Perhaps they think the game is violating truth in advertising laws by classifying itself as excellent or splendid, as in "did a bully job of persuading the members", or expressing approval, as in "Bully for you!"
"Last I checked Best Buy won't sell AO-rated or unrated games"
That's good to hear. And if that standard were upheld universally then we wouldn't have any need for a law.
When GTA:SA got rerated to AO, I didn't hear of a single vendor opting to get the stickers so they could keep selling the relabeled game. Even on-line stores like Amazon that require credit cards to purchase games pulled it from sale.(*)
So I must have missed something. Can you cite an example of a place selling modern unrated or AO-rated games over the counter? (Activision's Bloody Human Freeway for the Atari 2600 isn't considered modern.)
(*) Legislation seeking to keep minors away from sexual content on the web say requiring the use of a credit card before access is sufficient to prove the remote user's adulthood, so why would Amazon need to pull GTA:SA?
My disagreement is that software vendors do not enforce the ESRB rating like theators enforce the movie ratings.
Have you checked to see whether all DVD vendors comply with MPAA rating guidelines restricting the sale or rental of R-rated movies?
Last I checked Best Buy won't sell AO-rated or unrated games, but they do sell unrated versions of movies (some with restored footage that originally prevented them from getting an R-rating in theaters) that had failed to get an R-rating, and I certainly remember seeing Girls Gone Wild and Playboy DVDs on the Special Interests shelf next to the Anime section.
And just a friendly note: there is no "o" in "theater" (nor in "theatre").
But, everyone here has a story about standing in line at EB/Software Etc/Gamestop behind a 8-12 year old with too much money buying GTA/BMXXX/etc.
All the comments I've read here has the parent joining the kid when the front of the line is reached, and that parent becoming indignant over being reminded of the game's rating, effectively saying, "Don't tell me how to raise my kid; that's the government's job!"
Does this mean that the only reason why someone would want such computing power is because they want to run projects they wouldn't want the public to know about?
Parodying a celebrity name is not using a celebrity name. What if CmdrTaco's friend's name really was Marilyn Hanson? What if my name really is Michael Bolton? Just because no-talent ass clown became famous and started winning Grammys shouldn't mean my Level 10 Orc can't be named Michael Bolton. And they way you have it, I won't even have the option of being Mike Bolton, or even Mike Boltedon. I'd have to go with something opposite and stupid like Speaker Nutsoff.
Oh, damn. Speaker is a title too! Damn. Damn damn DAMN!
Blizzard made you change your nickname in their game (you even agree that this is their right)... so why is this a news story again?
It at least gives him something to point to as Violated to say that he used to be CmdrTaco, thereby reestablishing his identity.
Unfortunately not everyone has a famous site that would be authoritative enough to validate their identity should it happen to them.
In these virtual worlds your name is really your only form of identity. If it can be taken away so easily your name might as well be Thomas Veil.
And besides, just because you've known about the problem for a long time doesn't mean everyone is informed, and sometimes it takes a person who is famous in the right circles to make a stink about a policy to get changes made.
I suppose if he'd named himself John Smith he'd be in violation because it could be seen as a combination of John Lennon and Will Smith. (Never mind that IMDB has 40 identical matches to the name "John Smith", some of them actors, resulting in them being numbered from I to XL.)
So practically all real names are banned, and then if you're not sufficiently creative in choosing your name (within rigidly defined areas of creativity) you're banned. And really any adjective could be read as a title, so out they go too.
"The Zaphod Beeblebrox?" "No, just a Zaphod Beeblebrox; didn't you hear I come in six-packs?"
So come up with a readable, unique, pronounceable name (i.e. must contain a sufficient number of vowels) that doesn't violate any of our secret rules, and do it in 4 to 8 characters.
Then there's the unreality of having a world where you knew there could not possibly be another person with your exact same name.
"Where's the jerk who's calling himself The Tick?!" "I am that jerk! Who wants to know?"
The name I wanted here already exists... and has apparently never been used. But I suspect I created that account long ago, forgot its password, and registered it to an e-mail address that I no longer possess and probably bounces. I wish there was a way I could claim it. I don't care about the lower ID number, just the name.
No, wait, that's not the most common, it's the first in alphabetical order. In this context, it stands for Set Top Box (VCR, cable box, other TV appliances).
I'm not as confident that CableCards will be all that good of a thing.
Most likely your CableCard will be married to the ID of the device the cable company installs it in. It won't be portable between devices, and they'll be free to refuse installation in any device they don't like. You won't be able to take your subscription to the neighbor's big screen TV and watch your premium sports channels there.
And you'll be paying for the rental of the CableCard in your monthly billing cycle, as much if not more than what you'd be paying for their crippled cable box.
And it sounds to me like it is possibly older equipment that Wal-Mart is using in some locations that were early users of that part of the spectrum, expected to have full control over that clean band, and thus can't handle the emissions of the XBOX 360, but that they can't upgrade their in-store equipment in those locations as readily as they can get Microsoft to adjust their XBOX 360 pod kiosks.
Unless I am linked to other websites which are actively indexed, I need to submit my website in order to have it indexed.
The web has ways to discover your site.
One of my sites got indexed by Google despite my never submitting it to or linking it from anywhere. Some other site combed the DNS records for new registered domains, linked me against my will, and now I get spam at that domain.
Just as a book is discoverable by walking the halls of a library or bookstore. If you want your books to be obscure and unfindable, don't publish.
This is an opt-OUT program. Fundamentally, this is flawed.
So is copyright now. Everything you make is automatically copyrighted. Change copyright back to opt-in (or at least renewal) and then get back to me.
I mean even webpage search engines are opt-in.
Uh, no. Unless you opt-out with a properly crafted robots.txt, the absence of that file means you're gonna get indexed. Same for archive.org, and they do make the original pages available. You can opt-out by telling them to remove the pages (a retroactive robots.txt).
is that copyright can be reneged if you are not seen to be defending your rights
Things must be different in Australia. Here, loss by failure to defend only applies to trademarks, not copyright. Or maybe you're just confusing the two.
It is difficult to see how anybody is being "screwed over," because the restrictions Google is placing on access are such that nobody is likely to lose sales (and many sales will probably be made) by virtue of the existence of this archive.
Indeed, authors gain value for their works by the value given by Google in making their works more discoverable by more people who can make purchases, just as it was found that people recording television on their VCR to watch at a more convenient time increases a show's viewership and garners more ad impressions, national and local.
As to (another poster complaining that the issue is) Google getting a copy of each work of their own for which they haven't paid, I'm sure they make full access to any text archived in their database to any member of the company... NOT! It is very feasible to archive the text in such a way that not even Google can retreive the full text, and I would expect that they would put in such restrictions.
Do we want to create a world where it is illegal to profit directly or indirectly from being a facilitator?
I don't know if I'd call it a "conflict of interest" that a journalist is covering Apple while using a Mac, as Dvorak does (can nobody write about the machine they actually use?)
No, just that Mac stories should be written by Windows users and Windows stories should be written by Windows users (and Linux stories shouldn't be written).
Say, does this mean another round of inexpensive previous-generation machines from a certain University as they upgrade their system to the latest and fastest?
BUT.. this top end Quad G5 configuration has me astonished, especially the +$1650 nVidia Quadro FX 4500. I was thinking of investing in a nice 30in Cinema Display and a QuadG5.... It's not like I'm going to do the fancy tricks this card is capable of, like stereographic LCD glasses, dual 30in screens, etc.
Then don't get that card. The other one offered can drive a single 30" Cinema Display.
Every breath you take Every move you make Every bond you break Every step you take I'll be watching you
Every single day Every word you say Every game you play Every night you stay I'll be watching you
O can't you see You belong to me How my poor heart aches with every step you take
Every move you make Every vow you break Every smile you fake Every claim you stake I'll be watching you
Since you've gone I been lost without a trace I dream at night I can only see your face I look around but it's you I can't replace I feel so cold and I long for your embrace I keep crying baby, baby,please
O can't you see you belong to me How my poor heart breaks with every step you take
Every move you make Every vow you break Every smile you fake Every claim you stake I'll be watching you
Every move you make, every step you take I'll be watching you
I'll be watching you (every breath you take, every move you make) (every bond you break, every step you take) I'll be watchin' you (every single day, every word you say) (every game you play, every night you stay) I'll be watchin' you (every move you make, every vow you break) (every smile you fake, every claim you stake) I'll be watchin' you (every single day, every word you say) (every game you play, every night you stay) I'll be watchin' you
(every breath you take, every move you make) (every bond you break, every step you take) I'll be watchin' you (every single day, every word you say) (every game you play, every night you stay) I'll be watchin' you (every move you make, every vow you break) (every smile you fake, every claim you stake) I'll be watchin' you (every single day, every word you say) (every game you play, every night you stay) I'll be watchin' you....
Don't just go with the first search hit, nor the liner notes of a compilation album. Sometimes you have to go digging for the complete lyrics.
Even if that is true, that could only put him at risk for future actions there. By coming to the US he could be arrested for past actions since our law was on the books at the time of the alleged offense.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, so we have innovation , indeed, intuitive, copy protection, boxen, turbo, cyber, and FLOSS,
Got any other words, phrases, or acronyms we should stop using?
Perhaps they think the game is violating truth in advertising laws by classifying itself as excellent or splendid, as in "did a bully job of persuading the members", or expressing approval, as in "Bully for you!"
"Last I checked Best Buy won't sell AO-rated or unrated games"
That's good to hear. And if that standard were upheld universally then we wouldn't have any need for a law.
When GTA:SA got rerated to AO, I didn't hear of a single vendor opting to get the stickers so they could keep selling the relabeled game. Even on-line stores like Amazon that require credit cards to purchase games pulled it from sale.(*)
So I must have missed something. Can you cite an example of a place selling modern unrated or AO-rated games over the counter? (Activision's Bloody Human Freeway for the Atari 2600 isn't considered modern.)
(*) Legislation seeking to keep minors away from sexual content on the web say requiring the use of a credit card before access is sufficient to prove the remote user's adulthood, so why would Amazon need to pull GTA:SA?
With the advent of live CDs
You say that as if it self-booting game disks were something new.
My disagreement is that software vendors do not enforce the ESRB rating like theators enforce the movie ratings.
Have you checked to see whether all DVD vendors comply with MPAA rating guidelines restricting the sale or rental of R-rated movies?
Last I checked Best Buy won't sell AO-rated or unrated games, but they do sell unrated versions of movies (some with restored footage that originally prevented them from getting an R-rating in theaters) that had failed to get an R-rating, and I certainly remember seeing Girls Gone Wild and Playboy DVDs on the Special Interests shelf next to the Anime section.
And just a friendly note: there is no "o" in "theater" (nor in "theatre").
But, everyone here has a story about standing in line at EB/Software Etc/Gamestop behind a 8-12 year old with too much money buying GTA/BMXXX/etc.
All the comments I've read here has the parent joining the kid when the front of the line is reached, and that parent becoming indignant over being reminded of the game's rating, effectively saying, "Don't tell me how to raise my kid; that's the government's job!"
Does this mean that the only reason why someone would want such computing power is because they want to run projects they wouldn't want the public to know about?
Parodying a celebrity name is not using a celebrity name. What if CmdrTaco's friend's name really was Marilyn Hanson? What if my name really is Michael Bolton? Just because no-talent ass clown became famous and started winning Grammys shouldn't mean my Level 10 Orc can't be named Michael Bolton. And they way you have it, I won't even have the option of being Mike Bolton, or even Mike Boltedon. I'd have to go with something opposite and stupid like Speaker Nutsoff.
Oh, damn. Speaker is a title too! Damn. Damn damn DAMN!
Blizzard made you change your nickname in their game (you even agree that this is their right)... so why is this a news story again?
It at least gives him something to point to as Violated to say that he used to be CmdrTaco, thereby reestablishing his identity.
Unfortunately not everyone has a famous site that would be authoritative enough to validate their identity should it happen to them.
In these virtual worlds your name is really your only form of identity. If it can be taken away so easily your name might as well be Thomas Veil.
And besides, just because you've known about the problem for a long time doesn't mean everyone is informed, and sometimes it takes a person who is famous in the right circles to make a stink about a policy to get changes made.
I suppose if he'd named himself John Smith he'd be in violation because it could be seen as a combination of John Lennon and Will Smith. (Never mind that IMDB has 40 identical matches to the name "John Smith", some of them actors, resulting in them being numbered from I to XL.)
So practically all real names are banned, and then if you're not sufficiently creative in choosing your name (within rigidly defined areas of creativity) you're banned. And really any adjective could be read as a title, so out they go too.
"The Zaphod Beeblebrox?"
"No, just a Zaphod Beeblebrox; didn't you hear I come in six-packs?"
So come up with a readable, unique, pronounceable name (i.e. must contain a sufficient number of vowels) that doesn't violate any of our secret rules, and do it in 4 to 8 characters.
Then there's the unreality of having a world where you knew there could not possibly be another person with your exact same name.
"Where's the jerk who's calling himself The Tick?!"
"I am that jerk! Who wants to know?"
The name I wanted here already exists... and has apparently never been used. But I suspect I created that account long ago, forgot its password, and registered it to an e-mail address that I no longer possess and probably bounces. I wish there was a way I could claim it. I don't care about the lower ID number, just the name.
What does "STB" mean?
Bachelor of Sacred Theology (religious order).
No, wait, that's not the most common, it's the first in alphabetical order. In this context, it stands for Set Top Box (VCR, cable box, other TV appliances).
I'm not as confident that CableCards will be all that good of a thing.
Most likely your CableCard will be married to the ID of the device the cable company installs it in. It won't be portable between devices, and they'll be free to refuse installation in any device they don't like. You won't be able to take your subscription to the neighbor's big screen TV and watch your premium sports channels there.
And you'll be paying for the rental of the CableCard in your monthly billing cycle, as much if not more than what you'd be paying for their crippled cable box.
I object to the .xxx domain because it's a stupid name.
And it sounds to me like it is possibly older equipment that Wal-Mart is using in some locations that were early users of that part of the spectrum, expected to have full control over that clean band, and thus can't handle the emissions of the XBOX 360, but that they can't upgrade their in-store equipment in those locations as readily as they can get Microsoft to adjust their XBOX 360 pod kiosks.
Unless I am linked to other websites which are actively indexed, I need to submit my website in order to have it indexed.
The web has ways to discover your site.
One of my sites got indexed by Google despite my never submitting it to or linking it from anywhere. Some other site combed the DNS records for new registered domains, linked me against my will, and now I get spam at that domain.
Just as a book is discoverable by walking the halls of a library or bookstore. If you want your books to be obscure and unfindable, don't publish.
This is an opt-OUT program. Fundamentally, this is flawed.
So is copyright now. Everything you make is automatically copyrighted. Change copyright back to opt-in (or at least renewal) and then get back to me.
I mean even webpage search engines are opt-in.
Uh, no. Unless you opt-out with a properly crafted robots.txt, the absence of that file means you're gonna get indexed. Same for archive.org, and they do make the original pages available. You can opt-out by telling them to remove the pages (a retroactive robots.txt).
is that copyright can be reneged if you are not seen to be defending your rights
Things must be different in Australia. Here, loss by failure to defend only applies to trademarks, not copyright. Or maybe you're just confusing the two.
It is difficult to see how anybody is being "screwed over," because the restrictions Google is placing on access are such that nobody is likely to lose sales (and many sales will probably be made) by virtue of the existence of this archive.
Indeed, authors gain value for their works by the value given by Google in making their works more discoverable by more people who can make purchases, just as it was found that people recording television on their VCR to watch at a more convenient time increases a show's viewership and garners more ad impressions, national and local.
As to (another poster complaining that the issue is) Google getting a copy of each work of their own for which they haven't paid, I'm sure they make full access to any text archived in their database to any member of the company... NOT! It is very feasible to archive the text in such a way that not even Google can retreive the full text, and I would expect that they would put in such restrictions.
Do we want to create a world where it is illegal to profit directly or indirectly from being a facilitator?
Sony doesn't want to repeat losing the format war like they did with betamax...
and the MiniDisc, and ATRAC, and SACD...
Blu-Ray the Flavour of The Moment
Does it taste like burning?
Profanity Sex Violence (PSV) Ratings differ from the ESRB in that they... ...are inspired by the BTK killer?
Next thing you know we'll be listening to nothing but commercial jingles on the radio and eating at Taco Bell.
I don't know if I'd call it a "conflict of interest" that a journalist is covering Apple while using a Mac, as Dvorak does (can nobody write about the machine they actually use?)
No, just that Mac stories should be written by Windows users and Windows stories should be written by Windows users (and Linux stories shouldn't be written).
Not my opinion.
Say, does this mean another round of inexpensive previous-generation machines from a certain University as they upgrade their system to the latest and fastest?
BUT.. this top end Quad G5 configuration has me astonished, especially the +$1650 nVidia Quadro FX 4500. I was thinking of investing in a nice 30in Cinema Display and a QuadG5.... It's not like I'm going to do the fancy tricks this card is capable of, like stereographic LCD glasses, dual 30in screens, etc.
Then don't get that card. The other one offered can drive a single 30" Cinema Display.
Don't just go with the first search hit, nor the liner notes of a compilation album. Sometimes you have to go digging for the complete lyrics.
Even if that is true, that could only put him at risk for future actions there. By coming to the US he could be arrested for past actions since our law was on the books at the time of the alleged offense.
Is he seeking standing to challenge the US law?