That little guy has some potential, but that is quite possibly the cheesiest looking case I have ever seen. They should have at least put a blur filter on that picture - Sheesh! How about hitting the mold with a hammer a couple of times to knock the air bubbles out of the plastic, at least for the one you're going to use for the product shot!
As usual, the Post says that the RIAA blames p2p for declining sales, but doesn't make any mention of the fact that maybe, just maybe some of the lost sales are a result of a poor economy or the fact that they've been ripping people off so bad they lost a class action suit for CD price fixing.
This would be like Clear Channel blaming NPR for me not listening to the radio stations I used to listen to before Clear Channel sucked them into their void. I stopped listening to commercial radio because I hate Clear Channel (and monopolies). Yes, I listen to NPR instead now, but if there were no NPR, I still wouldn't listen to commercial radio.
Did I buy more CD's before p2p? Yes. I had more discretionary income. Would I buy more CD's if there wasn't p2p? No. The lack of p2p networks would not put more discretionary income in my pocket. And it certainly isn't going to make me forgive them for price fixing.
But, as much as I lothe the RIAA and their tactics, going after the people violating copyrights is probably the first thing they've done right. Suing software and search engine developers is not only wrong, it's stupid. Go after someone who is actually doing something wrong.
Wouldn't this machine be totally useless without at the very least a CD-ROM drive or NIC? Sure, you could plug in an external (assuming it has FireWire or USB), but without it one or the other, what are you going to do, download everything via Dialup? Sure it's more expandable, but out of the box I don't see that it would be much more useful than a WebTV.
Isn't this kind of like selling a car with a gas tank port but no gas tank? (But it comes pre-loaded with a quart in the fuel lines!)
I can understand maybe if you're trying to come across as an "unbiased" news site, but to make even personal and overtly editorial sites comply with this would just be silly.
If they have to do it, they should make the responder host his own comments, and at the most make the original article include a link to the response. And even then, only for certain sites. To have to post the response on your own site it too much burden and would severely stiffle freedom of expression.
And if I posted an article on how great Linux is, would I have to give space to Microsoft for a rebuttal?
I think this would be a very difficult law to apply fairly across the board. There are so many degrees of 'false' hype - it could be anything from promoting features that are genuinely planned for the final product but were delayed by an unforseen problem, all the way to wishful thinking or boldface lies from the marketing departments.
So if a well intentioned plan doesn't pan out, someone could be found guilty, while at the same time if a marketing lie is somehow actually pulled off, the more flagrant offender gets away clean.
Like a lot of legal issues, it's mostly about intent. I think you'd have to prove two things- one, they was clear knowledge that what they're saying is untrue and/or impossible, and two, there would have to be an intent to defraud. If it's not a public company, the only offense possible would be deceptive advertising, which would only apply if they were already shipping the product while still lying about it's capabilities.
I didn't get any details, but I called the Sherrif's office and the auction for the domain name has been cancelled. If you go to the domain, it still shows the document saying it's on for today at 11:00 am - you'd think they'd update it to cut down on the phone calls.
The problem with that is that it totally negates the (IMHO) most important part - making sure that the copyright owner's contact information is available to anyone who wants to try and licence it. As I see it, this isn't about making sure things eventually become free, but more about making sure things aren't lost because the copyright owner drops off the face of the Earth and the work is lost forever because no one can get permission to keep it alive.
Suppose an author wrote a book 50 years ago, and he dies, leaving no heirs. Now suppose I don't like the ideas in that book, and I don't think it should be available. For $1, I can see that it doesn't become available for another 50 years.
The DMV? Sounds pretty silly to me. With electronic bill paying and e-mail, I figure in another year or two I'm going to rip my mailbox out of the ground and be done with it.
When they change zip codes in relatively small areas to add a post office, it's a nightmare for all the businesses and individuals that have to inform all their contacts, re-print stationery, new signage... imaging the cost involved in doing it on a global scale. You could probably feed a small third-world country for a year on what it would cost UPS alone.
If you're going to go to that trouble and expense, replace the system with something more efficient that will have a good ROI, instead of just tweaking what already works.
Or better yet, just wait for technology to make it irrelevant - someone mentioned just using longitude and latitude - if you're going to use mapping software anyhow, why not do that and then you wouldn't even need the address anymore.
Sorry, maybe that was a bad choice of link because of its slant - they just have a lot of good resources for trying to get the vote postponed. Yes, a lot of anti-Bush folks are fighting extra hard against this vote because having fewer media companies will make it even easier for them to be controlled (or at least influenced) by the admin, but there are so many other reasons that everyone should oppose this - like moveon.org's article about the ammonia spill in Minot, North Dakota - the consolodation of the radio station ownership (6 out of 7 stations) meant that there wasn't anyone to call at the stations to get the word out when the emergency alert system failed. But hey, when they cut the local news, at least there'll be more time for reality TV shows.
The FCC is set to vote on their secret-none-more-secret changes to the media ownership regulations on Monday. If you like the direction commercial radio has taken in the last few years, don't worry about it. If not, moveon.org has some good resources for who to call.
They should just unplug China's Guangdong province from the rest of the Internet - that should buy Asia a few more IP Addresses', and the 'dongs can hack and spam themselves instead of the rest of us:-)
Most web sites have end user agreements, especially the bigger ones. For example, here's a snipet from Expedia's:
This Web site is for your personal and noncommercial use. You may not modify, copy, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, create derivative works from, transfer, or sell any information, software, products, or services obtained from this Web site.
"Personal, non-commercial use..." so I guess if you're looking for a business flight, you better not use it.
Point being that even public info, or info in the public domain can be protected when it is provided in a special format. While you may be able to publish a companies prices, sucking that info from their web site will most likely violate their terms of use. It's like the old shareware and freeware floppies - the programs can't be sold, and the publisher can't stop you from distributing them - but you can't make duplicates of the disk as a whole, because the compilation and format is what's protected.
Look at it another way. Say you manually type 400 pages of parts pricing information into a database or web page for a local appliance dealer. You don't charge them much, because you can sell copies of the database or web pages to 100's of dealers across the country. But when you start making sales calls, all your leads tell you "No thanks, I just downloaded it of their web site".
Companies should be allowed to publish information to be used by their customers only without fear of their competition using it against them. Otherwise it's the consumers who suffer from a lack of resources. It's already happening- how many times have you been to a web site that makes you call them to find out who the dealer is in your area? It's because they don't want their competition going after their dealers.
Also remember this - forget about the legality for a moment - anything you write will most likely be easily broken by small changes in the format and/or code of the source web sites. If they don't want to (or can't) bother with going after you legally, they could make your life a never-ending nightmare of coding updates. And if your site is successful, you'll be a big red flag in their web logs.
A lot of good posts about the hardware and connection, but don't forget your EULA. Some things to consider:
1) Have a good privacy policy You may need to fall back on it if the authorities (or the RIAA) come knocking for your logs. If they badger you into turning them over without a court order, you could be in one of those stories about the criminals sueing because they got caught.
2) Look at the big ISP's agreements for ideas You may see something you hadn't thought of.
3) Lawyers are much more cost effective when used to prevent you from being sue, rather than defend you after the fact. Think about having one draft or review your agreement.
Not trying to scare you, just make sure you're covered if the guy on the third floor turns out to be a pedophile, terrorist, or (gasp) file trader.:-)
I don't know who you use for streaming, but if you can stream the kind of traffic NPR gets for free, tell me where. I did a little research (logged into the real stream, got the base, looked up the domain owner) and found that NPR has apparently just signed on with a new streaming provider to save money and provide more service. That smells is fanatical Mac users accusing NPR of all people of being bought by Microsoft. When was the last time you supported public radio, by the way? http://www.speedera.com/newsroom/pressreleases/npr.html
Slashdot Mirror
That little guy has some potential, but that is quite possibly the cheesiest looking case I have ever seen. They should have at least put a blur filter on that picture - Sheesh! How about hitting the mold with a hammer a couple of times to knock the air bubbles out of the plastic, at least for the one you're going to use for the product shot!
As usual, the Post says that the RIAA blames p2p for declining sales, but doesn't make any mention of the fact that maybe, just maybe some of the lost sales are a result of a poor economy or the fact that they've been ripping people off so bad they lost a class action suit for CD price fixing.
This would be like Clear Channel blaming NPR for me not listening to the radio stations I used to listen to before Clear Channel sucked them into their void. I stopped listening to commercial radio because I hate Clear Channel (and monopolies). Yes, I listen to NPR instead now, but if there were no NPR, I still wouldn't listen to commercial radio.
Did I buy more CD's before p2p? Yes. I had more discretionary income. Would I buy more CD's if there wasn't p2p? No. The lack of p2p networks would not put more discretionary income in my pocket. And it certainly isn't going to make me forgive them for price fixing.
But, as much as I lothe the RIAA and their tactics, going after the people violating copyrights is probably the first thing they've done right. Suing software and search engine developers is not only wrong, it's stupid. Go after someone who is actually doing something wrong.
Wouldn't this machine be totally useless without at the very least a CD-ROM drive or NIC? Sure, you could plug in an external (assuming it has FireWire or USB), but without it one or the other, what are you going to do, download everything via Dialup? Sure it's more expandable, but out of the box I don't see that it would be much more useful than a WebTV.
Isn't this kind of like selling a car with a gas tank port but no gas tank? (But it comes pre-loaded with a quart in the fuel lines!)
Thanks for clearing that up. I'm a little fuzzy on the human custom of exchanging currency for goods and services.
I'm happy to see Microsoft is looking out for governments worldwide, and not just here in the US.
...only outlaws will make comments.
I can understand maybe if you're trying to come across as an "unbiased" news site, but to make even personal and overtly editorial sites comply with this would just be silly.
If they have to do it, they should make the responder host his own comments, and at the most make the original article include a link to the response. And even then, only for certain sites. To have to post the response on your own site it too much burden and would severely stiffle freedom of expression.
And if I posted an article on how great Linux is, would I have to give space to Microsoft for a rebuttal?
I think this would be a very difficult law to apply fairly across the board. There are so many degrees of 'false' hype - it could be anything from promoting features that are genuinely planned for the final product but were delayed by an unforseen problem, all the way to wishful thinking or boldface lies from the marketing departments.
So if a well intentioned plan doesn't pan out, someone could be found guilty, while at the same time if a marketing lie is somehow actually pulled off, the more flagrant offender gets away clean.
Like a lot of legal issues, it's mostly about intent. I think you'd have to prove two things- one, they was clear knowledge that what they're saying is untrue and/or impossible, and two, there would have to be an intent to defraud. If it's not a public company, the only offense possible would be deceptive advertising, which would only apply if they were already shipping the product while still lying about it's capabilities.
I didn't get any details, but I called the Sherrif's office and the auction for the domain name has been cancelled. If you go to the domain, it still shows the document saying it's on for today at 11:00 am - you'd think they'd update it to cut down on the phone calls.
The problem with that is that it totally negates the (IMHO) most important part - making sure that the copyright owner's contact information is available to anyone who wants to try and licence it. As I see it, this isn't about making sure things eventually become free, but more about making sure things aren't lost because the copyright owner drops off the face of the Earth and the work is lost forever because no one can get permission to keep it alive.
Suppose an author wrote a book 50 years ago, and he dies, leaving no heirs. Now suppose I don't like the ideas in that book, and I don't think it should be available. For $1, I can see that it doesn't become available for another 50 years.
The DMV? Sounds pretty silly to me. With electronic bill paying and e-mail, I figure in another year or two I'm going to rip my mailbox out of the ground and be done with it. When they change zip codes in relatively small areas to add a post office, it's a nightmare for all the businesses and individuals that have to inform all their contacts, re-print stationery, new signage... imaging the cost involved in doing it on a global scale. You could probably feed a small third-world country for a year on what it would cost UPS alone. If you're going to go to that trouble and expense, replace the system with something more efficient that will have a good ROI, instead of just tweaking what already works. Or better yet, just wait for technology to make it irrelevant - someone mentioned just using longitude and latitude - if you're going to use mapping software anyhow, why not do that and then you wouldn't even need the address anymore.
Sorry, maybe that was a bad choice of link because of its slant - they just have a lot of good resources for trying to get the vote postponed. Yes, a lot of anti-Bush folks are fighting extra hard against this vote because having fewer media companies will make it even easier for them to be controlled (or at least influenced) by the admin, but there are so many other reasons that everyone should oppose this - like moveon.org's article about the ammonia spill in Minot, North Dakota - the consolodation of the radio station ownership (6 out of 7 stations) meant that there wasn't anyone to call at the stations to get the word out when the emergency alert system failed. But hey, when they cut the local news, at least there'll be more time for reality TV shows.
The FCC is set to vote on their secret-none-more-secret changes to the media ownership regulations on Monday. If you like the direction commercial radio has taken in the last few years, don't worry about it. If not, moveon.org has some good resources for who to call.
They should just unplug China's Guangdong province from the rest of the Internet - that should buy Asia a few more IP Addresses', and the 'dongs can hack and spam themselves instead of the rest of us :-)
Most web sites have end user agreements, especially the bigger ones. For example, here's a snipet from Expedia's:
This Web site is for your personal and noncommercial use. You may not modify, copy, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, create derivative works from, transfer, or sell any information, software, products, or services obtained from this Web site.
"Personal, non-commercial use..." so I guess if you're looking for a business flight, you better not use it. Point being that even public info, or info in the public domain can be protected when it is provided in a special format. While you may be able to publish a companies prices, sucking that info from their web site will most likely violate their terms of use. It's like the old shareware and freeware floppies - the programs can't be sold, and the publisher can't stop you from distributing them - but you can't make duplicates of the disk as a whole, because the compilation and format is what's protected. Look at it another way. Say you manually type 400 pages of parts pricing information into a database or web page for a local appliance dealer. You don't charge them much, because you can sell copies of the database or web pages to 100's of dealers across the country. But when you start making sales calls, all your leads tell you "No thanks, I just downloaded it of their web site". Companies should be allowed to publish information to be used by their customers only without fear of their competition using it against them. Otherwise it's the consumers who suffer from a lack of resources. It's already happening- how many times have you been to a web site that makes you call them to find out who the dealer is in your area? It's because they don't want their competition going after their dealers. Also remember this - forget about the legality for a moment - anything you write will most likely be easily broken by small changes in the format and/or code of the source web sites. If they don't want to (or can't) bother with going after you legally, they could make your life a never-ending nightmare of coding updates. And if your site is successful, you'll be a big red flag in their web logs.
A lot of good posts about the hardware and connection, but don't forget your EULA. Some things to consider:
:-)
1) Have a good privacy policy
You may need to fall back on it if the authorities (or the RIAA) come knocking for your logs. If they badger you into turning them over without a court order, you could be in one of those stories about the criminals sueing because they got caught.
2) Look at the big ISP's agreements for ideas
You may see something you hadn't thought of.
3) Lawyers are much more cost effective when used to prevent you from being sue, rather than defend you after the fact. Think about having one draft or review your agreement.
Not trying to scare you, just make sure you're covered if the guy on the third floor turns out to be a pedophile, terrorist, or (gasp) file trader.
I don't know who you use for streaming, but if you can stream the kind of traffic NPR gets for free, tell me where. I did a little research (logged into the real stream, got the base, looked up the domain owner) and found that NPR has apparently just signed on with a new streaming provider to save money and provide more service. That smells is fanatical Mac users accusing NPR of all people of being bought by Microsoft. When was the last time you supported public radio, by the way? http://www.speedera.com/newsroom/pressreleases/npr .html