You seem to be drawing a lot of false assumptions here about what I may or may not do with my computer or what my viewpoints will be. And to be perfectable frank, has no place in this debate.
Now if I give my friend access to my CD collection and he copies the CD, am I the one violating copyright or is he? Now take the P2P example. If I give my friend access to my mp3 collection in order to listen to a song, and he downloads and keeps them, who is the pirate?
Remember, the DMCA says it's the person who does the copying who breaks the copyright, not the person who is holding the material, no matter how flimsy protection is given to the material.
Sharing isn't distributing. I can share my music with my friends in many ways. I can't sell copies of it. P2P will fall under distribution because the RIAA says it will.
Just because a university offers a course in something, doesn't make it relevant. Many universities teach what the professors think is good for teaching.
No, I have no "concrete proof" but then again I was posting my opinion.
I thought a boycott of the RIAA and MPAA was already going on for years. Maybe not a large organized one, but just a bunch of objectors. Which seems funner that they are complaining that sales are down. Well yes you dummies, you are running against a boycott.
Patents and Copyrights working
on
My Visit to SCO
·
· Score: 1
I'm glad we've given SCO exclusive patent / copyright to.. ummmm... their Unix invention... It's really progressing science... Well it's progressing the useful... art.. ummm.. of bullsh*t.
I went music shopping today. First I went to the used CD store, found an album I wanted for $7.50. Then I went to the hip CD store that prides itself for it's good selection. I wasn't able to find any of the artists I was interested in, and I'm not talking mp3.com artists, but actual artists signed to record companies. I guess I'll have to buy online. One of the problems with the internet, a lot of people have gained a lot wider selection taste in music.
I'm sure the street vendors will let the hollywood execs take stuff for free off their carts till they can get themselves back on their feet. Hollywood is that type of place, unlike those no good small town fileswappers.
Okay this seems to be SCO's business plan. Have microsoft give you money in order to make your software copyrights look important. Sue IBM in order to scare other Unix companies from investing in Linux and to keep paying them buckets for using something based on old code. Create enough FUD about Linux that some companies decide to switch to the one Unix like operating system that will never have copyright issues with SCO, SCO's Unix.
And everyone will know about SCO since all the news outlets are giving SCO so much coverage since it involves the media darling Linux. Besides the cost of the lawyers, this is a very cheap way for SCO to rake in a lot of money. Far cheaper then repacking Linux over and over again.
With stories like these, it starts to become obvious how much the government is holding up progress in personal security.
People are often scared to give info like finger print to Id people because they are either A: scared of companies abusing the info (which can be solved by contracts) or B: scared of the government looking for info which could accidently incriminate them(which can be solved by limited the scope of government).
Secuirty wise they also need to ask for a pin so that a print can not be faked and be a safeguard against errors in the system.
Slashdot Mirror
You seem to be drawing a lot of false assumptions here about what I may or may not do with my computer or what my viewpoints will be. And to be perfectable frank, has no place in this debate. Now if I give my friend access to my CD collection and he copies the CD, am I the one violating copyright or is he? Now take the P2P example. If I give my friend access to my mp3 collection in order to listen to a song, and he downloads and keeps them, who is the pirate? Remember, the DMCA says it's the person who does the copying who breaks the copyright, not the person who is holding the material, no matter how flimsy protection is given to the material.
Sharing isn't distributing. I can share my music with my friends in many ways. I can't sell copies of it. P2P will fall under distribution because the RIAA says it will.
Just because a university offers a course in something, doesn't make it relevant. Many universities teach what the professors think is good for teaching. No, I have no "concrete proof" but then again I was posting my opinion.
Interest in java seems to be going downhill. I think releasing it under the GPL might spur more interest and innovation with Java.
I thought a boycott of the RIAA and MPAA was already going on for years. Maybe not a large organized one, but just a bunch of objectors. Which seems funner that they are complaining that sales are down. Well yes you dummies, you are running against a boycott.
I'm glad we've given SCO exclusive patent / copyright to.. ummmm... their Unix invention... It's really progressing science... Well it's progressing the useful... art.. ummm .. of bullsh*t.
I went music shopping today. First I went to the used CD store, found an album I wanted for $7.50. Then I went to the hip CD store that prides itself for it's good selection. I wasn't able to find any of the artists I was interested in, and I'm not talking mp3.com artists, but actual artists signed to record companies. I guess I'll have to buy online. One of the problems with the internet, a lot of people have gained a lot wider selection taste in music.
I can't wait for the next innovation that Unisys brings to the market.
I'm sure the street vendors will let the hollywood execs take stuff for free off their carts till they can get themselves back on their feet. Hollywood is that type of place, unlike those no good small town fileswappers.
will they blow up your computer if you download files?
Okay this seems to be SCO's business plan. Have microsoft give you money in order to make your software copyrights look important. Sue IBM in order to scare other Unix companies from investing in Linux and to keep paying them buckets for using something based on old code. Create enough FUD about Linux that some companies decide to switch to the one Unix like operating system that will never have copyright issues with SCO, SCO's Unix. And everyone will know about SCO since all the news outlets are giving SCO so much coverage since it involves the media darling Linux. Besides the cost of the lawyers, this is a very cheap way for SCO to rake in a lot of money. Far cheaper then repacking Linux over and over again.
With stories like these, it starts to become obvious how much the government is holding up progress in personal security. People are often scared to give info like finger print to Id people because they are either A: scared of companies abusing the info (which can be solved by contracts) or B: scared of the government looking for info which could accidently incriminate them(which can be solved by limited the scope of government). Secuirty wise they also need to ask for a pin so that a print can not be faked and be a safeguard against errors in the system.