to tell the truth, I'll have to apologize right now... I wasn't really replying to anything in your post, I just made the connection in my brain about what I posted, and looked for a good place to put it to see what people thought. *looks sheepish* I'll try to post earlier in the conversation next time and on a more relevant place
ianal, just using logic here. "To constitute theft there must be a taking without the owner's consent, and it must be unlawful or felonious; every part of the property stolen must be removed, however slightly, from its former position; and it must be, at least momentarily, in the complete possession of the thief.[from dictionary.com]" When someone shares a copyrighted file: 1. An illegal copy of the file is made (copying to give away is not fair use). It seems to me that this copy is a separate entity from the original. 2. No matter what temporary file rigamarole is used to get the copy to the other person's computer, at some point an illegal copy is completely brought from the sharer's computer to the sharee's computer. It seems to me that this should be considered cold blooded theft. A copy of the file is taken in its entirety, and the sellers of the music are deprived of its use (they can no longer sell that copy, because it has been unlawfully taken).
If it were a perpetual motion machine or the like, the government would declare it top secret and/or a threat to national security, or barring that, would try to make it and the inventor out to be a crackpot like they did with Tesla... The uspto is just the gov's way of sifting out all the really usefull items from public knowledge and so they can maintain control.
(sorry.. rant over. touched a nerve there... I have special nerve endings just for when stories of inventions like this come up)
FTC commissioner Orson Swindle told the lawmakers that spam "has become the weapon of choice for those engaged in fraud and deception" and is "about to kill the killer (application) of the Internet, specifically consumer use of e-mail and e-commerce."
"Dealing with the emotional reaction of spam by millions of users requires our immediate attention before it gets out of hand," Swindle said.
BEFORE it gets out of hand? hmm
E-mail marketers should be required to describe their products honestly and honor consumer requests to be taken off their contact lists, the commissioners said, while criminal penalties should be explored for those who falsify their return addresses.
but if they did that, they wouldn't get any business... oh wait
If I read the article right, it only needs to be passed in its model form in one state (it has passed in two) to be enforceable in all (through the clause that says the vendors choose the state in which they will be sued). They only had to get it passed in one, but we have to pass bomb shelter states in all fifty states to be safe. Am I missing something here?
On a side note, it would be interesting to see the reaction of people if every piece of software was required by law to be shipped with a printed version of the eula in a booklet on the back of the package that could be opened and read. Sales would drop dramatically until they stopped putting all the crap in there (or maybe not... I guess there are enough that just wouldn't care.)
Actually there are a few good parallels between real piracy and music piracy... such as the pirates intercepted a ship and looted it before it got to its port, much the same as people who intercept the prereleases and copyrighted music before it gets into the hands of people who would pay money for them. The difference, of course, being that 'looting' copyrighted material doesn't lessen it's value to the other consumers AS MUCH.
This is one thing I don't see here... copyright infringement does lower the value of the material by making it more available without payment, thus ensuring that fewer people will have to buy it to enjoy it. This directly hurts the companies, since fewer people have to buy it to enjoy it, and indirectly hurts the consumers, since less revenue means fewer or lower quality products.
I can already see the posts after this saying that it is okay since it is the music companies that are being hurt, and that they are already putting out garbage anyways. Ah well, I'll have to agree with that in spirit!;)
The guy isn't guilty of any crime, but he had to settle as if he were? Someone enlighten me...
I'm still forming my opinion on this, but if the RIAA is willing to pursue bully tactics (intimidating people with lawsuits with no merit against people who can't fight back), and price fixing, they shouldn't have the nerve to complain when the consumer resorts to the same things when fighting back. Not saying it's right, or legal, but they shouldn't act shocked when human nature asserts itself. Oh, and the people who ACTUALLY DO something against the law, even when pursuing their own form of justice should be prepared to face the consequences... (in general, not referring to the lawsuits in question)
"Shuster does have time on his side, Aharonian said. The pop-up patent was filed in 1998, and under patent law, challengers would have to show similar technology being used prior to 1997.
"That is a bit early in Internet history," Aharonian said. "He's got slightly favorable timing.""
Sounds like a golf game or something. "he's got a slightly favorable lie... just in the fairway"
Seriously, the the patent business appears to be booming these days.
I wonder about that. [Diehard Trekkie Rant]In one episode Sisko gives commands to several Galaxy wings. Whether 'Galaxy wing' refers to a small battlegroup built around a Galaxy class starship, or two Galaxy class ships acting together, or something else, this is just one fleet of several mentioned. Leads me to think more than just 6 galaxies... Besides, when Starfleet went to wartime production of starships, it undoubtedly built more Galaxies (we know for a fact that the current Galaxies received a refit to make them more survivable).[/Diehard Trekkie Rant] Ennnnnyway... I do agree st ship battles aren't that realistic. One could could say that the star trek series is presented as a pictoral history type thing that is not really representative of what actually happened, just something lay-audiences would understand (I mean, what.. you have computer controlled, light speed propagating weapons, but you fight in visual range of the other ship? mmmmm no.)
Slashdot Mirror
to tell the truth, I'll have to apologize right now... I wasn't really replying to anything in your post, I just made the connection in my brain about what I posted, and looked for a good place to put it to see what people thought. *looks sheepish* I'll try to post earlier in the conversation next time and on a more relevant place
ianal, just using logic here.
"To constitute theft there must be a taking without the owner's consent, and it must be unlawful or felonious; every part of the property stolen must be removed, however slightly, from its former position; and it must be, at least momentarily, in the complete possession of the thief.[from dictionary.com]"
When someone shares a copyrighted file:
1. An illegal copy of the file is made (copying to give away is not fair use). It seems to me that this copy is a separate entity from the original.
2. No matter what temporary file rigamarole is used to get the copy to the other person's computer, at some point an illegal copy is completely brought from the sharer's computer to the sharee's computer.
It seems to me that this should be considered cold blooded theft. A copy of the file is taken in its entirety, and the sellers of the music are deprived of its use (they can no longer sell that copy, because it has been unlawfully taken).
Al Gore already claimed that ;)
If it were a perpetual motion machine or the like, the government would declare it top secret and/or a threat to national security, or barring that, would try to make it and the inventor out to be a crackpot like they did with Tesla... The uspto is just the gov's way of sifting out all the really usefull items from public knowledge and so they can maintain control. (sorry.. rant over. touched a nerve there... I have special nerve endings just for when stories of inventions like this come up)
lol. did a double take, but chalked it up to mistranslation or something. I guess we know which way I lean on this subject...
If I read the article right, it only needs to be passed in its model form in one state (it has passed in two) to be enforceable in all (through the clause that says the vendors choose the state in which they will be sued). They only had to get it passed in one, but we have to pass bomb shelter states in all fifty states to be safe. Am I missing something here? On a side note, it would be interesting to see the reaction of people if every piece of software was required by law to be shipped with a printed version of the eula in a booklet on the back of the package that could be opened and read. Sales would drop dramatically until they stopped putting all the crap in there (or maybe not... I guess there are enough that just wouldn't care.)
Actually there are a few good parallels between real piracy and music piracy... such as the pirates intercepted a ship and looted it before it got to its port, much the same as people who intercept the prereleases and copyrighted music before it gets into the hands of people who would pay money for them. The difference, of course, being that 'looting' copyrighted material doesn't lessen it's value to the other consumers AS MUCH. This is one thing I don't see here... copyright infringement does lower the value of the material by making it more available without payment, thus ensuring that fewer people will have to buy it to enjoy it. This directly hurts the companies, since fewer people have to buy it to enjoy it, and indirectly hurts the consumers, since less revenue means fewer or lower quality products. I can already see the posts after this saying that it is okay since it is the music companies that are being hurt, and that they are already putting out garbage anyways. Ah well, I'll have to agree with that in spirit! ;)
The guy isn't guilty of any crime, but he had to settle as if he were? Someone enlighten me... I'm still forming my opinion on this, but if the RIAA is willing to pursue bully tactics (intimidating people with lawsuits with no merit against people who can't fight back), and price fixing, they shouldn't have the nerve to complain when the consumer resorts to the same things when fighting back. Not saying it's right, or legal, but they shouldn't act shocked when human nature asserts itself. Oh, and the people who ACTUALLY DO something against the law, even when pursuing their own form of justice should be prepared to face the consequences... (in general, not referring to the lawsuits in question)
the problem is getting anyone to admit to it! ;)
I wonder about that. [Diehard Trekkie Rant]In one episode Sisko gives commands to several Galaxy wings. Whether 'Galaxy wing' refers to a small battlegroup built around a Galaxy class starship, or two Galaxy class ships acting together, or something else, this is just one fleet of several mentioned. Leads me to think more than just 6 galaxies... Besides, when Starfleet went to wartime production of starships, it undoubtedly built more Galaxies (we know for a fact that the current Galaxies received a refit to make them more survivable).[/Diehard Trekkie Rant]
Ennnnnyway... I do agree st ship battles aren't that realistic. One could could say that the star trek series is presented as a pictoral history type thing that is not really representative of what actually happened, just something lay-audiences would understand (I mean, what.. you have computer controlled, light speed propagating weapons, but you fight in visual range of the other ship? mmmmm no.)