1. Streaming wasn't the problem; there was an abuse of the streaming which allowed the theft of music.
2. Shoutcast streaming is NOT free. If you do it, BMI and ASACP will send you nice 8.5" x 11" envelope demanding streaming fees, as enforced by US Law.
Does this allow for closed-lid* functionality as well? (That's what I'd kill for in on my iBook)
*Closed-lid mode is when a monitor is plugged into the 'Book, as well as a keyboard, the screen is closed, and machine uses them instead. PowerBooks do this, but iBooks do not.
I was under the impression that if you stream, you pay.
Unfortunately, I've found any and all documentation for the fees, etc. to be sparse and confusing, and that's why I never found a decent answer to my question. I've wanted to know for some time, but the documentation never addresses my questions; they just assume that if you stream, then you're streaming stuff covered by the RIAA, and therefore, they should be payed, even though that might not be the case (as in mine).
What if my stream ONLY plays content that I created and that I hold copyright on? I have a stream that plays a three hour loop of the Best of my radio show, so I own the copyright on that and it's all that's on the stream... Why should I pay the RIAA for this? I'm not signed, and I'm just doing it in an effort to get more listeners for my show (which is webcast by my University, which does/will pay royalities for all music it streams).
Am I the only one who thinks that the parallel between this and the beginning of IBM clones is very striking? I mean, if you look at it, Microsoft owes it's fortunes to the cloners, those who figured out how the system worked, etc. and IBM tried to supress that (not that Microsoft minded). Now, 20 years later, Microsoft has something that people are messing with, and sure enough, they're not liking it. What will this lead to?
If you guys are weeting your pants over this, you have to be trying Chimera on Mac... no XUL, so that overhead is spared; you do get a feel for how quick the Gecko engine can be.
Hardware tweaks are very difficult though - no conventional changable BIOS.
Did you ever consider that having a changable BIOS is a flaw? If you are trying to make computer technology which is simple for people to use, configuring a BIOS is not something that would naturally come into question.
Slashdot Mirror
There's a great service for the Chicago area at:
http://www.gcmtravel.org/
Very handy for a metro area with as many expressways as the Milwaukee-Chicago-Gary area.
1. Streaming wasn't the problem; there was an abuse of the streaming which allowed the theft of music.
2. Shoutcast streaming is NOT free. If you do it, BMI and ASACP will send you nice 8.5" x 11" envelope demanding streaming fees, as enforced by US Law.
Does this allow for closed-lid* functionality as well? (That's what I'd kill for in on my iBook)
*Closed-lid mode is when a monitor is plugged into the 'Book, as well as a keyboard, the screen is closed, and machine uses them instead. PowerBooks do this, but iBooks do not.
I was under the impression that if you stream, you pay.
Unfortunately, I've found any and all documentation for the fees, etc. to be sparse and confusing, and that's why I never found a decent answer to my question. I've wanted to know for some time, but the documentation never addresses my questions; they just assume that if you stream, then you're streaming stuff covered by the RIAA, and therefore, they should be payed, even though that might not be the case (as in mine).
What if my stream ONLY plays content that I created and that I hold copyright on? I have a stream that plays a three hour loop of the Best of my radio show, so I own the copyright on that and it's all that's on the stream... Why should I pay the RIAA for this? I'm not signed, and I'm just doing it in an effort to get more listeners for my show (which is webcast by my University, which does/will pay royalities for all music it streams).
Any insights would be greatly appreciated...
I'm supposing that this makes the Mac the anti-Gentoo, since it "just works"?
Am I the only one who thinks that the parallel between this and the beginning of IBM clones is very striking? I mean, if you look at it, Microsoft owes it's fortunes to the cloners, those who figured out how the system worked, etc. and IBM tried to supress that (not that Microsoft minded). Now, 20 years later, Microsoft has something that people are messing with, and sure enough, they're not liking it. What will this lead to?
If you guys are weeting your pants over this, you have to be trying Chimera on Mac... no XUL, so that overhead is spared; you do get a feel for how quick the Gecko engine can be.
Hardware tweaks are very difficult though - no conventional changable BIOS. Did you ever consider that having a changable BIOS is a flaw? If you are trying to make computer technology which is simple for people to use, configuring a BIOS is not something that would naturally come into question.