It actually depends on where you live. In some countries, this is covered under what's referred to as a "Friends & Family" clause. It allows you to make copies (for non-commercial purposes--you can't go sell 'em on the street) of things you own for friends or family (as the name implies).
US law does not permit this. Yes, it's silly but that's what the law currently says. It certainly veers away from the original intent of the Copyright clause in the Constitution which aimed to protect *publishers* from being undersold and forced out of business. With "publishing" being now very simple and almost cost-free (if you choose your distribution medium well) the whole nature of dissemination of information has changed completely.
I'm going to guess that it's because this is much more than a VCR, it is a means for avoiding the one thing that makes network television profitable: commercials.
You're right, of course, but here's the mind blowing thing: even without one of these nifty little commercial-skip features, hardly anyone watches commercials anyway. Seriously, commercials are mostly just for going to get a drink or using the bathroom. And even the ones you watch are not of much effect. If advertisers realized how useless TV ads were, they'd put all their money into product placement instead--which does seem to be pretty effective.
The only difference between TV commercials and banner ads on the web is that by click-through analysis, advertisers can actually SEE how ineffective it is.
With the appropriate kernel config and patches (low-latency patch, especially) Linux can be lightweight and responsive/quick/excellent for media applications. The quick booting thing shouldn't be too hard to do. There may already be a project to do a load-core-from-disk boot, I don't know.
Not quite. I've actually witnessed the reaction people have had when explaining that they don't *really* have to use the command line. They usually say something like, "If an operating system even *has* a command line, it's out of date and shouldn't be used." A far better strategy is just to not tell them that there even *is* a command line. That's what MS does, incidentally. You'll find no mention of the "fabulous DOS shell" as a feature of the Windows operating system.
as far as BE goes, it's good for multimedia or something (please confirm)...
Er, sort of. It's good for really low latency applications (think software synthesis, realtime mixing/DSP, reliable MIDI recording/mixing). Musicians (and video editing people too, I suppose) need to be sure that everything will be perfectly in sync. You can't do this with 100 ms latencies (Windows/Mac OS). There some dirty tricks you can pull in Windows and Mac OS to get low latencies but they reduce stability and just aren't good ideas. Plus, these OSes aren't very powerful.
The good news is that there is a kernel patch available for Linux that provides better latencies than are available in BeOS! The bad news is that it's kind of a dirty hack (Linus won't include it in the official distribution for some very logical reasons).
Media professionals currently use Mac OS and Windows primarily (and Linux occasionally--like me!) but hate it every step of the way and would like to have something better. Unfortunately, there aren't enough of us to make a meaningful "marketshare" (as you put it).
You do know about the low latency patch for the Linux kernel don't you? It's been out for a long time and is an essential tool in the Linux music/audio community. We're all running patched kernels and we get lower input-output latencies for software synthesis than BeOS does!
By threatening and quantifying punishment for providing misinformation, the message is clear: we can check this information.
The message *I* get from it is: This information is *really* important. The census is for outlining political districts and fraud in this area could be disastrous. I wasn't commenting on the "statistical use" thing.
You're absolutely right about the invasion of privacy stuff. However, it's probably a good idea that lying on the census (about significant things, like how many people there are in your household) should be illegal and punishable by fine. Of course, if all they were asking was the number of people in your household, it'd be difficult to check the truthfulness of it with your name.
Do you mean that Islam is incompatible with democracy? Or that the country is in such bad potiical and economic state that democracy is impossible? Is it the low population density? The lack of infrastructure?
All of the above.;-) More seriously, I think that it is possible for them to become a Republic at some point; however, it's going to be a while. Perhaps a *long* while.
When I was attending college, I took a Political Science class with a very insightful instructor about how states are built and how various forms of government develop. We examined how popular government grew in England over a period of several hundred years. We also looked at how it *didn't* develop completely in Germany until after WWII. Then, we looked at third world nations attempting to implement popular government (because of the success in the West) and how it has tended to fail because certain economic, religious, and social characteristics were not present in large enough degrees or in the right combinations to support growth of popular government.
While it is true that the Allies were able to engineer German society after WWII in a satisfactory manner--and it was masterfully done--it must be remembered that Germany was almost all the way there already. They had the Protestant Reformation under their belt and they had long ago experienced capitalism and urbanization. Kaiser Wilhelm and Adolf Hitler had succeeded in unifying the nation (state-building). What was wrong was the unusually high sense of submission to authority, regardless of the sensiblity of that authority. (*Reasonable* submission to authority is, of course, appropriate.) Additionally, there was a great deal of corporatism that fueled the dominance of the industry-government.
So, Afghanistan *could* be ready for a government "of the people" someday. They have a lot of social and economic changes to go through first. I think that the emphasis that Islam places on authority--and it is stronger and more strict than that of biblical Christianity--is the most problematic facet of their society.
Because justic is a (gasp!) Judeo-Christian ideal! We can't have any of that. We're all good little atheists and moral-relativists here at Slashdot. Right?
The rhythm is significant, yes. However, for there to be copyright infringement, the case that must be made is that the pitch and rhythmic elements are both sufficiently similar in the two works and that one composer was previously exposed to the other's work. The pitch and rhythm thing can be quite subjective.
As an aside, the Western tonal tradition lends itself to common series' of pitches and/or rhythms anyway. Music isn't clinical--it's messy. This annoys the hell out of attorneys, who are extremely clinical.
At any rate, there's virtually no chance that this particular case would ever go through. The phone company has more of a case against these guys than the other way around. (And the phone company doesn't have a case either, really.)
I kind of doubt this is what the idea of copy righting was for.
Correct.
Copyrights along with patents were originally made to promote scientific research.
Partially correct. Patent was to promote the furthering of the sciences. Copyright was to promote the furthering of "useful Arts."
Protecting one's intellectual property is the whole idea behind copy righting.
Completely and totally incorrect. The concept of "intellectual property" is absolutely *not* what the founding fathers had in mind. Jefferson, in particular, made a very clear point in his writings that the rights granted were not property rights. Rather, they are *monopoly* rights. And very limited monopoly rights, at that.
Copyright is a chance to recover costs involved in publishing. The copyright holder (not "owner", as is sometimes used) has a time-limited artificial monopoly on the expression of an idea.
The concept of Copyright as property came about much more recently.
Slashdot Mirror
US law does not permit this. Yes, it's silly but that's what the law currently says. It certainly veers away from the original intent of the Copyright clause in the Constitution which aimed to protect *publishers* from being undersold and forced out of business. With "publishing" being now very simple and almost cost-free (if you choose your distribution medium well) the whole nature of dissemination of information has changed completely.
You're right, of course, but here's the mind blowing thing: even without one of these nifty little commercial-skip features, hardly anyone watches commercials anyway. Seriously, commercials are mostly just for going to get a drink or using the bathroom. And even the ones you watch are not of much effect. If advertisers realized how useless TV ads were, they'd put all their money into product placement instead--which does seem to be pretty effective.
The only difference between TV commercials and banner ads on the web is that by click-through analysis, advertisers can actually SEE how ineffective it is.
With the appropriate kernel config and patches (low-latency patch, especially) Linux can be lightweight and responsive/quick/excellent for media applications. The quick booting thing shouldn't be too hard to do. There may already be a project to do a load-core-from-disk boot, I don't know.
Not quite. I've actually witnessed the reaction people have had when explaining that they don't *really* have to use the command line. They usually say something like, "If an operating system even *has* a command line, it's out of date and shouldn't be used." A far better strategy is just to not tell them that there even *is* a command line. That's what MS does, incidentally. You'll find no mention of the "fabulous DOS shell" as a feature of the Windows operating system.
Argh. Missed that. Sorry. I was tired. At any rate, many of us *do* apply that patch. We have to in order to get a decent software synthesis platform.
What?!? I could never do that to a piece of hardware! It would be like murder!
Er, sort of. It's good for really low latency applications (think software synthesis, realtime mixing/DSP, reliable MIDI recording/mixing). Musicians (and video editing people too, I suppose) need to be sure that everything will be perfectly in sync. You can't do this with 100 ms latencies (Windows/Mac OS). There some dirty tricks you can pull in Windows and Mac OS to get low latencies but they reduce stability and just aren't good ideas. Plus, these OSes aren't very powerful.
The good news is that there is a kernel patch available for Linux that provides better latencies than are available in BeOS! The bad news is that it's kind of a dirty hack (Linus won't include it in the official distribution for some very logical reasons).
Media professionals currently use Mac OS and Windows primarily (and Linux occasionally--like me!) but hate it every step of the way and would like to have something better. Unfortunately, there aren't enough of us to make a meaningful "marketshare" (as you put it).
Talking about latency? Then, not really. There's a low latency patch for the Linux kernel that delivers better latencies than BeOS.
You do know about the low latency patch for the Linux kernel don't you? It's been out for a long time and is an essential tool in the Linux music/audio community. We're all running patched kernels and we get lower input-output latencies for software synthesis than BeOS does!
The message *I* get from it is: This information is *really* important. The census is for outlining political districts and fraud in this area could be disastrous. I wasn't commenting on the "statistical use" thing.
You're absolutely right about the invasion of privacy stuff. However, it's probably a good idea that lying on the census (about significant things, like how many people there are in your household) should be illegal and punishable by fine. Of course, if all they were asking was the number of people in your household, it'd be difficult to check the truthfulness of it with your name.
Hitler was from Austria.
All of the above. ;-) More seriously, I think that it is possible for them to become a Republic at some point; however, it's going to be a while. Perhaps a *long* while.
When I was attending college, I took a Political Science class with a very insightful instructor about how states are built and how various forms of government develop. We examined how popular government grew in England over a period of several hundred years. We also looked at how it *didn't* develop completely in Germany until after WWII. Then, we looked at third world nations attempting to implement popular government (because of the success in the West) and how it has tended to fail because certain economic, religious, and social characteristics were not present in large enough degrees or in the right combinations to support growth of popular government.
While it is true that the Allies were able to engineer German society after WWII in a satisfactory manner--and it was masterfully done--it must be remembered that Germany was almost all the way there already. They had the Protestant Reformation under their belt and they had long ago experienced capitalism and urbanization. Kaiser Wilhelm and Adolf Hitler had succeeded in unifying the nation (state-building). What was wrong was the unusually high sense of submission to authority, regardless of the sensiblity of that authority. (*Reasonable* submission to authority is, of course, appropriate.) Additionally, there was a great deal of corporatism that fueled the dominance of the industry-government.
So, Afghanistan *could* be ready for a government "of the people" someday. They have a lot of social and economic changes to go through first. I think that the emphasis that Islam places on authority--and it is stronger and more strict than that of biblical Christianity--is the most problematic facet of their society.
By the way, I like your .sig.
Because justic is a (gasp!) Judeo-Christian ideal! We can't have any of that. We're all good little atheists and moral-relativists here at Slashdot. Right?
Turn your mind away from Marx and Trotsky and start finding out the true story, instead of knee-jerking off.
Well, whatever it is, we *definitely* shouldn't grant any more legitimacy to world government and jurisdiction.
And so, we come to impasse. Many of us believe that the Jews were granted that land by God, you do not. This is the primary issue.
The people of Afghanistan aren't *ready* for Democracy (or even a Republic). It simply isn't right for their society.
Check out two links: GNUstep and WindowMaker. These two, combined, are producing something far better than a lame Windoze clone: a NeXTSTEP clone!
You can. If you're using NeXTSTEP, that is. ;-)
Just a friendly note from your local NeXT bigot.
Damn straight.
They already did. It was the WIPO treaty from which we got the DMCA. They put their foot down on the wrong roach.
As an aside, the Western tonal tradition lends itself to common series' of pitches and/or rhythms anyway. Music isn't clinical--it's messy. This annoys the hell out of attorneys, who are extremely clinical.
At any rate, there's virtually no chance that this particular case would ever go through. The phone company has more of a case against these guys than the other way around. (And the phone company doesn't have a case either, really.)
Correct.
Copyrights along with patents were originally made to promote scientific research.Partially correct. Patent was to promote the furthering of the sciences. Copyright was to promote the furthering of "useful Arts."
Protecting one's intellectual property is the whole idea behind copy righting.Completely and totally incorrect. The concept of "intellectual property" is absolutely *not* what the founding fathers had in mind. Jefferson, in particular, made a very clear point in his writings that the rights granted were not property rights. Rather, they are *monopoly* rights. And very limited monopoly rights, at that.
Copyright is a chance to recover costs involved in publishing. The copyright holder (not "owner", as is sometimes used) has a time-limited artificial monopoly on the expression of an idea.
The concept of Copyright as property came about much more recently.