The Pirate Party has a constructive and reasoned proposal for an alternative to pharmaceutical patents. It would not only solve these problems, but also give more money to pharmaceutical research, while still cutting public spending on medicines in half. This is something we would like to discuss on a European level.
I feel it important to point out that 17 USC 512 was added by the DMCA. So despite all the bad mouthing about the DMCA (which mostly I agree with) Google is technically protected by the DMCA. Crazy, no?
Comparing music to a physical product is a faulty argument. They are not controlling the distribution of all music or any other product. Only assuring me control over my artistic creation, a creation that would never have existed if not for the creator. And you seem to act like big business is the only one that benefits. If, for example, someone were to bypass the street performer protocol you mentioned early and get a copy of what they were tiring to sell and distribute it. The 'street performer' would be guaranteed the same recourse against the people that stole it as someone selling their product on a per unit basis.
It's not the governments job to level the playing field only to enforce the laws. They didn't set up on the recoding labels, those came along naturally so how would it be fair if they set up a centralized micropatronage system? (not saying they shouldn't just pointing out the obvious) Regardless though, why does the government need to even set up such a system. Such a website could be made in a matter of weeks.
The whole problem with your argument and others like yours is you seem to think that you're some how entitled to other peoples work. That they should be forced to make it available to everyone. While as nice as your utopian/communist world be, where everything is free and people share freely. It completely overlooks the rights of the people out there making the work in the first place. They worked hard for their creation and should have a right to say how it's used. You know what I always find ironic is these are generally the same people that whine and bitch every time some company uses Linux in a closed source project; like their right to control their project's use is some how more important.
Anyway, I'm off work now so we'll probably have to pick this up the in the comments about the next crack down of file sharing;)
There's nothing stopping you from doing a micropatronage/Street Performer Protocol type system right now. A small band can easily set up a website and rely on donations from fans. But the fact is you simply won't make as much money that way (the greedy nature of humans and all that) So if I want to set up a website and charge X dollars for my music why should you be allowed to undermine my chosen system of distribution? You may not agree with the system but is it not my right to choose how I share/sell my music? After all it is MY music.
If your system is truly superior why not let the economic forces play out rather then trying to impose your vision of the future on others?
The problem will only go away when those who make music embrace sharing as a way to popularize it. Those who like it, will pay. What will work better in the long run -- scaring people into paying? Or letting them choose to? If the industry doesn't realize the answer and tries to criminalize society instead, it's time for people to force them to. I really hope that initiatives like the Swedish "Pirate Party" are successful in working towards the decriminalization of non-commercial copying.
That's pretty naïve IMO. If itunes (for example) had two buttons 'Buy this music and help out the artist' and 'download for free' you honestly think people are going to buy it? People want stuff for free. The only reason people still do buy music/videos/games whatever is because a)they don't trust the network b) simply haven't heard of it or c) it's not easy to use (because it's fulled with junk or what not). If you remove the criminalization of those networks you've basically removed all 3 hurdles.
The mode of travel is not protected only the travel it's self. By your logic you could claim there is also a tax on interstate travel because obviously planes trips are taxed and fly between states. You are not being IDed to travel between the states your being ID to be allowed to fly. There is an important difference. And I do belive you are allowed to travel without ID; they make it as inconvenient as hell to do it, but your are allowed to do it.
It's like you said, you stepped out of the designated area the cops may have been jerks but they were within their rights. The police are allowed to request ID in the course of investigation of a crime. If you don't want to be IDed don't break the law.
That's sooooo going to be over turned. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/US SC_CR_0443_0047_ZS.html The application of the Texas statute to detain appellant and require him to identify himself violated the Fourth Amendment because the officers lacked any reasonable suspicion to believe that appellant was engaged or had engaged in criminal conduct.
The thing is the government didn't give you that card, you requested it from the government and you are not required to carry it. There is no need for a national ID card it's easy to prove who you are now without it: I personally drivers license, sam's card, work ID, debt card, CCW license, and collage ID all with my picture and name on them. And they're all voluntary. So given it's already so easy to prove who you are what is the point of putting yet another card out there? The only real answer is to track people... a very worrisome prospect.
The funny thing is, can you imagine if passports were a new idea? Just think of the outraged slashdotters that would vent their fury on a scaremongering story entitled "New Compulsory Photo ID required just to leave the country".
Or Driving Licenses: "New Compulsory Photo ID required just to operate vehicles!"
Wrong, because driving and entering a foreign country are privileges. Living in the country I was born is a right.
BS! You can freely travel to any state of the union with out any kind of stops or check points. You can still refuse to show ID if the police have no reason to suspect you of wrong doing. And if you want to drink in public, stick it in a brown bag.
Of course they shouldn't be wasting their time writing judgments while sitting on the bench. That's why they have clerks tucked away in the back room to bang these things out;)
And even if you had gotten galciv2 to run the game was a disaster: dozens of crashes, messed up interface, pitiful documentation, blatant AI stupidity (which I found really surprising given how much talk about how smart it was suppose to be). All of which most reviewers don't even mention. They all seem so taken by the fact that some no name company made a good game they don't want to point out it's many glaring problems.
My biggest pet peeve with them is crap being in the wrong category. It makes it such a chore to look for something to buy. For example lets go with wholesale lots of PCs The first 20 results are single buy laptop computers and then we have
TEKTRONIX 840 850 860 AUXILLARY 500 SHEET PAPER TRAY 100 x Antistatic Anti Static Bags ESD (6"x9") MAKE OVER £1000 A WEEK ON EBAY (100% PROFIT) Mystery Box Of Computers 3 more single computers. LAPTOP REPAIR BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY Wholesale Lots- Buy Computers and MAKE A LOT OF MONEY !
I mean holy shit, this reads more like spam then things to buy. And it goes on and on and on like this.
He said that he had thought that with the missing character, the section in question would have come out to be an unintelligible scramble. Instead, he was astounded to see that by sheer chance, the resulting random text had turned out to be apparently intelligible English, "ID BY ROWS", although that was not what was intended
So basically he thought it would be impossible to solve all this time but never told anyone? If I had been working on this puzzle I would feel a massive urge to go beat the crap out of this guy.
What does network bandwidth have to do with Moore's law? Either you or the submitter has got something confused.... I think I'll trust Enigma_Man and this has something to do with the connections between chips.
While certinly not the most (though if you count all the times he's been on the histroy channel....) I find it amusing the amount of times Hitler has been credited http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0386944/ And I know for a fact that's not even all of the movies he has show up in.
It's easy to get the power back to the people that use it just set up a nonprofit company and start laying fiber.... no the REAL problem is how to pay for it. Some how I'd expect voluntary contributions would fall short. An internet tax would work.... as evil as it might sound.
You've got it ass back wards. Iraq is going to bleed us of money till the sun turns cold. There is no way we could have ever made money from attacking Iraq. Not only because of the huge cost of the war, but because it would be unjustifiable for us to simply take Iraqi oil. And we're not even getting new oil reserves from this; Saddam was perfectly willing to sell us his oil before the war.
I know that the EULA protects the author from liability if they state that software is provided 'as is'. As a matter of fact I just pointed that very issue out in another comment.
I'm referring to the fact that an EULA offers no protection as to active negligence (I can't remember if there's a real term for it...). Where the design of your product is what fails and does harm. If I write a program that is designed to help you tell the difference between edible mushrooms and poison then I make a mistake and basically tell someone to go east poison mushrooms I'm in big trouble because the intent of my program was to tell the difference between good and bad mushrooms and it failed. If my program fails in that regard I'm very much liable because by marketing my program is a guide to tell the difference I implied that my guide was correct. If I stick some little clause in the EULA that says 'Not to be used as guide' it won't stand up because if it's not to be used as a guide why was it marketed as one? If the program was not intended to be used as a guide it has to be very clear of such. Big bold letters on the front of the package or some such. This is because there is a very high degree of risk with such a product. A risk that the author should know about.
To answer a possible challenge to this; companies like Microsoft can get away this for 2 reasons. 1)They don't market their product to risk intensive operations, like hospitals. In fact I bet they have specific disclaimers not to use it in hospitals where someone can be injured by it's failure. 2)An OS isn't nearly as risky as a program that IDs deadly plants.
Not that I'm an expert in this field.... In fact this is specifically the kind of cases that made me decided that being a lawyer was just to damn boring to do as a profession;)
Slashdot Mirror
Something tells me the UN is referring to things like math, science, history, and politics. Not the newest video game or latest music album.
I feel it important to point out that 17 USC 512 was added by the DMCA.
So despite all the bad mouthing about the DMCA (which mostly I agree with) Google is technically protected by the DMCA. Crazy, no?
Comparing music to a physical product is a faulty argument. They are not controlling the distribution of all music or any other product. Only assuring me control over my artistic creation, a creation that would never have existed if not for the creator. And you seem to act like big business is the only one that benefits. If, for example, someone were to bypass the street performer protocol you mentioned early and get a copy of what they were tiring to sell and distribute it. The 'street performer' would be guaranteed the same recourse against the people that stole it as someone selling their product on a per unit basis.
;)
It's not the governments job to level the playing field only to enforce the laws. They didn't set up on the recoding labels, those came along naturally so how would it be fair if they set up a centralized micropatronage system? (not saying they shouldn't just pointing out the obvious) Regardless though, why does the government need to even set up such a system. Such a website could be made in a matter of weeks.
The whole problem with your argument and others like yours is you seem to think that you're some how entitled to other peoples work. That they should be forced to make it available to everyone.
While as nice as your utopian/communist world be, where everything is free and people share freely. It completely overlooks the rights of the people out there making the work in the first place. They worked hard for their creation and should have a right to say how it's used.
You know what I always find ironic is these are generally the same people that whine and bitch every time some company uses Linux in a closed source project; like their right to control their project's use is some how more important.
Anyway, I'm off work now so we'll probably have to pick this up the in the comments about the next crack down of file sharing
There's nothing stopping you from doing a micropatronage/Street Performer Protocol type system right now. A small band can easily set up a website and rely on donations from fans.
But the fact is you simply won't make as much money that way (the greedy nature of humans and all that)
So if I want to set up a website and charge X dollars for my music why should you be allowed to undermine my chosen system of distribution? You may not agree with the system but is it not my right to choose how I share/sell my music? After all it is MY music.
If your system is truly superior why not let the economic forces play out rather then trying to impose your vision of the future on others?
The mode of travel is not protected only the travel it's self. By your logic you could claim there is also a tax on interstate travel because obviously planes trips are taxed and fly between states. You are not being IDed to travel between the states your being ID to be allowed to fly. There is an important difference.
And I do belive you are allowed to travel without ID; they make it as inconvenient as hell to do it, but your are allowed to do it.
It's like you said, you stepped out of the designated area the cops may have been jerks but they were within their rights. The police are allowed to request ID in the course of investigation of a crime. If you don't want to be IDed don't break the law.
That's sooooo going to be over turned.S SC_CR_0443_0047_ZS.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/U
The application of the Texas statute to detain appellant and require him to identify himself violated the Fourth Amendment because the officers lacked any reasonable suspicion to believe that appellant was engaged or had engaged in criminal conduct.
The thing is the government didn't give you that card, you requested it from the government and you are not required to carry it.
There is no need for a national ID card it's easy to prove who you are now without it: I personally drivers license, sam's card, work ID, debt card, CCW license, and collage ID all with my picture and name on them. And they're all voluntary.
So given it's already so easy to prove who you are what is the point of putting yet another card out there? The only real answer is to track people... a very worrisome prospect.
Wrong, because driving and entering a foreign country are privileges.
Living in the country I was born is a right.
BS!
You can freely travel to any state of the union with out any kind of stops or check points.
You can still refuse to show ID if the police have no reason to suspect you of wrong doing.
And if you want to drink in public, stick it in a brown bag.
Of course they shouldn't be wasting their time writing judgments while sitting on the bench. ;)
That's why they have clerks tucked away in the back room to bang these things out
And even if you had gotten galciv2 to run the game was a disaster: dozens of crashes, messed up interface, pitiful documentation, blatant AI stupidity (which I found really surprising given how much talk about how smart it was suppose to be). All of which most reviewers don't even mention.
They all seem so taken by the fact that some no name company made a good game they don't want to point out it's many glaring problems.
My biggest pet peeve with them is crap being in the wrong category. It makes it such a chore to look for something to buy.
For example lets go with wholesale lots of PCs
The first 20 results are single buy laptop computers and then we have
TEKTRONIX 840 850 860 AUXILLARY 500 SHEET PAPER TRAY
100 x Antistatic Anti Static Bags ESD (6"x9")
MAKE OVER £1000 A WEEK ON EBAY (100% PROFIT)
Mystery Box Of Computers
3 more single computers.
LAPTOP REPAIR BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY
Wholesale Lots- Buy Computers and MAKE A LOT OF MONEY !
I mean holy shit, this reads more like spam then things to buy.
And it goes on and on and on like this.
So basically he thought it would be impossible to solve all this time but never told anyone?
If I had been working on this puzzle I would feel a massive urge to go beat the crap out of this guy.
What does network bandwidth have to do with Moore's law? Either you or the submitter has got something confused....
I think I'll trust Enigma_Man and this has something to do with the connections between chips.
Google has failed me, turning up references to it but nothing about it.
So can someone explain what it is... and what exactly the problem is?
I may not be up to date on the most recent security notices...
But are security problems from video drives really that common of a problem?
While certinly not the most (though if you count all the times he's been on the histroy channel....)
I find it amusing the amount of times Hitler has been credited
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0386944/
And I know for a fact that's not even all of the movies he has show up in.
Well yes... you should be concerned.
But does that we should ban AutoCAD? Shouldn't pay taxes? Should censor Slashdot?
I personally don't think so.
Yes yes.
But what he's talking about is sylized grahpics (like cartoons)
It's almost like you didn't read the article.... but we know that can't be.
It's easy to get the power back to the people that use it just set up a nonprofit company and start laying fiber.... no the REAL problem is how to pay for it.
Some how I'd expect voluntary contributions would fall short.
An internet tax would work.... as evil as it might sound.
Edison solved that problem well over 100 years ago ;)
They'll never stop us!
You've got it ass back wards.
Iraq is going to bleed us of money till the sun turns cold.
There is no way we could have ever made money from attacking Iraq. Not only because of the huge cost of the war, but because it would be unjustifiable for us to simply take Iraqi oil. And we're not even getting new oil reserves from this; Saddam was perfectly willing to sell us his oil before the war.
I know that the EULA protects the author from liability if they state that software is provided 'as is'.
;)
As a matter of fact I just pointed that very issue out in another comment.
I'm referring to the fact that an EULA offers no protection as to active negligence (I can't remember if there's a real term for it...). Where the design of your product is what fails and does harm.
If I write a program that is designed to help you tell the difference between edible mushrooms and poison then I make a mistake and basically tell someone to go east poison mushrooms I'm in big trouble because the intent of my program was to tell the difference between good and bad mushrooms and it failed. If my program fails in that regard I'm very much liable because by marketing my program is a guide to tell the difference I implied that my guide was correct. If I stick some little clause in the EULA that says 'Not to be used as guide' it won't stand up because if it's not to be used as a guide why was it marketed as one?
If the program was not intended to be used as a guide it has to be very clear of such. Big bold letters on the front of the package or some such.
This is because there is a very high degree of risk with such a product. A risk that the author should know about.
To answer a possible challenge to this; companies like Microsoft can get away this for 2 reasons.
1)They don't market their product to risk intensive operations, like hospitals. In fact I bet they have specific disclaimers not to use it in hospitals where someone can be injured by it's failure.
2)An OS isn't nearly as risky as a program that IDs deadly plants.
Not that I'm an expert in this field.... In fact this is specifically the kind of cases that made me decided that being a lawyer was just to damn boring to do as a profession