my rule of thumb is that as long as i don't make money off the work, i'm free to make and distribute as many copies as i like.
so backups and gifts are great. trading is fine.
if i made a profit, i'd be a bootlegger. i'd be cutting into his incentive, pushing the going rate down, spoiling his gig.
if it's not taxable income, it's legal. go nuts.
it's the gordion knot formula that makes all of your questions simplistic. plus, being a principled person, you get to sleep the easy sleep of the righteous.
ensure "diversity" and "level the playing field" for new competition
goes back to anti-trust principle, that a diverse marketplace of medium-sized firms is better for the consumer, innovation, progress, than an oligopoly.
heaven forbid that we allow radio stations to select what to play of their own free will.
except for that under current regs this translates into an exsclusive committee of maybe a half-dozen crackers end up programming the entirety of the nations radio.
we own the airwaves collectively. the fed manages them for us. we tell them what we want and they do it. radio sucks. register to vote.
in the mood for a little more propaganda? try http://www.issues2000.org/Ralph_Nader_Technology.h tm
issues of fair use vs. piracy are cloudy at this point, because copyright law has yet to catch up with technology.
all sides of the issue are staking out extreme positions, we're watching a power vacuum being filled by way of feeding frenzy.
what's needed is a new approach to copyright laws, to take account of our new technology.
our new approach to copyrights should make media ownership less complicated, more intuitive. people shouldn't have to wonder if they're breaking the law by transferring their purchased commodity from media x to y.
how about this: when you purchase a copyrighted work, you also purchase the right to make as many copies of it, and transfer it to as many systems, as you desire. the one caveat is that you're not allowed to make money off of these copies, without express permission from the copyright holder.
feel free to share, but don't try to make bread from the sweat of another's brow.
this approach renders questions of ownership and fair use simplistic, for example:
can i rip my cd to mp3? -> yes.
can i watch my dvd on linux? -> yes.
backup copies? -> yes.
p2p sharing? -> yes.
can i copy a cd for my mom? -> yes.
can i sell a copy to a stranger? -> no.
charge for access to my ftp of dl's? -> no.
can i sell divx versions of dvd's? -> no.
this is a rule of thumb a six-year-old could understand.
copyright law is ours to determine. there's nothing set in stone about it. we should update the law to reflect technological changes, instead of letting it be fought out in a million seperate law suits.
"let us raise a standard to which the wise and the honest can repair. the event is in the hand of God. " - GW
not to get too geeky here (HA!), but the New X-Men series being put out these days is really quite good. They've given the book to writer Grant Morrison, who wrote The Invisibles, Batman Arkham Asylum, Animal Man, and loads of other great comics. He's part of the reason comics will eventually find their way into college-level literature classes.
make sure to get the New X-Men books though, (there are as many variants of x-men comics as there are linux distros) and all the other ones are just cotton candy fluff by comparison.
Økokrim?!? Where's my keyboard's "Ø" key? Norwegians are far out.
The tragedy is that Norwegian taxpayers are footing the bill for this seemingly endless lawsuit.
A bright kid gets skewered by the courts, at the behest of greedy multinationals, and taxpayers pay for it.
"the world only makes sense when you force it to"
- Batman, as he's kicking Superman's ass.
call me crazy, but i'm not worried about tainted mp3s, even a little bit. has anyone ever been burned by one? it seems to me anyone savvy enough to be creating viruses probably has a large mp3 collection of their own, is probably sensitive to the mp3/RIAA controversy, probably considers folks listening to mp3s on "their team". i doubt a virus-maker would create evil mp3s, on the principle that one doesn't sh*%t where one eats.
have been sharing mp3s for years now, have a collection of over 65,000, have never found a single one that adversely affected my machine.
by the way, id3 tags are neat. i think it's great that one can create an mp3 with a link to one's website, or include a message to metallica & the RIAA on an mp3 of 'damage, inc.'
but that's just me.
Slashdot Mirror
so backups and gifts are great. trading is fine.
if i made a profit, i'd be a bootlegger. i'd be cutting into his incentive, pushing the going rate down, spoiling his gig.
if it's not taxable income, it's legal. go nuts.
it's the gordion knot formula that makes all of your questions simplistic. plus, being a principled person, you get to sleep the easy sleep of the righteous.
was so inspired by this article i lit one of my farts on fire.
http://www.atnewyork.com/news/article.php/1381471
goes back to anti-trust principle, that a diverse marketplace of medium-sized firms is better for the consumer, innovation, progress, than an oligopoly.
heaven forbid that we allow radio stations to select what to play of their own free will.
except for that under current regs this translates into an exsclusive committee of maybe a half-dozen crackers end up programming the entirety of the nations radio.
we own the airwaves collectively. the fed manages them for us. we tell them what we want and they do it. radio sucks. register to vote.
in the mood for a little more propaganda? try http://www.issues2000.org/Ralph_Nader_Technology.h tm
"two great minds, with but a single thought."
the 1st being rep. boucher, who's working to extend fair use rights.
http://www.atnewyork.com/news/article.php/1381471
nice to see that the slashdot voting bloc is gaining momentum.
anybody else want to get in on the ground floor?
did i read somebody saying there was a flac plugin for winamp? i didn't see it on their site. please to edumacate me. thanks in advance.
issues of fair use vs. piracy are cloudy at this point, because copyright law has yet to catch up with technology. all sides of the issue are staking out extreme positions, we're watching a power vacuum being filled by way of feeding frenzy. what's needed is a new approach to copyright laws, to take account of our new technology. our new approach to copyrights should make media ownership less complicated, more intuitive. people shouldn't have to wonder if they're breaking the law by transferring their purchased commodity from media x to y. how about this: when you purchase a copyrighted work, you also purchase the right to make as many copies of it, and transfer it to as many systems, as you desire. the one caveat is that you're not allowed to make money off of these copies, without express permission from the copyright holder. feel free to share, but don't try to make bread from the sweat of another's brow. this approach renders questions of ownership and fair use simplistic, for example: can i rip my cd to mp3? -> yes. can i watch my dvd on linux? -> yes. backup copies? -> yes. p2p sharing? -> yes. can i copy a cd for my mom? -> yes. can i sell a copy to a stranger? -> no. charge for access to my ftp of dl's? -> no. can i sell divx versions of dvd's? -> no. this is a rule of thumb a six-year-old could understand. copyright law is ours to determine. there's nothing set in stone about it. we should update the law to reflect technological changes, instead of letting it be fought out in a million seperate law suits. "let us raise a standard to which the wise and the honest can repair. the event is in the hand of God. " - GW
not to get too geeky here (HA!), but the New X-Men series being put out these days is really quite good. They've given the book to writer Grant Morrison, who wrote The Invisibles, Batman Arkham Asylum, Animal Man, and loads of other great comics. He's part of the reason comics will eventually find their way into college-level literature classes. make sure to get the New X-Men books though, (there are as many variants of x-men comics as there are linux distros) and all the other ones are just cotton candy fluff by comparison.
humans are overrated, bub.
Økokrim?!? Where's my keyboard's "Ø" key? Norwegians are far out. The tragedy is that Norwegian taxpayers are footing the bill for this seemingly endless lawsuit. A bright kid gets skewered by the courts, at the behest of greedy multinationals, and taxpayers pay for it. "the world only makes sense when you force it to" - Batman, as he's kicking Superman's ass.
call me crazy, but i'm not worried about tainted mp3s, even a little bit. has anyone ever been burned by one? it seems to me anyone savvy enough to be creating viruses probably has a large mp3 collection of their own, is probably sensitive to the mp3/RIAA controversy, probably considers folks listening to mp3s on "their team". i doubt a virus-maker would create evil mp3s, on the principle that one doesn't sh*%t where one eats. have been sharing mp3s for years now, have a collection of over 65,000, have never found a single one that adversely affected my machine. by the way, id3 tags are neat. i think it's great that one can create an mp3 with a link to one's website, or include a message to metallica & the RIAA on an mp3 of 'damage, inc.' but that's just me.