I couldn't agree with you more. The only people being inconvenienced by this are Microsoft's legitimate paying customers. Once again a major company has reinforced the notion that not only does pirated software/music/movies/etc save you money it also saves you a ton of hassle.
Well then, all WatchGuard needs to do now is back it up with some source code showing how they managed to fuck it up so bad it misses 94% of the viruses now.
It's a Peter Molyneux game.... the final version of the dog won't be anything like what he claims it is. It will still be kinda fun to play around with for about fifteen minutes when it will suddenly do nothing but crap all over the place no matter what commands you give it. And it won't be to long after that until you figure out you can complete the game much easier by just ignoring the stupid thing.
19 U.S.C. 1467 and 19 C.F.R. 162.6, are the laws that give Customs and Border Protection the power to do border searches. Those laws were upheld as constitutional by The Supreme Court for the reason you said. Control your borders is an inherent right of every sovereign country.
I don't think it's nearly as simple as that. No one is arguing that the writers should be paid every time a commercial shows a scene from an episode they've already been paid for. The situation here is someone created something original and gave it away for free in one context. Now NBC wants to come along and say that gives them the right to use it for free any way they see fit and in any context they can think of.
Isn't that the same thing NBC claims is illegal when I download one of they're freely broadcast television shows off the Internet and watch it on my portable video player instead?
The whole war on terror is nothing but an effort to relieve the citizens of their rights.
Billions of dollars for a border wall that not only won't work, but would be a logistical nightmare to actually build
Billions of dollars for radiation monitors at our ports that don't actually monitor the types of radiation likely to be used in any kind of attack
Billions of dollars to defend areas in this country that the average American hasn't even heard from terror attacks that aren't even remotely likely
Billions of dollars in Iraq that got up and wandered off that no one can be bothered to go look for
Billions of dollars. . . . aw, hell, you get the idea
Citizens might be losing their rights, but that's only a byproduct of the real effort. The only purpose for the war on terror is to shove as much of your tax dollars into their pockets as they can.
>> Sure, there are some *good* people who will buy a game after playing a torrented full version, but thats maybe 5%. its the other 95% that are just stealing them with no intention to buy, and its that 95% that the RIAA etc are going after.
See, that's the problem with your line of thinking. 95% of the people aren't going to give you a dime no matter how many people the *AA sues. By suing the torrent sites out of existance you just eliminated the 5% who became extra sales for you.
The ones who get pirate copies of Civ IV today just might turn into the ones who'll plunk down $100 for the super deluxe version of Civ VI, or VII, etc. down the line.
The Right Honourable Jack Straw MP, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, London
Dear Foreign Secretary,
How are you gentlemen !! All your base are belong to us. You are on the way to destruction. You have no chance to survive make your time. Ha Ha Ha Ha....
Satelite radio is painted everywhere, can you just go ahead and use it? No you can't, you need an approved device and a subscription to decode those signals.
I was always under the impression that individuals were free to build their own descramblers, but selling completed units was illegal. Is that notion still alive now or did the DMCA kill it?
Well, I'll grant you it wasn't the perfect example of aiding and abetting, but it wasn't originally my example it was the GP's.
The only point I wanted to make was that the *law* is always cut and dried, it's the way the law is applied that introduces the shades of grey.
Using the example you cited the cops might have an air tight case that proves you lied to them, but the original offense you lied about might be so trivial as to not make it worth the effort to prosecute.
The law is cut and dry. You're either innocent or guilty. If you know someone is dealing illegal drugs and you didn't alert the proper authorities, then you're guilty of aiding and abetting. Period.
Whether or not the police would try to charge you with anything, or a jury would convict you, or a judge throws you in jail is a whole different matter. The law is binary, the application of the law has infinite possibilities.
Sorry? The software manufacturer is likely to differ on that point. You still have your license to use said software. That you have lost your installation media is your problem, not the manufacturer's problem.
But isn't this the crux of the whole argument? If it's *MY* installation media then you *SOLD* it to me. It's mine and you have no rights to impose additional conditions on me after the sale.
On the other hand if you claim it wasn't a sale at all but a *LICENSE* transaction, then I must be using *YOUR* installation media. If you won't replace it when it becomes damaged then I'm free to obtain it from anywhere I please without paying another license fee.
That's the whole problem with EULA's. They want the best of both worlds without having to assume any of the risks.
It really does work though. BMG has saved/made millions (I've seen the numbers) on albums that are DRM'd vs the albums that aren't, even when the DRM is easy to defeat like MediaMAX. For whatever reason, there are stastically more sales of DRM'd albums than non DRM albums.
This is complete nonsense. If they only put DRM on sure thing hit albums and leave niche albums unprotected then of course there are more sales of DRM'd albums. It would be like claiming sales percentages are down and ignoring the fact your shipping less product.
Umm, the reason Adler wasn't worried about it is because they already made the announcement that the source code would be freely available:
http://www.votehere.net/vhti_ref_source_code.asp
That's like the police not being worried that someone has been wandering around the evidence room.
More like not worrying about people wandering around in the local shopping mall.
If willfull blindness is not a defense, then how come Sprint, AT&T, etc, haven't been prosecuted for carry child pornography? How is this any different than that?
The Feds:"We have reason to believe your service was used to transmit/facilitate kiddie porn and here's our warrant"
Sprint, AT&T, et al:"Here's his name, address, phone number..."
Slashdot Mirror
I couldn't agree with you more. The only people being inconvenienced by this are Microsoft's legitimate paying customers. Once again a major company has reinforced the notion that not only does pirated software/music/movies/etc save you money it also saves you a ton of hassle.
Man you think that's bad I was using a laptop on a park bench when it caught fire.
The least the Microsoft guy could have done was given me a towel afterwards.
Well then, all WatchGuard needs to do now is back it up with some source code showing how they managed to fuck it up so bad it misses 94% of the viruses now.
It's a Peter Molyneux game.... the final version of the dog won't be anything like what he claims it is. It will still be kinda fun to play around with for about fifteen minutes when it will suddenly do nothing but crap all over the place no matter what commands you give it. And it won't be to long after that until you figure out you can complete the game much easier by just ignoring the stupid thing.
Close bwd,
19 U.S.C. 1467 and 19 C.F.R. 162.6, are the laws that give Customs and Border Protection the power to do border searches. Those laws were upheld as constitutional by The Supreme Court for the reason you said. Control your borders is an inherent right of every sovereign country.
http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/travel/admissability/
I don't think it's nearly as simple as that. No one is arguing that the writers should be paid every time a commercial shows a scene from an episode they've already been paid for. The situation here is someone created something original and gave it away for free in one context. Now NBC wants to come along and say that gives them the right to use it for free any way they see fit and in any context they can think of.
Isn't that the same thing NBC claims is illegal when I download one of they're freely broadcast television shows off the Internet and watch it on my portable video player instead?
- Billions of dollars. . . . aw, hell, you get the idea
Citizens might be losing their rights, but that's only a byproduct of the real effort. The only purpose for the war on terror is to shove as much of your tax dollars into their pockets as they can.The parent post seems pretty quite knowledgeable... anyone wanna translate it into dumb-ass for the rest of us?
>> Sure, there are some *good* people who will buy a game after playing a torrented full version, but thats maybe 5%. its the other 95% that are just stealing them with no intention to buy, and its that 95% that the RIAA etc are going after.
See, that's the problem with your line of thinking. 95% of the people aren't going to give you a dime no matter how many people the *AA sues. By suing the torrent sites out of existance you just eliminated the 5% who became extra sales for you.
The ones who get pirate copies of Civ IV today just might turn into the ones who'll plunk down $100 for the super deluxe version of Civ VI, or VII, etc. down the line.
7 November 2005
....
To:
The Right Honourable Jack Straw MP, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, London
Dear Foreign Secretary,
How are you gentlemen !!
All your base are belong to us.
You are on the way to destruction.
You have no chance to survive make your time.
Ha Ha Ha Ha
Sincerely,
Carlos M. Guiterrez Secretary of Commerce
Condoleezza Rice Secretary of State
Well, I'll grant you it wasn't the perfect example of aiding and abetting, but it wasn't originally my example it was the GP's. The only point I wanted to make was that the *law* is always cut and dried, it's the way the law is applied that introduces the shades of grey. Using the example you cited the cops might have an air tight case that proves you lied to them, but the original offense you lied about might be so trivial as to not make it worth the effort to prosecute.
The law is cut and dry. You're either innocent or guilty. If you know someone is dealing illegal drugs and you didn't alert the proper authorities, then you're guilty of aiding and abetting. Period.
Whether or not the police would try to charge you with anything, or a jury would convict you, or a judge throws you in jail is a whole different matter. The law is binary, the application of the law has infinite possibilities.
On the other hand if you claim it wasn't a sale at all but a *LICENSE* transaction, then I must be using *YOUR* installation media. If you won't replace it when it becomes damaged then I'm free to obtain it from anywhere I please without paying another license fee.
That's the whole problem with EULA's. They want the best of both worlds without having to assume any of the risks.
This is complete nonsense. If they only put DRM on sure thing hit albums and leave niche albums unprotected then of course there are more sales of DRM'd albums. It would be like claiming sales percentages are down and ignoring the fact your shipping less product.
If willfull blindness is not a defense, then how come Sprint, AT&T, etc, haven't been prosecuted for carry child pornography? How is this any different than that?
The Feds:"We have reason to believe your service was used to transmit/facilitate kiddie porn and here's our warrant"
Sprint, AT&T, et al:"Here's his name, address, phone number..."