I'm no lawyer either, but if I were, I would insist on a clause like that. It would be the depth of stupidity to put yourself in a legal situation where someone can sue you for something they placed in your possession. It's basic protection.
Aside from that, uploading to YouTube is voluntary, and far from a necessity. I fail to see how YouTube is in a position "over" uploaders.
Do you have anything to back that statement? Remember, you said "typically" which implies it is the norm. I'll let you go if you can demonstrate 50.1% of cases fit your description.
Ah, the "everyone's doing it, or worse, so what I do is just fine" line of reasoning. Still as morally bankrupt as the day it was first thought up, of course, but hey! why let that stop you.
No, it's not being self-righteous. It's recognizing that my greed for entertainment doesn't trump the rights of others. It's actually consideration, something you apparently don't fully understand, given your stance on collecting the copyrighted works of others on your own terms.
Ah, so that's your justification. It's interesting. It has a certain logic, so long as you ignore the rights of the people that you have to trample on to achieve your goal.
As for me, no, there are many ways to get TV shows in my world. TV, for one. I never feel justified in pirating to fill my greed for entertainment. Possibly because I don't have that greed. But as I said, I'm not an asshole.
I'm no fanboy, but I knew it was coming. Nintendo is the only company that consistently pandered to people who wanted a gaming experience. Everyone else shoots for the "cool" factor, trying to rope in trend followers. Nintendo remained focused all throughout their time in games on the one thing that counted - having fun.
This isn't to say that MS and Sony don't have fun experiences available with their consoles, just that it seems fun comes second for them to being the leader. Sure, competition is good, but it's not the end goal.
I was always certain Nintendo would find itself back on top. I honestly thought it would be another generation, but hey, bully for them.
Right, that means you aren't willing to pay for the entertainment. Does this somehow justify piracy? I don't see how, but then again, I'm not an asshole.
Assuming for a second your opinion is 100% legitimate (a big assumption, you've provided no backing), so what?
It's purely luck being born with drive and intelligence and capability. Should steps be taken to hold them down since they didn't earn that? Do we really need to make Harrison Bergeron come true?
I shop elsewhere, after I give shit to the people who annoyed me. I don't care if it's their choice to do it. At some point, the decision was made by the person harassing me to harass me. I'm under no obligation to make the process pleasant for them.
Hey buddy, what do you make? Seven, eight bucks an hour? Get another job if you're being made to do distasteful stuff for low prices. You have no claim to sympathy from customers, since you are the customer service. If you do shit that annoys me, I'm calling you out on it.
The appearance of a person is much more complicated than the cover of a book. It reveals many aspects of personality, indicating things like slovenliness, disdain for the opinions of others, and a total lack of understanding of how other people think in extreme cases like sir Stallman.
Why wouldn't they? Basically, it hurts pirates (who aren't gonna pay), Slashdotters who hold their principles above playing the game (and let's face it, tend to not pay for software anyway), and a vanishingly small percentage of people who just can't get it to work.
Go over the store manager's head, contact the corporate staff of PC World. Check with the manufacturer of the laptop as a possible repair vector. Contact any business associations in the area for advice. If you have money to burn and you want to press things to a point that will drive them nuts, involve the legal system.
And as others have said, why is this in YRO? I know the "editors" don't really do as the name of the position implies, and I know kdawson is even less diligent than usual, but jeepers cats man, come on.
Frankly, so what? Piracy is a large cause of falling revenues in the music industry. Does it hurt your sensibilities to hear that?
You can talk about the quality of the product until the end of time, but the truth is music is no better or worse than it ever was. Realistically, if no one wanted the music, people wouldn't be downloading it either.
America doesn't need a third party. America needs to stop officially sanctioning the party system. There's no point in bringing in other groups if they are automatically marginalized.
Cancel the primaries, legally destroy the GOP and the DNC, and start it all fresh, with people and ideas. Then things will work again.
Of course, that's about as likely as religion being real.
I'm having a hard time telling if your serious, since you basically seem to imply that CEOs, politicians, and other various in-charge types aren't actually people. Are you parodying yourself?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm no lawyer either, but if I were, I would insist on a clause like that. It would be the depth of stupidity to put yourself in a legal situation where someone can sue you for something they placed in your possession. It's basic protection.
Aside from that, uploading to YouTube is voluntary, and far from a necessity. I fail to see how YouTube is in a position "over" uploaders.
Do you have anything to back that statement? Remember, you said "typically" which implies it is the norm. I'll let you go if you can demonstrate 50.1% of cases fit your description.
A dick who makes his own decisions and deals with the consequences.
I'm aware that's a synonym for freedom loving.
So? I don't get why that's a problem. Is it wrong to have dreams, or is it wrong that they don't all come true?
Why can't we go to the moon in a properly fraternal, just, and socialist way? I don't want the lunar surface tainted with capitalist pig dogs.
Ah, the "everyone's doing it, or worse, so what I do is just fine" line of reasoning. Still as morally bankrupt as the day it was first thought up, of course, but hey! why let that stop you.
No, it's not being self-righteous. It's recognizing that my greed for entertainment doesn't trump the rights of others. It's actually consideration, something you apparently don't fully understand, given your stance on collecting the copyrighted works of others on your own terms.
Ah, so that's your justification. It's interesting. It has a certain logic, so long as you ignore the rights of the people that you have to trample on to achieve your goal.
As for me, no, there are many ways to get TV shows in my world. TV, for one. I never feel justified in pirating to fill my greed for entertainment. Possibly because I don't have that greed. But as I said, I'm not an asshole.
I'm no fanboy, but I knew it was coming. Nintendo is the only company that consistently pandered to people who wanted a gaming experience. Everyone else shoots for the "cool" factor, trying to rope in trend followers. Nintendo remained focused all throughout their time in games on the one thing that counted - having fun.
This isn't to say that MS and Sony don't have fun experiences available with their consoles, just that it seems fun comes second for them to being the leader. Sure, competition is good, but it's not the end goal.
I was always certain Nintendo would find itself back on top. I honestly thought it would be another generation, but hey, bully for them.
Right, that means you aren't willing to pay for the entertainment. Does this somehow justify piracy? I don't see how, but then again, I'm not an asshole.
So you've made your point - you want entertainment, and you don't want to have to pay for it. Congratulations, you're an asshole.
Assuming for a second your opinion is 100% legitimate (a big assumption, you've provided no backing), so what?
It's purely luck being born with drive and intelligence and capability. Should steps be taken to hold them down since they didn't earn that? Do we really need to make Harrison Bergeron come true?
A company can only push its taxes onto its customers. Where else would they get the money?
I shop elsewhere, after I give shit to the people who annoyed me. I don't care if it's their choice to do it. At some point, the decision was made by the person harassing me to harass me. I'm under no obligation to make the process pleasant for them.
Hey buddy, what do you make? Seven, eight bucks an hour? Get another job if you're being made to do distasteful stuff for low prices. You have no claim to sympathy from customers, since you are the customer service. If you do shit that annoys me, I'm calling you out on it.
The appearance of a person is much more complicated than the cover of a book. It reveals many aspects of personality, indicating things like slovenliness, disdain for the opinions of others, and a total lack of understanding of how other people think in extreme cases like sir Stallman.
Possibly, this isn't fair, but it is real.
Except it is still a you problem, by definition. It spoils the gameplay, for you. Not for me, not for the many, many others who are enjoying it.
You may insist all you like that it does indeed ruin my experience, but it really doesn't.
Does that mean that I can actually buy a game or two there without them hounding me about reservations? If so, I might rescind my personal boycott.
Why wouldn't they? Basically, it hurts pirates (who aren't gonna pay), Slashdotters who hold their principles above playing the game (and let's face it, tend to not pay for software anyway), and a vanishingly small percentage of people who just can't get it to work.
The numbers are in their favor here.
Go over the store manager's head, contact the corporate staff of PC World.
Check with the manufacturer of the laptop as a possible repair vector.
Contact any business associations in the area for advice.
If you have money to burn and you want to press things to a point that will drive them nuts, involve the legal system.
And as others have said, why is this in YRO? I know the "editors" don't really do as the name of the position implies, and I know kdawson is even less diligent than usual, but jeepers cats man, come on.
It couldn't have, because that would effectively counter the anti-corporate point. We can't have that, so you, sir, are a liar.
Frankly, so what? Piracy is a large cause of falling revenues in the music industry. Does it hurt your sensibilities to hear that?
You can talk about the quality of the product until the end of time, but the truth is music is no better or worse than it ever was. Realistically, if no one wanted the music, people wouldn't be downloading it either.
Looks like a socialist with modpoints and a grudge got to your post. I do so love when people mod down to express disagreement.
Here's hoping I get this one in M2.
You're close, but you missed the mark.
America doesn't need a third party. America needs to stop officially sanctioning the party system. There's no point in bringing in other groups if they are automatically marginalized.
Cancel the primaries, legally destroy the GOP and the DNC, and start it all fresh, with people and ideas. Then things will work again.
Of course, that's about as likely as religion being real.
I'm having a hard time telling if your serious, since you basically seem to imply that CEOs, politicians, and other various in-charge types aren't actually people. Are you parodying yourself?