quash (kwahsh), vb.1. To annul or make void; to terminate (quash an indictment) (quash proceedings); 2. To suppress or subdue; to crush (quash a rebellion). [Black's Law Dictionary, 8e]
I'm really unimpressed with any lawyer who couldn't figure out how to change the filter to "All Files" so that they could find the PDF.
And I'm really unimpressed with any geek who couldn't figure out how to respond to an ex parte application to strike a portion of the proceedings for a technical violation of Local Rule 37-2.3... Or, let me put it another way. Russ Frackman (who I know) brought down Napster, one of the most prominent technology cases in that field. He did so while not knowing how to use email. (His secretary printed incoming email; he read it and dictated responses, which she took down in shorthand to email out from her desk a few moments later.) You can be an excellent lawyer and not know the nuances of software you're using.
Speaking of which, where exactly do I "change the filter to 'All Files'"? There's no combo-box control for that in the Mac versions of Firefox I use on a daily basis. If it's buried more deeply than that, yeah, I can probably find it, but that's not what I get paid for, anymore. Likewise finding (and hoping it (a) works and (b) is maintained) or writing (and maintaining) a FF extension. Could I? Almost certainly. Should I? Not anymore.
Use IE. IE is tollerable at version 9 and is the most supported intranet browser which is only updated annually.
Not exactly a workable solution on my Macintosh and Linux workstations, but, thanks for the suggestion.
Except, MSIE is only supported up to version 8: "CM/ECF has been tested and works correctly with Firefox 3.5, and Internet Explorer 7 and 8." https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/login.pl
If I had to choose one, there would be no way it would be a laptop. Built like crap and they don't last.
Say what?! I'm still using my circa-2006 MacBook Pro, though I recently augmented it with a MacBook Air for the light weight, and an iPad for the always-on portability (and that also has a ZaggKeys Solo for occasional heavier duty input). At home the MacBook [Air|Pro] is hooked up to a 5+ year old Dell 2007WFP (love the matte display; the MBP also has the matte), a Unicomp keyboard, and a ThinkPad wired mouse that matches the Bluetooth I carry with the laptop. At the office is another Unicomp keyboard, matching corded mouse, and 24" Dell matte flatpanel. My laptops have been well built and last forever...
Sigh. As one of the Righthaven tools[1] found out the hard way... the CM/ECF system used by all Federal District Courts has been tested to work with FF 3.5; from extensive personal experience it also works fine with FF 3.6. It does not work at all with FF 4.0+ (in that you can't use FF to upload PDFs, which is all you'd use the Electronic Case Filing system for (document retrieval is done through PACER, though they overlap).
For some stupid reason, ECF specifies an ACCEPT parameter of “image/*” for the PDF upload forms, which of course is incorrect (PDFs are MIME type “application/pdf” per IANA; see also, e.g., RFC 3778).
As of FF 4.0 (https://developer.mozilla.org/en/HTML/Element/input), that 'accept' parameter is honored and FF filters the file selector box to only permit image filetypes to be uploaded. End result? #massivefail
Yes, ECF is broken. But try getting not one, but 89, Federal bureaucracies to fix their tech in a timely fashion... (Each district court runs its own ECF system.)
Sigh.
[1] Declaration of Shawn A. Mangano, Esq., Righthaven LLC v. Democratic Underground, LLC, No. 10-cv-01356-RLH-GWF, docket entry 127-1 (Dist. Of Nevada, June 29, 2011)
Was going to write a science fiction tale around it, but life intervened (and I'm not the wordsmith to make "OMG, data from the skies!" interesting... Neal Stephenson can make building a data haven interesting. Me, notsomuch...).
The idea came about when I read about Sealand. Okay, sure, great, pseudo-island-nation with its own wacky laws -- but, (a) their pipes have to terminate somewhere, and (b) one pissed off Iranian speedboat[1] with a small hand-launched missile could wreak enough havoc to take Sealand offline, if push came to shove.
My idea coupled the then-burgeoning phenomenon of microsats http://slashdot.org/articles/00/06/11/2013214_F.shtml with the fuzziness of international / maritime law; rogue geeks on sailboats uploading censored data to the satellite network, that could then be received by any kid with an 18" dish and readily available receiver plans. (Transceiver seemed a bit far fetched.)
Maybe I'll write it one day. How long 'til NaNoWriMo?
[1] Leaving aside for the moment the logistics of how such a speedboat would traverse the open ocean from the Strait of Hormuz to the coast of England... [insert African swallow reference(s) here]
Seriously. I've also had a non-traditional career trajectory vis-a-vis programming, though I still enjoy doing it here and there and like to stay current with my skills. (I'm also a lawyer, and I deal a lot with "software law," so one helps the other.) I wrote a quick-and-dirty Perl script that polls the local Craigslist every few hours and shoots me the more interesting leads; I pick one or two a month (time permitting) and I've had about a 50% success rate in landing the positions. Everything from BlackBerry GPS development to some embedded code that went up in a recent rocket (one of the CALVEIN launches, nothing too exciting). Build a résumé of smaller projects while you're teaching... Get back into the game that way. In 6 months to a year you'll have the 'current cred' to interview seriously for like positions that are on longer term projects or permanent-hire...
I remember every year asking for an Erector Set and never getting one; as an adult my mom confided she was hoping I would "come out of it" and get interested in football or something. (She also pushed hard for me to go to a Big Campus (UofA or ASU or...) like she did (NIU); I chose a small liberal arts school and blossomed... She also mocked (as an adult) the science fiction conventions I used to drag her to (as my essential transportation), and I remember having to save up on the sly and get a ride with one of the adults in the computer club I attended to the local hotel sale to buy my first Apple IIgs...)
Find out what the kids themselves are interested in, and encourage that. Don't try to mold them to what/you/ think it might be cool for them to become. Expose them, sure. "Hey, want to check out this robotics project I've been working on?" But don't wrap it for them under the tree.
Maybe if Amazon, Google and a few other major cloud storage providers take a huge hit, they'll tell the government to fix the situation.
No, shops large enough to have influence are likewise large enough to simply setup European subsidiaries, with hardware in Europe and a cadre of European compliance officers, and it's business as usual. "You can choose a Region to optimize for latency, minimize costs, or address regulatory requirements... Objects stored in a Region never leave the Region unless you transfer them out. For example, objects stored in the EU (Ireland) Region never leave the EU." http://aws.amazon.com/s3/ (emphasis added)
That being said, it was because their procedures were shit, not because they were doing maintenance.
Actually, no, the Chernobyl disaster was sparked with a 'live' test of a new, untested mechanism for powering reactor cooling systems in the event of a disaster that brought down the power grid. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster#The_attempted_experiment (And even that test was delayed several hours, into a shift of workers that weren't properly prepared to conduct the test.)
Well, California is a community property state, so his wife. Since she isn't inheriting it (she already co-owned it), she doesn't have to pay estate taxes (I think).
Only to the extent Jobs acquired those shares during the marriage. Anything acquired before, in a community property state, is separate property (with the community having an interest in any increase in value that can be attributed to work done during the existence of the community)... And assuming there's no trust, etc., in existence.
What I'd like to know is what, if any, effect 17 U.S.C 117 does have in reality. By face value, it should mean the owner of a copy of a computer program is allowed to use the copy without infringing copyright, i.e. installation and copying to RAM should not result in infringing copies as long as you bought a legal copy of the software (as Psystar did), but has anyone ever won a lawsuit based on that point?
Ownership is the issue. Most software is licensed (or so sayeth the EULAs, and while there's some disagreement in the authorities, the courts are generally agreeing; see, e.g., Vernor v. Autodesk, 621 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir., 2010) (en banc review declined; I don't believe there's been a decision yet on the petition for a writ of certiori to the Supreme Court). Opinion: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1537762.html
I bought a QNAP TS-109 about 5 years ago, it worked great as a central storage for everything.... until... its power supply went flaky and couldn't handle the drive anymore. RAID doesn't do you much good when the drive controller goes down. Worse, the TS-109 kept files in some kind of format that was unreadable by Ubuntu, OS-X, Windows, and my local Linux Guru's hobby farm of machines - could see the partitioning, but the data partition was unreadable.
Fear of exactly that is why I'm moving my law firm from our current ReadyNAS units (which are decent and so far dependable) to a stripped down Linux system running software (/dev/md) RAID1 on SATA drives using this:
I like that I can yank a good drive, hook it up to any off-the-shelf USB-to-SATA adapter, and mount it (via VirtualBox if necessary) from any Linux instance I can throw at it, for data recovery. Plus having a full (well, stripped) Linux stack lets us do other integration stuff, like Hamachi (we don't control the firewall or edge router(s) for our offices, unfortunately).
Intel has had several RISC chips on the market at various times; the i960, the i860, even ARM designs (XScale).
TFA doesn't say Intel is going to be bringing out RISC technology, though, just that it's "taking aim" at markets that are still RISC strongholds:
With the launch of the E7 earlier this year, it seemed Intel was finally ready to make its final push, calling out RISC by name. “The days of IT organizations being forced to deploy expensive, closed RISC architectures for mission-critical applications are nearing an end,” said Kirk Skaugen, vice president and general manager of Intel's Data Center Group, in a statement announcing the E7 line.
Bold words. Can the E7 really dethrone UltraSparc/Power/PA-RISC and, of course, Intel's own Itanium processors? Intel thinks so.
Monopolists are incapable fundamental change. They will do everything within their power to alter anything except their core monopoly. This includes lawsuits, buying legislation, corporate espionage, smear campaigns, defamation, etc. Whatever they can get away with.... Even though they are pushing an aging and ill suited CPU, through shear muscle (overt Mafia reference) they just might succeed.
Everyone always seems to forget that, at the same time Intel was rolling out the 80486, it also rolled out its next-generation RISC-based i860. Fast as hell (for the time). There was a huge push by Microsoft, which at the time was trying to be platform-agnostic (this was circa 1989; Windows NT was being developed on the i860, and NT 3.51 (1995) and NT 4.0 (1996) were released for the x86, MIPS, Alpha, and PowerPC architectures).
Even with the two market 'monopolists' (not entirely accurate; IBM OS/2 (although circa 1989 that too was at least partially a Microsoft project), Mac OS, AMD, Cyrix, all existed at the time) behind it, the i860 went nowhere. The market spoke - it wanted x86 compatibility.
The DMCA requires that you have looked at the file to determine that it in fact is a copyright to which you own
No, it actually doesn't. See the court's opinion in Rossi v. MPAA, no. 03-16034 (December 1, 2004) (http://www.steptoe.com/assets/attachments/1740.pdf), where the proprietor of InternetMovies.com "urge[d the 9th Circuit] to adopt a rule that in order to have 'a good faith belief' of infringement, the copy- right owner is required to conduct a reasonable investigation into the allegedly offending" material. The appeals court declined Rossi's invitation. The example I chose wasn't the best, and it's obvious to you and me that it's a pre-release copy of Windows NT 5. But it's not inconceivable that there are more ambiguous filenames etc. out there that a less geekily informed admin might, with a good faith belief, interpret as being a copy of a copyrighted work s/he was authorized to act on.
The DMCA's penalty of perjury language only applies to the statement that the author is "authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed." 17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(vi) (http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#512).
If I work for Consolidated Pictures, which owns the rights to the movie The Cairo Goose, and I send a DMCA takedown notice on the file MSDN_Preview_WinNT_Cairo-{g00s3}.rar, and state under penalty of perjury that I am authorized to act on behalf of the owner of the exclusive rights in The Cairo Goose, I'm fine, even though upon closer inspection the RAR file is, on its face, obviously not a copy of my employer's motion picture. (It's someone else's copyright to enforce.;))
To be clear, I'm not saying (in a DMCA takedown) that I own the rights to that/file/, I'm identifying a work (The Cairo Goose), saying under penalty of perjury that I'm authorized to act on behalf of the rights holder of that work (The Cairo Goose), and, not under penalty of perjury, that I have a good-faith belief that the file in question is a copy of The Cairo Goose.
Note that 512(f) does provide liability "for any damages, including costs and attorneys' fees, incurred by the alleged infringer" when a DMCA notification "knowingly materially misrepresent[s]" infringement.
Also, 512(g) provides for reinstatement of content upon counter-notification where there was a "mistake or misidentification of the material..."
So... there's an exemption for Music but not for everything else so you read the negative into it? Generally, in case law as I understand it (not a laywer) - the absence of a case proving a poiint can't be inferred to prove a point.
17 USC 106 makes it the exclusive right of the copyright holder to do, or to authorize, reproducing a copyrighted work. 17 USC 1001 et seq carve out some exemptions for digital audio (sound recordings). There are a couple of other extremely limited carve-outs (and you might be able to argue 17 USC 117 applies; I haven't had the occasion to revisit it since Vernor v. Autodesk was decided (09-35969) by the 9th Circuit last year), but unless you fit into one of those, unauthorized reproduction is a copyright infringement. (Setting aside any possible defenses, such as fair use, that may apply; those are fact-heavy analyses decided on a case-by-case basis.)
So, in this context, yeah, absence of a case explicitly authorizing "space shifting" of video game ROMs can be inferred to prove a point, since in the absence of caselaw to the contrary the statutory provisions control.
In the very specific context where all of the criteria of that regulation are met, there may be an argument for space shifting. To my knowledge, it's never been tested in court. That said, the blanket statement "if you own a copy of something, you can space shift it, like you can rip CDs to MP3s" (paraphrased) is still not true.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, without RTFA but going just by the above statement: "even after being deleted from the index..."
Deletion from an index != "being deleted."
If I go into the index of the Encyclopedia Galactica and remove all references to The Mule, the article(s) the index pointed to still exist...
D'oh, never mind, followed the wrong link from the article.
It actually holds exactly the opposite! http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/michigan/miedce/2:2009mc50872/241276/4/0.pdf?1269990661 "Accordingly, the Court quashes the subpoena requiring Defendant to testify – giving up his password – thereby protecting his invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination."
quash (kwahsh), vb.1. To annul or make void; to terminate (quash an indictment) (quash proceedings); 2. To suppress or subdue; to crush (quash a rebellion). [Black's Law Dictionary, 8e]
http://www.satirewire.com/news/feb02/warship.shtml
I'm really unimpressed with any lawyer who couldn't figure out how to change the filter to "All Files" so that they could find the PDF.
And I'm really unimpressed with any geek who couldn't figure out how to respond to an ex parte application to strike a portion of the proceedings for a technical violation of Local Rule 37-2.3... Or, let me put it another way. Russ Frackman (who I know) brought down Napster, one of the most prominent technology cases in that field. He did so while not knowing how to use email. (His secretary printed incoming email; he read it and dictated responses, which she took down in shorthand to email out from her desk a few moments later.) You can be an excellent lawyer and not know the nuances of software you're using.
Speaking of which, where exactly do I "change the filter to 'All Files'"? There's no combo-box control for that in the Mac versions of Firefox I use on a daily basis. If it's buried more deeply than that, yeah, I can probably find it, but that's not what I get paid for, anymore. Likewise finding (and hoping it (a) works and (b) is maintained) or writing (and maintaining) a FF extension. Could I? Almost certainly. Should I? Not anymore.
Use IE. IE is tollerable at version 9 and is the most supported intranet browser which is only updated annually.
Not exactly a workable solution on my Macintosh and Linux workstations, but, thanks for the suggestion.
Except, MSIE is only supported up to version 8: "CM/ECF has been tested and works correctly with Firefox 3.5, and Internet Explorer 7 and 8." https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/login.pl
If I had to choose one, there would be no way it would be a laptop. Built like crap and they don't last.
Say what?! I'm still using my circa-2006 MacBook Pro, though I recently augmented it with a MacBook Air for the light weight, and an iPad for the always-on portability (and that also has a ZaggKeys Solo for occasional heavier duty input). At home the MacBook [Air|Pro] is hooked up to a 5+ year old Dell 2007WFP (love the matte display; the MBP also has the matte), a Unicomp keyboard, and a ThinkPad wired mouse that matches the Bluetooth I carry with the laptop. At the office is another Unicomp keyboard, matching corded mouse, and 24" Dell matte flatpanel. My laptops have been well built and last forever...
There are a few Hondas that disprove that statement ... RC211V, NSX, RC51, CBR*RR...
Sigh. As one of the Righthaven tools[1] found out the hard way ... the CM/ECF system used by all Federal District Courts has been tested to work with FF 3.5; from extensive personal experience it also works fine with FF 3.6. It does not work at all with FF 4.0+ (in that you can't use FF to upload PDFs, which is all you'd use the Electronic Case Filing system for (document retrieval is done through PACER, though they overlap).
For some stupid reason, ECF specifies an ACCEPT parameter of “image/*” for the PDF upload forms, which of course is incorrect (PDFs are MIME type “application/pdf” per IANA; see also, e.g., RFC 3778).
As of FF 4.0 (https://developer.mozilla.org/en/HTML/Element/input), that 'accept' parameter is honored and FF filters the file selector box to only permit image filetypes to be uploaded. End result? #massivefail
Yes, ECF is broken. But try getting not one, but 89, Federal bureaucracies to fix their tech in a timely fashion... (Each district court runs its own ECF system.)
Sigh.
[1] Declaration of Shawn A. Mangano, Esq., Righthaven LLC v. Democratic Underground, LLC, No. 10-cv-01356-RLH-GWF, docket entry 127-1 (Dist. Of Nevada, June 29, 2011)
Was going to write a science fiction tale around it, but life intervened (and I'm not the wordsmith to make "OMG, data from the skies!" interesting... Neal Stephenson can make building a data haven interesting. Me, notsomuch...).
The idea came about when I read about Sealand. Okay, sure, great, pseudo-island-nation with its own wacky laws -- but, (a) their pipes have to terminate somewhere, and (b) one pissed off Iranian speedboat[1] with a small hand-launched missile could wreak enough havoc to take Sealand offline, if push came to shove.
My idea coupled the then-burgeoning phenomenon of microsats http://slashdot.org/articles/00/06/11/2013214_F.shtml with the fuzziness of international / maritime law; rogue geeks on sailboats uploading censored data to the satellite network, that could then be received by any kid with an 18" dish and readily available receiver plans. (Transceiver seemed a bit far fetched.)
Maybe I'll write it one day. How long 'til NaNoWriMo?
[1] Leaving aside for the moment the logistics of how such a speedboat would traverse the open ocean from the Strait of Hormuz to the coast of England ... [insert African swallow reference(s) here]
Seriously. I've also had a non-traditional career trajectory vis-a-vis programming, though I still enjoy doing it here and there and like to stay current with my skills. (I'm also a lawyer, and I deal a lot with "software law," so one helps the other.) I wrote a quick-and-dirty Perl script that polls the local Craigslist every few hours and shoots me the more interesting leads; I pick one or two a month (time permitting) and I've had about a 50% success rate in landing the positions. Everything from BlackBerry GPS development to some embedded code that went up in a recent rocket (one of the CALVEIN launches, nothing too exciting). Build a résumé of smaller projects while you're teaching... Get back into the game that way. In 6 months to a year you'll have the 'current cred' to interview seriously for like positions that are on longer term projects or permanent-hire...
If a boy likes to play with dolls let him be.
If a girl likes to play with GI-Joe let her be.
This.
I just read this article, it's an extreme, but it proves the point I think: http://articles.boston.com/2011-12-11/lifestyle/30512365_1_twin-boys-transgender-jonas
I remember every year asking for an Erector Set and never getting one; as an adult my mom confided she was hoping I would "come out of it" and get interested in football or something. (She also pushed hard for me to go to a Big Campus (UofA or ASU or ...) like she did (NIU); I chose a small liberal arts school and blossomed... She also mocked (as an adult) the science fiction conventions I used to drag her to (as my essential transportation), and I remember having to save up on the sly and get a ride with one of the adults in the computer club I attended to the local hotel sale to buy my first Apple IIgs...)
Find out what the kids themselves are interested in, and encourage that. Don't try to mold them to what /you/ think it might be cool for them to become. Expose them, sure. "Hey, want to check out this robotics project I've been working on?" But don't wrap it for them under the tree.
Maybe if Amazon, Google and a few other major cloud storage providers take a huge hit, they'll tell the government to fix the situation.
No, shops large enough to have influence are likewise large enough to simply setup European subsidiaries, with hardware in Europe and a cadre of European compliance officers, and it's business as usual. "You can choose a Region to optimize for latency, minimize costs, or address regulatory requirements ... Objects stored in a Region never leave the Region unless you transfer them out. For example, objects stored in the EU (Ireland) Region never leave the EU." http://aws.amazon.com/s3/ (emphasis added)
Anything on EA's conditions?
I haven't heard anything about the working conditions at EA aside from jokes.
I haven't seen much lately, but in 2004 it was alleged that EA sucked the soul (or at least any semblance of work-life balance) out of its employees... http://news.cnet.com/Electronic-Arts-faces-overtime-lawsuit/2100-1043_3-5450316.html
They settled a couple of years ago for millions, no word on whether conditions have improved. http://articles.latimes.com/2006/apr/26/business/fi-ea26
That being said, it was because their procedures were shit, not because they were doing maintenance.
Actually, no, the Chernobyl disaster was sparked with a 'live' test of a new, untested mechanism for powering reactor cooling systems in the event of a disaster that brought down the power grid. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster#The_attempted_experiment (And even that test was delayed several hours, into a shift of workers that weren't properly prepared to conduct the test.)
Well, California is a community property state, so his wife. Since she isn't inheriting it (she already co-owned it), she doesn't have to pay estate taxes (I think).
Only to the extent Jobs acquired those shares during the marriage. Anything acquired before, in a community property state, is separate property (with the community having an interest in any increase in value that can be attributed to work done during the existence of the community)... And assuming there's no trust, etc., in existence.
What I'd like to know is what, if any, effect 17 U.S.C 117 does have in reality. By face value, it should mean the owner of a copy of a computer program is allowed to use the copy without infringing copyright, i.e. installation and copying to RAM should not result in infringing copies as long as you bought a legal copy of the software (as Psystar did), but has anyone ever won a lawsuit based on that point?
Ownership is the issue. Most software is licensed (or so sayeth the EULAs, and while there's some disagreement in the authorities, the courts are generally agreeing; see, e.g., Vernor v. Autodesk, 621 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir., 2010) (en banc review declined; I don't believe there's been a decision yet on the petition for a writ of certiori to the Supreme Court). Opinion: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1537762.html
I bought a QNAP TS-109 about 5 years ago, it worked great as a central storage for everything.... until... its power supply went flaky and couldn't handle the drive anymore. RAID doesn't do you much good when the drive controller goes down. Worse, the TS-109 kept files in some kind of format that was unreadable by Ubuntu, OS-X, Windows, and my local Linux Guru's hobby farm of machines - could see the partitioning, but the data partition was unreadable.
Fear of exactly that is why I'm moving my law firm from our current ReadyNAS units (which are decent and so far dependable) to a stripped down Linux system running software (/dev/md) RAID1 on SATA drives using this:
http://www.google.com/products/catalog?hl=en&cid=11139380982736363255
I like that I can yank a good drive, hook it up to any off-the-shelf USB-to-SATA adapter, and mount it (via VirtualBox if necessary) from any Linux instance I can throw at it, for data recovery. Plus having a full (well, stripped) Linux stack lets us do other integration stuff, like Hamachi (we don't control the firewall or edge router(s) for our offices, unfortunately).
RISC architecture is gonna change everything!
I'm still waiting for the P6 chip. Triple the speed of the Pentium. With a PCI bus, too.
Intel has had several RISC chips on the market at various times; the i960, the i860, even ARM designs (XScale).
TFA doesn't say Intel is going to be bringing out RISC technology, though, just that it's "taking aim" at markets that are still RISC strongholds:
Monopolists are incapable fundamental change. They will do everything within their power to alter anything except their core monopoly. This includes lawsuits, buying legislation, corporate espionage, smear campaigns, defamation, etc. Whatever they can get away with. ... Even though they are pushing an aging and ill suited CPU, through shear muscle (overt Mafia reference) they just might succeed.
Everyone always seems to forget that, at the same time Intel was rolling out the 80486, it also rolled out its next-generation RISC-based i860. Fast as hell (for the time). There was a huge push by Microsoft, which at the time was trying to be platform-agnostic (this was circa 1989; Windows NT was being developed on the i860, and NT 3.51 (1995) and NT 4.0 (1996) were released for the x86, MIPS, Alpha, and PowerPC architectures).
Even with the two market 'monopolists' (not entirely accurate; IBM OS/2 (although circa 1989 that too was at least partially a Microsoft project), Mac OS, AMD, Cyrix, all existed at the time) behind it, the i860 went nowhere. The market spoke - it wanted x86 compatibility.
The DMCA requires that you have looked at the file to determine that it in fact is a copyright to which you own
No, it actually doesn't. See the court's opinion in Rossi v. MPAA, no. 03-16034 (December 1, 2004) (http://www.steptoe.com/assets/attachments/1740.pdf), where the proprietor of InternetMovies.com "urge[d the 9th Circuit] to adopt a rule that in order to have 'a good faith belief' of infringement, the copy- right owner is required to conduct a reasonable investigation into the allegedly offending" material. The appeals court declined Rossi's invitation. The example I chose wasn't the best, and it's obvious to you and me that it's a pre-release copy of Windows NT 5. But it's not inconceivable that there are more ambiguous filenames etc. out there that a less geekily informed admin might, with a good faith belief, interpret as being a copy of a copyrighted work s/he was authorized to act on.
The DMCA's penalty of perjury language only applies to the statement that the author is "authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed." 17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(vi) (http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#512).
If I work for Consolidated Pictures, which owns the rights to the movie The Cairo Goose, and I send a DMCA takedown notice on the file MSDN_Preview_WinNT_Cairo-{g00s3}.rar, and state under penalty of perjury that I am authorized to act on behalf of the owner of the exclusive rights in The Cairo Goose, I'm fine, even though upon closer inspection the RAR file is, on its face, obviously not a copy of my employer's motion picture. (It's someone else's copyright to enforce. ;))
To be clear, I'm not saying (in a DMCA takedown) that I own the rights to that /file/, I'm identifying a work (The Cairo Goose), saying under penalty of perjury that I'm authorized to act on behalf of the rights holder of that work (The Cairo Goose), and, not under penalty of perjury, that I have a good-faith belief that the file in question is a copy of The Cairo Goose.
Note that 512(f) does provide liability "for any damages, including costs and attorneys' fees, incurred by the alleged infringer" when a DMCA notification "knowingly materially misrepresent[s]" infringement.
Also, 512(g) provides for reinstatement of content upon counter-notification where there was a "mistake or misidentification of the material..."
So... there's an exemption for Music but not for everything else so you read the negative into it? Generally, in case law as I understand it (not a laywer) - the absence of a case proving a poiint can't be inferred to prove a point.
17 USC 106 makes it the exclusive right of the copyright holder to do, or to authorize, reproducing a copyrighted work. 17 USC 1001 et seq carve out some exemptions for digital audio (sound recordings). There are a couple of other extremely limited carve-outs (and you might be able to argue 17 USC 117 applies; I haven't had the occasion to revisit it since Vernor v. Autodesk was decided (09-35969) by the 9th Circuit last year), but unless you fit into one of those, unauthorized reproduction is a copyright infringement. (Setting aside any possible defenses, such as fair use, that may apply; those are fact-heavy analyses decided on a case-by-case basis.)
So, in this context, yeah, absence of a case explicitly authorizing "space shifting" of video game ROMs can be inferred to prove a point, since in the absence of caselaw to the contrary the statutory provisions control.
Mysidia postied it already, so just linking to his post instead of whoring it myself.
Re: 37 CFR 201.40
In the very specific context where all of the criteria of that regulation are met, there may be an argument for space shifting. To my knowledge, it's never been tested in court. That said, the blanket statement "if you own a copy of something, you can space shift it, like you can rip CDs to MP3s" (paraphrased) is still not true.