You have not made a single on-topic response to me
Not sense "Please kill yourself," no. Should I have?
and instead have beaten a strawman to death
Sounds like you're a bit confused about the definition of the term "straw man." I'm not making a straw man argument. I'm not making an argument at all. I'm simply telling you that you're childish antics are boring.
I throw these out there for no real reason but the common interest.
I've got a G4 with an 80 GB root drive which I use all day, every day. Well, almost. It's never had anything done to it, filesystem-maintenance-wise, since I last did an OS upgrade last fall, about eight months ago.
Out of 319507 non-zero data forks total, 317386 (99.34 %) have no fragmentation.
Then why do we have Americans being laid off to move jobs overseas- if not to take advantage of the fact that costs are relative?
That's not what you said. You said that the cost of labor is zero. You said that linking value to labor is meaningless. These things are untrue.
Ecconomics is a form of philosophy
Obviously false.
The so-called "natural" rights of property owners aren't natural at all
You haven't been reading your Locke. Why do you bother coming to class if you're not going to do the homework?
For instance- the economic system of the Native Americans held that land can't be owned
Heh. That's an oft-repeated myth. Property rights, including the rights of landowners, were vitally important to many native American tribes. Particularly the relatively advanced tribes of the Pacific Northwest like the Tlingit and the Haida.
In fact, those tribes also had intellectual property traditions. It was considered a crime to sing another clan's songs without permission, for example.
The whole concept of ownership itself is just a philosophical construct
Sure. You just seem to be unaware of its philosophical basis, that's all.
Also, you keep confusing philosophy with economics. You really should get over that. It's gonna keep tripping you up.
there's nothing in nature that would insist upon us having a concept of ownership.
Better rethink that. Consider, for example, the fact that all animals are, to a greater or lesser extent, territorial. Animals "understand" the concept of ownership very well, particularly the concept of the ownership of land. The idea of ownership is very much rooted in nature.
But people who are being tortured will do anything, especially lie, to escape torture.
Funny thing: that's not actually true. When you're subjected to torture, especially the psychological kind like being deprived of sleep for days, you lose the ability to lie. It becomes psychologically impossible, or at least very difficult. You might try to lie, but your attempts would out as incoherent ramblings. Asked the same question twice in a row, you'd give two different answers.
By that point, you know that your lies aren't fooling anybody, and you give in to the fact that your only choice is to tell the truth.
This is called your "breaking point."
The psychological effects of torture are very well understood. We've been doing it for a long time.
The point: torture is not only immoral, it is not even a very good way to get information.
It is definitely immoral, except in situations where it's morally imperative. And it's actually a very good way to get information, which is why we do it. And by "we" I don't just mean Americans. I mean human beings in general. We learned thousands of years ago that torture is a great way to get to the truth, so when we need to get to the truth, that's the method we use.
In all fairness, there are some applications for Mac OS X that require three mouse buttons: Maya and Shake come to mind. The thing about these applications, though, is that they're IRIX apps that were ported to the Mac. They don't follow the Mac human interface guidelines.
That's not necessarily to say that these are not well-designed applications. It's just that these applications have a very specific user base.
Did you know that he wrote in fragments, and the context of those fragments is not relevant to understanding his philosophical position?
Aside from being untrue, that's just wrongheaded. Context is always important.
If you apply reason to your stated opinions, you will find that it is not ethically or morally possible to defend the argument that the ends justify the means.
Of course it is. Let's do it the simplest way possible: body count. If I torture one man to save tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or millions, I've made the right choice.
Let's use the greatest-net-benefit calculus. Same result.
In fact, the only moral/ethical decision calculus under which torture isn't justified in that situation is the naive absolutist one.
So, my dear troll, what would you have done during WWII when the US destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Tortured the living hell out of any Americans who could have given me information about the bombings before the fact.
Of course, in the end, that probably would have resulted in more deaths, because thwarting the bombings would have necessitated an Allied invasion of the home islands, with casualties in the million-plus range, as opposed to the 'prox 200,000 who died as it was.
But a Japanese soldier wouldn't have been responsible for thinking that far ahead. He would have been responsible only for doing his duty to protect his country and his people. So the answer is obvious.
But please, humor me for a minute: will a clean install preserve things like user accounts, network settings, install applications, application settings under/Library, etc?
Okay, let me get this straight. You're allegedly responsible for all these Macs, and yet you don't know the difference between an install, an archive-and-install, and an upgrade?
And the thing about NIS... I call bullshit. Nobody, but nobody, bothers to use NIS on Mac OS X any more. Open Directory is so superior, it's not worth the trouble.
I think you're either making stuff up to get attention, or especially and unusually clueless.
Nietschze said a couple of things you may want to ponder
He said a lot more than that. Please don't pull pithy aphorisms out of context and use them to try to sound insightful.
BTW if you *read* the Geneva convention, you will find that pretty much every example you suggest would be considered torture.
Couldn't care less. If it were my choice, and I were faced with having to decide between complying with the Geneva Convention and saving the lives of innocent people, man, I don't even have to think about it.
If nothing else, would you be okay if the bad guys used any of your examples on captured US troops?
If US troops were planning to blow up an enemy city filled with noncombatants, I'd insist on it. Hell, out of the way, I'll do it myself.
If not, perhaps you should re-consider your stated opinion.
Obviously there was a little bit of miscommunication between the marketing person who wrote the press release and the developer who told them what COM is.
Erm, no. Not exactly. Rather, the developer told the marketing guy what COM is, and the marketing guy replied, "Nobody cares about that. Tell me why people should care." The developer then rambled for ten minutes about remote object invocation and locational transparency. The marketing guy got up right in the middle of a sentence and said, "Lets you control iTunes, kinda like AppleScript. Got it. Thanks."
I wonder what age I'll be when I have that much storage space on my computer.
For about $800, plus shipping and handling, you can have it right now.
Two-hundred-fifty-gigabyte hard drives are selling for about $199 via mail order. If I wanted to spend a bit more than $800, I could put a terabyte in my G4 right now, today.
I've got a quarter of a T right now, and it's going to be time to add more soon. No need to quadruple it, but I might double it.
You can suggest whatever you want. But if you'll notice, I'm not the one acting like a truculent ten-year-old who's snuck into the basement to play with his dad's PC.
If you'd read the rest of my post, you'd've seen that Darwin's source has been given away.
Heh. I don't really need to read your post to know that. I have a copy of the source tree right here.
There's really not much to Darwin. It's not an operating system. It's just a kernel. Apple loses nothing by giving it away, and gains the assistance of every developer in the world who wants to chip in.
The Darwin license, incidentally, is totally incompatible with the GPL... thank heavens.
Neither the BSD nor the GPL prevents them from selling it; only from keeping the source code from those they sell it to.
Blah blah blah. The GPL is not an option, period, end of paragraph. Apple's not going to sign up for anything that requires them to give away their intellectual property. They might choose to, but then again they might not. It's going to be a choice, not a requirement that they have to live up to.
Why not make the mouse type an option at time of purchase?
Because Apple's customers don't want to have to deal with it. Remember what I said about how annoying all of your customers is no good?
Those who want the traditional Mac single button mouse gets it and those who request a multiple or scroll version gets one.
That's exactly how it is now. Except the people who want the eleven-button HOTAS mouse with the joystick and the two tiny wheels also get a free zero-button mouse for their trouble.
You just illustrated the whole problem with the issue. You do something they don't like, and instantly you're a felon.
Two things. 1. It's not just "something they don't like," it's something that's been made illegal by our elected representatives. 2. It's hardly instant. There's a threshold. If you do this much piracy in a 180-day period, you're a felon. I think it's pirating $1,000 worth of music in 6 months, but I won't promise that. Check the statutes.
All Power Macs come with graphics cards in them that have two outputs: one ADC and one DVI. (ADC is a connector type that carries DVI, USB, and power all on one cable.)
The Mac comes with a little 6" adapter that plugs into the DVI port and comes out VGA.
So yeah, on any given Power Mac, you can plug in an Apple monitor with ADC, any digital or analog DVI display, or any VGA display.
Hey dipshit, Apple is about usability and efficiency.
No. Apple's core philosophy is to make great products. Sometimes great products have an element of efficiency or ease of use, but more often they're great for other reasons. A great product can be highly baroque, for instance, because baroque things can be beautiful.
Having to use two hands to do what can easily be done with one is antithetical to Apple's modus.
That's why nothing in Mac OS X requires the use of either a control-click or a second-mouse-button click. Some highly specialized applications like Shake and Maya do, but they're hardly common.
Once you have used a programmable three button, scrolling mouse, particularly with Expose, you can't go back to a one button mouse.
I use a zero-button mouse because I have repetitive-stress injuries in my hands from years of typing. Clicking with just one finger is a little painful for me.
My niece uses a zero-button mouse on her mom's Mac because she's too young to have good manual dexterity. So not having to worry about any buttons is easier for her. Just mash.
My mom uses a zero-button mouse for the same reason.
See, the whole "programmable three button, scrolling mouse" thing is unique to you. It's how you like to work. And that's great, because for just a few bucks you can buy a mouse and do what you want.
The rest of us like things just the way they are, thanks.
As for the caps, that denoted SHOUTING, because I was yelling at Apple, who keeps shooting themselves in the foot
Apple has been consistently profitable since 1998. That's something like 24 consecutive quarters of profitability, which is virtually unprecedented in their industry.
What are they shooting themselves in again?
I WANT to buy an Apple mouse because Apple makes excellent products.
Apple doesn't want to sell you one because there's no good business case for it. Railing about it won't help.
That could easily change, and millions of dollars could be made, with one reasonable decision.
Millions of dollars? Just how much do you expect Apple to sell these mice for, exactly? Say they sell them for a reasonable price: $20. They'd have to sell 50,000 of them just to make a million dollars in revenue. The profit on a $20 mouse would be, at the very most, about five dollars. Now we're talking about 200,000 units sold to generate a measly million bucks in gross profit.
Just how many of these suckers do you think Apple will sell? One for every ten Macs? One for every 20?
Oh, that's right. You think every Mac owner will buy one. Riiiight.
Don't quit your day-job, okay? It's clear that you've got no head for business.
Which, with Iraq's shelf-life problem of the time would have been mostly harmless goo
That's only true of actual agents. The weapons we're talking about here were composed of two binary reagents that, when combined, form unstable chemical agents.
Look, we look at it this way: you don't want nerve gas to hang around long. If it does, you run the risk of exposing your own men to it. So you want nerve gas to degrade in minutes, or hours at the most.
On the other hand, you don't want to have to process and dispose of chemical shells every year or two. So you want your reagents to be highly stable.
Your so-called Czech connection consists of one of the hijackers maybe metting ONCE with an Iraqi Miliary Intelligence officer in April 2001
Okay. So? Do you have some kind of information in your hands that disproves the link?
The Ansar al-Islam - Al Qaida connection may or may not be real
No, it's real all right. We have financial records linking them. Ansar al-Islam was founded in late 2001 or early 2002 with $300,000 of Osama bin Laden's own money.
but it doesn't matter as links between the ultra religious sect and the militantly athiest Saddam Hussein remain circumstancial and second hand.
Except for the fact that the link between Ansar al-Islam and Iraqi Military Intelligence is well documented. You're just ignoring facts because you'd rather believe that Saddam was unjustly overthrown by the big, bad Americans.
Saddam was actually working with Bush to cement Bush's presidency
The USB specification defines different device classes. The class called "input devices" is made up of keyboards, mice, and similar things. Scanners aren't in the "input devices" class. They're in the "image devices" classes.
It's really not that hard, you know. You should be able to grasp this.
Nonsense. It deals with all aspects of the rights of the creator of a work. Which is why, for instance, copyright law governs when, how, and how often a radio station can play your CD.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you even see your own hypocrisy?
Nuh-uh.
You have not made a single on-topic response to me
Not sense "Please kill yourself," no. Should I have?
and instead have beaten a strawman to death
Sounds like you're a bit confused about the definition of the term "straw man." I'm not making a straw man argument. I'm not making an argument at all. I'm simply telling you that you're childish antics are boring.
I've got a G4 with an 80 GB root drive which I use all day, every day. Well, almost. It's never had anything done to it, filesystem-maintenance-wise, since I last did an OS upgrade last fall, about eight months ago.Not too shabby, methinks.
Then why do we have Americans being laid off to move jobs overseas- if not to take advantage of the fact that costs are relative?
That's not what you said. You said that the cost of labor is zero. You said that linking value to labor is meaningless. These things are untrue.
Ecconomics is a form of philosophy
Obviously false.
The so-called "natural" rights of property owners aren't natural at all
You haven't been reading your Locke. Why do you bother coming to class if you're not going to do the homework?
For instance- the economic system of the Native Americans held that land can't be owned
Heh. That's an oft-repeated myth. Property rights, including the rights of landowners, were vitally important to many native American tribes. Particularly the relatively advanced tribes of the Pacific Northwest like the Tlingit and the Haida.
In fact, those tribes also had intellectual property traditions. It was considered a crime to sing another clan's songs without permission, for example.
The whole concept of ownership itself is just a philosophical construct
Sure. You just seem to be unaware of its philosophical basis, that's all.
Also, you keep confusing philosophy with economics. You really should get over that. It's gonna keep tripping you up.
there's nothing in nature that would insist upon us having a concept of ownership.
Better rethink that. Consider, for example, the fact that all animals are, to a greater or lesser extent, territorial. Animals "understand" the concept of ownership very well, particularly the concept of the ownership of land. The idea of ownership is very much rooted in nature.
But people who are being tortured will do anything, especially lie, to escape torture.
Funny thing: that's not actually true. When you're subjected to torture, especially the psychological kind like being deprived of sleep for days, you lose the ability to lie. It becomes psychologically impossible, or at least very difficult. You might try to lie, but your attempts would out as incoherent ramblings. Asked the same question twice in a row, you'd give two different answers.
By that point, you know that your lies aren't fooling anybody, and you give in to the fact that your only choice is to tell the truth.
This is called your "breaking point."
The psychological effects of torture are very well understood. We've been doing it for a long time.
The point: torture is not only immoral, it is not even a very good way to get information.
It is definitely immoral, except in situations where it's morally imperative. And it's actually a very good way to get information, which is why we do it. And by "we" I don't just mean Americans. I mean human beings in general. We learned thousands of years ago that torture is a great way to get to the truth, so when we need to get to the truth, that's the method we use.
In all fairness, there are some applications for Mac OS X that require three mouse buttons: Maya and Shake come to mind. The thing about these applications, though, is that they're IRIX apps that were ported to the Mac. They don't follow the Mac human interface guidelines.
That's not necessarily to say that these are not well-designed applications. It's just that these applications have a very specific user base.
Did you know that he wrote in fragments, and the context of those fragments is not relevant to understanding his philosophical position?
Aside from being untrue, that's just wrongheaded. Context is always important.
If you apply reason to your stated opinions, you will find that it is not ethically or morally possible to defend the argument that the ends justify the means.
Of course it is. Let's do it the simplest way possible: body count. If I torture one man to save tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or millions, I've made the right choice.
Let's use the greatest-net-benefit calculus. Same result.
In fact, the only moral/ethical decision calculus under which torture isn't justified in that situation is the naive absolutist one.
So, my dear troll, what would you have done during WWII when the US destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Tortured the living hell out of any Americans who could have given me information about the bombings before the fact.
Of course, in the end, that probably would have resulted in more deaths, because thwarting the bombings would have necessitated an Allied invasion of the home islands, with casualties in the million-plus range, as opposed to the 'prox 200,000 who died as it was.
But a Japanese soldier wouldn't have been responsible for thinking that far ahead. He would have been responsible only for doing his duty to protect his country and his people. So the answer is obvious.
I'm really not seeing your point here.
Riiight... because attacking my personality instead of actually reading my entire posts is so mature...
This coming from Mr. "Please Kill Yourself."
Your mom must be so proud.
Yes, something like LDAP &/or Kerberos would be nicer in the long run
Wow. 1992 called. They want their cutting-edge technology back.
based on what we're trying to do, upgrade installs seem to make the most sense
Then you deserve what you get. Quitcher bitchin.
and the short cord on the apple pro mouse makes it REALLY hard to use
Why? Doesn't it just plug into the keyboard?
But please, humor me for a minute: will a clean install preserve things like user accounts, network settings, install applications, application settings under /Library, etc?
Okay, let me get this straight. You're allegedly responsible for all these Macs, and yet you don't know the difference between an install, an archive-and-install, and an upgrade?
And the thing about NIS... I call bullshit. Nobody, but nobody, bothers to use NIS on Mac OS X any more. Open Directory is so superior, it's not worth the trouble.
I think you're either making stuff up to get attention, or especially and unusually clueless.
Nietschze said a couple of things you may want to ponder
He said a lot more than that. Please don't pull pithy aphorisms out of context and use them to try to sound insightful.
BTW if you *read* the Geneva convention, you will find that pretty much every example you suggest would be considered torture.
Couldn't care less. If it were my choice, and I were faced with having to decide between complying with the Geneva Convention and saving the lives of innocent people, man, I don't even have to think about it.
If nothing else, would you be okay if the bad guys used any of your examples on captured US troops?
If US troops were planning to blow up an enemy city filled with noncombatants, I'd insist on it. Hell, out of the way, I'll do it myself.
If not, perhaps you should re-consider your stated opinion.
Don't be so smug. Use your brain.
Obviously there was a little bit of miscommunication between the marketing person who wrote the press release and the developer who told them what COM is.
Erm, no. Not exactly. Rather, the developer told the marketing guy what COM is, and the marketing guy replied, "Nobody cares about that. Tell me why people should care." The developer then rambled for ten minutes about remote object invocation and locational transparency. The marketing guy got up right in the middle of a sentence and said, "Lets you control iTunes, kinda like AppleScript. Got it. Thanks."
I recently upgraded eight Macs to 10.3, and they generally took 35-50 minutes to upgrade
Upgrades take considerably longer. They're also generally a dumb idea. Clean installs work much better. At the very least, do an archive-and-install.
You say you got a 400mhz G3 iMac to install Panther in 10 minutes? I say baloney.
Come to my house. I'll show you. And we'll have pie.
I was taking such careful notes because I was looking for ways to speed things up
1. Don't upgrade.
2. If you're doing that many machines, use a freakin' iPod for chrissakes.
Sorry, but I don't believe you.
No need to apologize to me. You're the one who, by my count, spent 4 1/2 hours installing--oh, excuse me, upgrading--Mac OS X. Sheesh.
For the price they want, I could still run my own server.
Unless the plan changes pretty drastically, Gmail is going to be free.
Thats like - a Life time of Mail (TM)
Not really. The Big Thinkers (TM) say that a lifetime's worth of data storage will be around a petabyte. That counts video, too.
For interesting reading, google "Memex" and "MyLifeBits."
I wonder what age I'll be when I have that much storage space on my computer.
For about $800, plus shipping and handling, you can have it right now.
Two-hundred-fifty-gigabyte hard drives are selling for about $199 via mail order. If I wanted to spend a bit more than $800, I could put a terabyte in my G4 right now, today.
I've got a quarter of a T right now, and it's going to be time to add more soon. No need to quadruple it, but I might double it.
May I suggest you follow your own advice?
You can suggest whatever you want. But if you'll notice, I'm not the one acting like a truculent ten-year-old who's snuck into the basement to play with his dad's PC.
If you'd read the rest of my post, you'd've seen that Darwin's source has been given away.
Heh. I don't really need to read your post to know that. I have a copy of the source tree right here.
There's really not much to Darwin. It's not an operating system. It's just a kernel. Apple loses nothing by giving it away, and gains the assistance of every developer in the world who wants to chip in.
The Darwin license, incidentally, is totally incompatible with the GPL... thank heavens.
Neither the BSD nor the GPL prevents them from selling it; only from keeping the source code from those they sell it to.
Blah blah blah. The GPL is not an option, period, end of paragraph. Apple's not going to sign up for anything that requires them to give away their intellectual property. They might choose to, but then again they might not. It's going to be a choice, not a requirement that they have to live up to.
Why not make the mouse type an option at time of purchase?
Because Apple's customers don't want to have to deal with it. Remember what I said about how annoying all of your customers is no good?
Those who want the traditional Mac single button mouse gets it and those who request a multiple or scroll version gets one.
That's exactly how it is now. Except the people who want the eleven-button HOTAS mouse with the joystick and the two tiny wheels also get a free zero-button mouse for their trouble.
You just illustrated the whole problem with the issue. You do something they don't like, and instantly you're a felon.
Two things. 1. It's not just "something they don't like," it's something that's been made illegal by our elected representatives. 2. It's hardly instant. There's a threshold. If you do this much piracy in a 180-day period, you're a felon. I think it's pirating $1,000 worth of music in 6 months, but I won't promise that. Check the statutes.
You've got that a little backwards.
All Power Macs come with graphics cards in them that have two outputs: one ADC and one DVI. (ADC is a connector type that carries DVI, USB, and power all on one cable.)
The Mac comes with a little 6" adapter that plugs into the DVI port and comes out VGA.
So yeah, on any given Power Mac, you can plug in an Apple monitor with ADC, any digital or analog DVI display, or any VGA display.
Hey dipshit, Apple is about usability and efficiency.
No. Apple's core philosophy is to make great products. Sometimes great products have an element of efficiency or ease of use, but more often they're great for other reasons. A great product can be highly baroque, for instance, because baroque things can be beautiful.
Having to use two hands to do what can easily be done with one is antithetical to Apple's modus.
That's why nothing in Mac OS X requires the use of either a control-click or a second-mouse-button click. Some highly specialized applications like Shake and Maya do, but they're hardly common.
Once you have used a programmable three button, scrolling mouse, particularly with Expose, you can't go back to a one button mouse.
I use a zero-button mouse because I have repetitive-stress injuries in my hands from years of typing. Clicking with just one finger is a little painful for me.
My niece uses a zero-button mouse on her mom's Mac because she's too young to have good manual dexterity. So not having to worry about any buttons is easier for her. Just mash.
My mom uses a zero-button mouse for the same reason.
See, the whole "programmable three button, scrolling mouse" thing is unique to you. It's how you like to work. And that's great, because for just a few bucks you can buy a mouse and do what you want.
The rest of us like things just the way they are, thanks.
As for the caps, that denoted SHOUTING, because I was yelling at Apple, who keeps shooting themselves in the foot
Apple has been consistently profitable since 1998. That's something like 24 consecutive quarters of profitability, which is virtually unprecedented in their industry.
What are they shooting themselves in again?
I WANT to buy an Apple mouse because Apple makes excellent products.
Apple doesn't want to sell you one because there's no good business case for it. Railing about it won't help.
That could easily change, and millions of dollars could be made, with one reasonable decision.
Millions of dollars? Just how much do you expect Apple to sell these mice for, exactly? Say they sell them for a reasonable price: $20. They'd have to sell 50,000 of them just to make a million dollars in revenue. The profit on a $20 mouse would be, at the very most, about five dollars. Now we're talking about 200,000 units sold to generate a measly million bucks in gross profit.
Just how many of these suckers do you think Apple will sell? One for every ten Macs? One for every 20?
Oh, that's right. You think every Mac owner will buy one. Riiiight.
Don't quit your day-job, okay? It's clear that you've got no head for business.
Which, with Iraq's shelf-life problem of the time would have been mostly harmless goo
That's only true of actual agents. The weapons we're talking about here were composed of two binary reagents that, when combined, form unstable chemical agents.
Look, we look at it this way: you don't want nerve gas to hang around long. If it does, you run the risk of exposing your own men to it. So you want nerve gas to degrade in minutes, or hours at the most.
On the other hand, you don't want to have to process and dispose of chemical shells every year or two. So you want your reagents to be highly stable.
Your so-called Czech connection consists of one of the hijackers maybe metting ONCE with an Iraqi Miliary Intelligence officer in April 2001
Okay. So? Do you have some kind of information in your hands that disproves the link?
The Ansar al-Islam - Al Qaida connection may or may not be real
No, it's real all right. We have financial records linking them. Ansar al-Islam was founded in late 2001 or early 2002 with $300,000 of Osama bin Laden's own money.
but it doesn't matter as links between the ultra religious sect and the militantly athiest Saddam Hussein remain circumstancial and second hand.
Except for the fact that the link between Ansar al-Islam and Iraqi Military Intelligence is well documented. You're just ignoring facts because you'd rather believe that Saddam was unjustly overthrown by the big, bad Americans.
Saddam was actually working with Bush to cement Bush's presidency
Ah. Now the tin-foil hat stuff comes out.
Yawn.
Sigh.
The USB specification defines different device classes. The class called "input devices" is made up of keyboards, mice, and similar things. Scanners aren't in the "input devices" class. They're in the "image devices" classes.
It's really not that hard, you know. You should be able to grasp this.
Copyright only deals with distribution.
Nonsense. It deals with all aspects of the rights of the creator of a work. Which is why, for instance, copyright law governs when, how, and how often a radio station can play your CD.