How does this ruling and the previous ruling account for this section of copyright law which says that it is not an infringement for you to make a copy of a legally acquired program provided "that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program
Because you are authorized to play ONE COPY of the game . You are not authorized to simultaneously run bots.
The law student failed to mention that the principal (only) use of Glider is to allow you to run a bot at the same time as you run the game.
And neither your father or grandfather ever ONCE got a sunburn?
Read the literature on this subject. Even competent dermatologists have been publishing articles saying their own profession has gone overboard on the sunscreen issue.
Actually all the studies that address "too much" involved sever sunburns in teen years.
There is no peer reviewed study that suggests normal exposure to sun imposes a high mortality.
Yet the press, over-reacting as usual, have scared people out of the sun and created a sunscreen industry overnight by failing to actually read the studies that were done.
Cancer rates caused by sun exposure only show significant rise in direct relation to bad burns. Avoid the bad burns and you are fine.
60 thousand years of human existence can't be discounted overnight.
Go out and play. Get a tan. Drink some coffee. Have some beer with those salty chips. Lets see, did I forget any of the other discredited cancer scares?
The sad part of my exposure to project management as it applies to Software development is that any project large enough to require use of a project management approach is destined to fail simply because of its size.
Well you've characterized human learning. As things become understood they can be stated in ever more precise and ever more concise language. (algorithms).
This itself speaks to the progress in the AI field. The startling and profound are rendered to algorithms, embodied into routines, and used "off the shelf" like a can of peas.
Having to go out and plant a garden every time you wanted pea soup got old after a while.
> I have a feeling that the reason AI has > 'underdelivered' is merely due to not > understanding our own intelligence first
But as TFA mentions, its also entirely possible that we do not need to replicate the human mind to accomplish the tasks we set out to accomplish with AI.
Realistically, who needs a depressed Marvin the robot moping about. We have teenagers.
Why would we want all the complications of emotions and moods simply to automate the docking of one space craft to another or to diagnose routine diseases given a list of symptoms?
We've not chosen to replicate the human mind because there is no shortage of human minds.
There is no demonstrable advantage to building a self aware piece of software. Therefore we don't waste any money on that type of AI.
Its almost as if the AI we DO build was designed by the AI we DO build. Purely practical, designed to handle mundane tasks without becoming bored, surly, depressed, always polite (perhaps to a fault).
We eventually build what we want. By that time our wants change, but that does not define a failure.
We haven't built petulant robots because we don't want them.
The planets, having 4.2, 6.7, and 9.4 times the mass of the Earth, orbit the star with periods of 4.3, 9.6, and 20.4 days, respectively.
Anything orbiting a star in 4.3 DAYS is extremely close to the star, and could not possibly anything more than a cinder, probably at near rock melting temperatures.
Mercury has an orbital period of 88 days for comparison.
> they throw in the towel to avoid precedent being established.
Exactly right.
By throwing in the towel here they think they are free to play this hand at another table. Avoiding a ruling was more important to them than simply losing this round.
TFA implies this may not be the case, and the dismissal may attach prejudice on any subsequent (or concurrent) claims against other defendants that are substantially similar.
IANAL, but would like to see one weigh in here with some professional observations.
This is hardly surprising given that the source for most paper is wood, and wood has the highest tensile strength of any building material known to man based either on weight or cross sectional area.
Not a lot of our building techniques rely primarily on tensile strength, most rely on spanning gaps with weight bearing members. But if you have to hang something heavy, Wood is your friend.
Tensile strength does come into play on collapsing structures, as weight bearing members are removed, and buildings end up hanging from their walls or rafters. Firefighters really dislike entering steel framed buildings, when fighting active fires because steel softens and collapses without warning, where as wood groans and snaps and gives ample warning that it is about to collapse.
Are you aware of any other companies that paid royalties to LGE in regard to this issue? Just asking, since that wasn't even hinted at in TFA.
As to why the appeals court sided with LG, -well, that's why we have a Supreme Court, but bear in mind that this case has been in litigation since 2002 and the Supreme court only accepted the case in 2007. Prior to that time, the lower courts were following the law and the decisions of the SCOTUS from a prior era.
Its just fun and amusing to counting all the oil, coal, gas, gold, nickle, salmon, crab, timber, and empty tourist's purses exported from that frozen wasteland.
> there is absolutely no other valid purpose besides that, for the short term
For some values of "short".
Reminds me of Seward's folly. Buy Alaska? What a total waste of money. Can't possibly justify such a waste while there is still one "Poor person" left anywhere in the world.
Slashdot Mirror
READ your license and find out.
Most likely you can run ONE copy of the game on ONE computer at once.
Two licenses would then require an additional computer (or a virtual machine).
Who modded this "insightful"?
How does this ruling and the previous ruling account for this section of copyright law which says that it is not an infringement for you to make a copy of a legally acquired program provided "that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program
Because you are authorized to play ONE COPY of the game . You are not authorized to simultaneously run bots.
The law student failed to mention that the principal (only) use of Glider is to allow you to run a bot at the same time as you run the game.
Oh, grow up and go read TFA.
You are allowed by the license to use one copy at a time.
The infringing software allows you to load multiple copies in such a way as to eliminate the copy protection and violate the license.
Hey, back off. My spell checker said sever was fine. ;-)
And neither your father or grandfather ever ONCE got a sunburn?
Read the literature on this subject. Even competent dermatologists have been publishing articles saying their own profession has gone overboard on the sunscreen issue.
Actually all the studies that address "too much" involved sever sunburns in teen years.
There is no peer reviewed study that suggests normal exposure to sun imposes a high mortality.
Yet the press, over-reacting as usual, have scared people out of the sun and created a sunscreen industry overnight by failing to actually read the studies that were done.
Cancer rates caused by sun exposure only show significant rise in direct relation to bad burns. Avoid the bad burns and you are fine.
60 thousand years of human existence can't be discounted overnight.
Go out and play. Get a tan. Drink some coffee. Have some beer with those salty chips. Lets see, did I forget any of the other discredited cancer scares?
The sad part of my exposure to project management as it applies to Software development is that any project large enough to require use of a project management approach is destined to fail simply because of its size.
Well you've characterized human learning. As things become understood they can be stated in ever more precise and ever more concise language. (algorithms).
This itself speaks to the progress in the AI field. The startling and profound are rendered to algorithms, embodied into routines, and used "off the shelf" like a can of peas.
Having to go out and plant a garden every time you wanted pea soup got old after a while.
> I have a feeling that the reason AI has
> 'underdelivered' is merely due to not
> understanding our own intelligence first
But as TFA mentions, its also entirely possible that we do not need to replicate the human mind to accomplish the tasks we set out to accomplish with AI.
Realistically, who needs a depressed Marvin the robot moping about. We have teenagers.
Why would we want all the complications of emotions and moods simply to automate the docking of one space craft to another or to diagnose routine diseases given a list of symptoms?
We've not chosen to replicate the human mind because there is no shortage of human minds.
There is no demonstrable advantage to building a self aware piece of software. Therefore we don't waste any money on that type of AI.
Its almost as if the AI we DO build was designed by the AI we DO build. Purely practical, designed to handle mundane tasks without becoming bored, surly, depressed, always polite (perhaps to a fault).
We eventually build what we want. By that time our wants change, but that does not define a failure.
We haven't built petulant robots because we don't want them.
They meant SIZED relative to earth. They used the term Super-Earths, which means Bigger than Earth.
Mercury would be a misnomer, because mercury is so tiny.
There is nothing in our solar system so large and so close to the sun. These are odd-ball planets, to say the least.
This is because the HARPS can't detect really small planets or really far away (from their sun) planets.
It uses perturbations of the star's movement to detect planets, and small or far planets just don't exert that much gravitational pull on the star.
Its a limitation of the tools at hand. Give it another 10 years.
The planets, having 4.2, 6.7, and 9.4 times the mass of the Earth, orbit the star with periods of 4.3, 9.6, and 20.4 days, respectively.
Anything orbiting a star in 4.3 DAYS is extremely close to the star, and could not possibly anything more than a cinder, probably at near rock melting temperatures.
Mercury has an orbital period of 88 days for comparison.
This article sure has been shopped around a bit hasn't it:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/views/linux/libraryview.jsp?end_no=100&lcl_sort_order=desc&type_by=Articles&sort_order=desc&show_all=false&sort_by=Relevance&search_by=anatomy+of&topic_by=All+topics+and+related+products&search_flag=true&show_abstract=true&S_TACT=105AGX59&S_CMP=GR
> they throw in the towel to avoid precedent being established.
Exactly right.
By throwing in the towel here they think they are free to play this hand at another table. Avoiding a ruling was more important to them than simply losing this round.
TFA implies this may not be the case, and the dismissal may attach prejudice on any subsequent (or concurrent) claims against other defendants that are substantially similar.
IANAL, but would like to see one weigh in here with some professional observations.
Why all the drama trying to figure out WHY these games disappear, when the fact that these were BORING from the beginning is patently obvious.
> No, steel does. That's why I-beams are steel, not
> wood. It's also why the cables in suspension
> bridges are steel, not wood poles.
The same weight of wood would be stronger.
Some respect has to be paid to longevity. Who would use wood suspension cables in termite country?
There are also problems of attaching wood to other objects. Hard to weld wood you know.
This is hardly surprising given that the source for most paper is wood, and wood has the highest tensile strength of any building material known to man based either on weight or cross sectional area.
Not a lot of our building techniques rely primarily on tensile strength, most rely on spanning gaps with weight bearing members. But if you have to hang something heavy, Wood is your friend.
Tensile strength does come into play on collapsing structures, as weight bearing members are removed, and buildings end up hanging from their walls or rafters. Firefighters really dislike entering steel framed buildings, when fighting active fires because steel softens and collapses without warning, where as wood groans and snaps and gives ample warning that it is about to collapse.
Are you aware of any other companies that paid royalties to LGE in regard to this issue? Just asking, since that wasn't even hinted at in TFA.
As to why the appeals court sided with LG, -well,
that's why we have a Supreme Court, but bear in mind that this case has been in litigation since 2002 and the Supreme court only accepted the case in 2007. Prior to that time, the lower courts were following the law and the decisions of the SCOTUS from a prior era.
>More CO2 => increased temperatures => more greenery => more CO2 absorption => decreased temperatures?
Exactly. Amazing how it all balances out. Its not the first time in earth's history that this cycle has played out.
Al Gore... Clean up on Isle 7.
Try reviewing history some time.
ClueBat: The US Purchased Alaska, from Russia, as was the practice in that era. In fact, most of the US territory was Purchased from other countries.
You may doubt the legality of the title of the sellers but possession was 9/10ths of the law at that time.
Nothing you need. Move along now.
Its just fun and amusing to counting all the oil, coal, gas, gold, nickle, salmon, crab, timber, and empty tourist's purses exported from that frozen wasteland.
All for about 1.9Â per acre.
Say the use claims the moon?
What are you talking about?
Do you have any more straw men you would like to prop up?
> there is absolutely no other valid purpose besides that, for the short term
For some values of "short".
Reminds me of Seward's folly. Buy Alaska? What a total waste of money. Can't possibly justify such a waste while there is still one "Poor person" left anywhere in the world.
Or maybe Starbucks does?
Of all the sit-down coffee shops I visit, Starbucks is the only one that has been charging for wifi over the past two years.
Whats up with that?