That is very likely true, but how many people really do this? Downloading a whole movie and burning a DVD has got to be a time-consuming pain in the ass. I've never even tried it myself; I'd rather just go to Blockbuster and rent the silly DVD. I don't even have a DVD burner because I don't think I'd get enough use out of it to justify the cost.
Of course, there are some people who will do just about anything for the sake of "beating the system", but I doubt there are enough such people to really jeopardize Hollywood's income.
...Yes, Hollywood DOES have the right to make money....
No they don't. They have the right to TRY to make money by making movies that people want to see. They have no right to expect a profit if they make crap, no matter how much they spend making the crap.
I think you're full of it. SCO's refusal to identify the alleged offending code is what is preventing any corrective action. IANAL, but I'm pretty sure this will prevent them from making any claims based on the duration of the infringement.
Can a company that makes a product dictate the price a retailer must charge when selling it? If not, how is this idea better than (for example) Blockbuster buying a pile of DVD's and then renting them out very cheaply, maybe even for free? Now, Blockbuster probably wouldn't do such a thing, but a co-op "video store" could.
This might be a helluva lot less complicated than any arrangement that involves issuing stock.
But instead SCO took a confrontational approach knowing that IBM would counterattack. Wonder why.
Perhaps they are in the thrall of a fanatasy that killing off Linux would result in Linux users switching to SCO. The way they're dragging this out, particulary WRT revealing the alleged IP violations, seems calculated to do the greatest possible damage to Linux.
The problem is that the effect they are aiming for is to stop businesses from adopting Linux. In this way they hope to encourage IBM and other organizations to buy them out to avoid more damage to the Linux market.
I'd call that strategy "extortion". However, it also makes me think of an infantile tantrum.
Got a replacement from WD (which was a refurbished drive and makes "clicking" sounds occasionally.
Watch out for that "clicking" noise. I had a WD drive that did that for the first three months that I had it, then it suddenly starting turning lots of read errors. The WD diagnostics said the drive was fine until the read errors started happening. I am now quite skeptical of the usefulness of these "diagnostics" for predicting failures. I suspect all they're good for is telling you whether or not the drive is broken badly enough to qualify for an RMA.
Does Windows expire if you don't pay a monthly fee?
Not yet, but I'll bet that's Microsoft's wet dream. I'll also bet that's what happens as soon as most computers have the necessary hardware to support Palladium.
ok.. I am so sick of seeing this.. the xbox modding may or may not be a 'DMCA violation' but that is not the point.. xbox modding is ILLEGAL in any country with even the most basic of electronic intellectual property laws as you are using an ILLEGALLY modified BIOS image.. so please, stop acting as if it is evil of the microsoft oppressors to be claiming this as so.. so believe what you want, but unless you are using cromwell, xbox modding on the most basic level is equivalent to piracy
Just out of curiosity, where is the restriction on xbox usage spelled out? Is it a plain and obvious label on the outside of the package that a buyer can see before they pay for it? Or
is it hidden somewhere inside the package?
Re:Lots of good info here...
on
I, Spammer
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I think Scelson greatly overstated his response rate. I've seen web pages offering spamming-for-hire services, and the response rates they claimed were generally in the range of 50 to 100 responses per 100,000 sent.
Also, I never saw any statements about the kinds of responses. I'm inclined to think the spammers-for-hire count all kinds of responses (including the death threats) to make their numbers look better.
If there's been price-fixing, it certainly hasn't been very competently done. DRAM prices have been in the flusher for quite a while now, and the manufacturers are losing money at an amazing rate.
If SMART were to be useful, the HD would beep at you, or blink its LED, or the OS would annoy you with popup messages so you knew, "oh shit, I gotta back up my stuff to somewhere else, NOW!"
I don't think you'll be seeing that. My cynical opinion is that SMART is mostly a way to delay user awareness of a problem until the last possible moment - hopefully, after the warranty has expired.
AFAIK, Murdoch's Fox News is the only news outlet ever to win a lawsuit by insisting they are under no obligation to report truthfully. Try a Google search for "fox news lawsuit jane monsanto" for more info.
The Iraq war coverage frequently mentioned that the U.S. military had been making efforts to take Iraq's state-run broadcasters off the air, and had found it difficult because there were so many backups (such as mobile transmitters). Clearly, both sides regard control of broadcast media to be an important asset. Yet, back home in the U.S. the government is giving that control to media mega-conglomerates. Why?
I think there's a lot of "quid pro quo" going on between the government and the media. Murdoch has repeatedly demonstrated that he will use his media outlets to support politicians that do his bidding and attack those that do not. The politicians don't seem to consider the long-term consequences: The bigger Murdoch gets, the more control he has over the politicians.
Sorry, I've already solved it. Take two bodies, put them in a vacuum with no other external forces, and have them orbit each other without decay. There. Perpetual motion.
Maybe. If Einstein was right, the system will slowly lose energy by emitting gravitational radiation.
The last time I tried to install a Microsoft security patch, I was confronted by an EULA that would have given Microsoft the right to alter my system at any future time without my knowledge or approval. The EULA went on to say that such alterations might prevent me from playing some media, and that Microsoft could not be held liable for my loss of functionality.
How do you think this might effect a content producer's choice of media format? If you were a content producer, would you have second thoughts about using a format that Microsoft could break at any future time? Is it possible that you would be inclined to chose Microsoft's preferred media formats to avoid such dificulties?
At the risk of sounding trite, consider what you can do to have a less destructive impact on our planet, even if it doesn't involve thousands of gallons of shit a day.
I'm a telecommuter. My 3.5-year-old car has less than 6,000 miles on it, so I'm using less gasoline and producing a lot less pollution than most commuters.
We supposedly have all this excess bandwidth left over from the dotcom bubble, so I think more people should use it in this manner. Also, buying OPEC oil so we can gather together in big buildings to make nice targets for terrorists doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.
Or would you prefer we go back to the old days when lawyers couldn't advertise in any way at all, and if you wanted legal representation you'd wind up more or less picking a name out of the phone book with no indication as to whether or not you'd actually want to hire them?
I remember those days: That's when people in my state (N.J.) could pay for a year's automobile insurance premiums with a single check, instead of needing a payment plan like they do today.
These days, the businesses that buy the most full-page ads in the yellow pages are law firms that take accidental injury cases on a contingent-fee basis. AFAIK, a single law firm of this kind has bought the most expensive ad in the entire phone book (the entire back cover) on every phone book in the whole state for as long as that space has been available for advertising.
Slashdot Mirror
...They download to avoid paying. ...
That is very likely true, but how many people really do this? Downloading a whole movie and burning a DVD has got to be a time-consuming pain in the ass. I've never even tried it myself; I'd rather just go to Blockbuster and rent the silly DVD. I don't even have a DVD burner because I don't think I'd get enough use out of it to justify the cost.
Of course, there are some people who will do just about anything for the sake of "beating the system", but I doubt there are enough such people to really jeopardize Hollywood's income.
...Yes, Hollywood DOES have the right to make money. ...
No they don't. They have the right to TRY to make money by making movies that people want to see. They have no right to expect a profit if they make crap, no matter how much they spend making the crap.
I think you're full of it. SCO's refusal to identify the alleged offending code is what is preventing any corrective action. IANAL, but I'm pretty sure this will prevent them from making any claims based on the duration of the infringement.
I personally hope the FTC is watching them very closely.
I think you meant the SEC, which is the agency that would be interested in insider trading.
What a fscking brilliant plan: Stop people from doing the things that make them want to buy your service.
Can a company that makes a product dictate the price a retailer must charge when selling it? If not, how is this idea better than (for example) Blockbuster buying a pile of DVD's and then renting them out very cheaply, maybe even for free? Now, Blockbuster probably wouldn't do such a thing, but a co-op "video store" could.
This might be a helluva lot less complicated than any arrangement that involves issuing stock.
... is going to be finding enough people who are willing to testify that they were stupid enough to click on the silly ads.
But instead SCO took a confrontational approach knowing that IBM would counterattack. Wonder why.
Perhaps they are in the thrall of a fanatasy that killing off Linux would result in Linux users switching to SCO. The way they're dragging this out, particulary WRT revealing the alleged IP violations, seems calculated to do the greatest possible damage to Linux.
The problem is that the effect they are aiming for is to stop businesses from adopting Linux. In this way they hope to encourage IBM and other organizations to buy them out to avoid more damage to the Linux market.
I'd call that strategy "extortion". However, it also makes me think of an infantile tantrum.
Got a replacement from WD (which was a refurbished drive and makes "clicking" sounds occasionally.
Watch out for that "clicking" noise. I had a WD drive that did that for the first three months that I had it, then it suddenly starting turning lots of read errors. The WD diagnostics said the drive was fine until the read errors started happening. I am now quite skeptical of the usefulness of these "diagnostics" for predicting failures. I suspect all they're good for is telling you whether or not the drive is broken badly enough to qualify for an RMA.
Does Windows expire if you don't pay a monthly fee?
Not yet, but I'll bet that's Microsoft's wet dream. I'll also bet that's what happens as soon as most computers have the necessary hardware to support Palladium.
ok.. I am so sick of seeing this.. the xbox modding may or may not be a 'DMCA violation' but that is not the point.. xbox modding is ILLEGAL in any country with even the most basic of electronic intellectual property laws as you are using an ILLEGALLY modified BIOS image.. so please, stop acting as if it is evil of the microsoft oppressors to be claiming this as so.. so believe what you want, but unless you are using cromwell, xbox modding on the most basic level is equivalent to piracy
Just out of curiosity, where is the restriction on xbox usage spelled out? Is it a plain and obvious label on the outside of the package that a buyer can see before they pay for it? Or is it hidden somewhere inside the package?
I think Scelson greatly overstated his response rate. I've seen web pages offering spamming-for-hire services, and the response rates they claimed were generally in the range of 50 to 100 responses per 100,000 sent.
Also, I never saw any statements about the kinds of responses. I'm inclined to think the spammers-for-hire count all kinds of responses (including the death threats) to make their numbers look better.
If there's been price-fixing, it certainly hasn't been very competently done. DRAM prices have been in the flusher for quite a while now, and the manufacturers are losing money at an amazing rate.
If SMART were to be useful, the HD would beep at you, or blink its LED, or the OS would annoy you with popup messages so you knew, "oh shit, I gotta back up my stuff to somewhere else, NOW!"
I don't think you'll be seeing that. My cynical opinion is that SMART is mostly a way to delay user awareness of a problem until the last possible moment - hopefully, after the warranty has expired.
AFAIK, Murdoch's Fox News is the only news outlet ever to win a lawsuit by insisting they are under no obligation to report truthfully. Try a Google search for "fox news lawsuit jane monsanto" for more info.
The Iraq war coverage frequently mentioned that the U.S. military had been making efforts to take Iraq's state-run broadcasters off the air, and had found it difficult because there were so many backups (such as mobile transmitters). Clearly, both sides regard control of broadcast media to be an important asset. Yet, back home in the U.S. the government is giving that control to media mega-conglomerates. Why?
I think there's a lot of "quid pro quo" going on between the government and the media. Murdoch has repeatedly demonstrated that he will use his media outlets to support politicians that do his bidding and attack those that do not. The politicians don't seem to consider the long-term consequences: The bigger Murdoch gets, the more control he has over the politicians.
Sorry, I've already solved it. Take two bodies, put them in a vacuum with no other external forces, and have them orbit each other without decay. There. Perpetual motion.
Maybe. If Einstein was right, the system will slowly lose energy by emitting gravitational radiation.
Where's the cat with buttered toast attached to its back?
The judges are still out on that one, it hasn't stopped moving yet.
Since when can a government entity tell you what to or not to include in your software?
Since when? Ever since Microsoft was found to be a monopoly in a court of law, that's when.
The last time I tried to install a Microsoft security patch, I was confronted by an EULA that would have given Microsoft the right to alter my system at any future time without my knowledge or approval. The EULA went on to say that such alterations might prevent me from playing some media, and that Microsoft could not be held liable for my loss of functionality.
How do you think this might effect a content producer's choice of media format? If you were a content producer, would you have second thoughts about using a format that Microsoft could break at any future time? Is it possible that you would be inclined to chose Microsoft's preferred media formats to avoid such dificulties?
Can we get an override to mod this up to a six? I think it's hilarious.
Twenty years ago, I never would have believed that I'd be rooting for IBM's lawyers today.
At the risk of sounding trite, consider what you can do to have a less destructive impact on our planet, even if it doesn't involve thousands of gallons of shit a day.
I'm a telecommuter. My 3.5-year-old car has less than 6,000 miles on it, so I'm using less gasoline and producing a lot less pollution than most commuters.
We supposedly have all this excess bandwidth left over from the dotcom bubble, so I think more people should use it in this manner. Also, buying OPEC oil so we can gather together in big buildings to make nice targets for terrorists doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.
Or would you prefer we go back to the old days when lawyers couldn't advertise in any way at all, and if you wanted legal representation you'd wind up more or less picking a name out of the phone book with no indication as to whether or not you'd actually want to hire them?
I remember those days: That's when people in my state (N.J.) could pay for a year's automobile insurance premiums with a single check, instead of needing a payment plan like they do today.
These days, the businesses that buy the most full-page ads in the yellow pages are law firms that take accidental injury cases on a contingent-fee basis. AFAIK, a single law firm of this kind has bought the most expensive ad in the entire phone book (the entire back cover) on every phone book in the whole state for as long as that space has been available for advertising.