can retain rights on the show, quite a racket.
Compression look up tables would either be a mathematical expression or be a technical innovation - neither of which is copyrightable.
Compression look up tables would either be a mathematical expression or be a technical innovation - neither of which is copyrightable (the former is not patentable under the EPC either). Copyright protects creative expressions. I'm sure someone wants you to think that their key table is copyright but it is not. It may be an industrial secret - but that's not a copyrighted work.
It may be copyright if it is published, made available to the public but I think this would be hard to show as the numbers are borne out of the algorithm and not an artistic expression.
Copyright and patents are monopolies granted in exchange for either publication of the work being protected or (in the case of patents) publication of a specification enabling the reproduction of the technical aspects of an invention.
... and it does this because???
... and don't forget when you're sacrificing the chicken you need to cut down and away otherwise the blood splatter is wrong and your license is void. It's clear as day in Section 32(1)(a)(iii)(b) subsection 14(2)a-lambda postscript 3.
Dolphin? Pff, marlin is the future.
{whistles and clicks loudly in sub-audible (!) frequencies}
Etymology is often pushed by those with an axe to grind, "homophobia" or "homophobic" is just a stick like "bigot" that people use as a replacement for an argument. The law was not homophobic unless you redefine homophobia, in which case the law was also cheesecake.
The proper argument the GP should have made was Turing "[...] was convicted under laws that discriminated unjustly based on sexual preference and was treated terribly.".
Any insight into the prison question?
Although he apparently chose hormone treatment and probation over 2years (?) of prison.
In what sense? You mean recognised as a person who took part in homosexual sex? Or what? I can't see what you mean, yet this is insightful?