Walt Disney has been dead for quite a while, too. Shouldn't Mickey Mouse, then, be in the public domain?
The cited case is nuanced - it hinges on derivative works - "As we have previously concluded that appellant's tile-preparing process results in derivative works and as the exclusive right to prepare derivative works belongs to the copyright holder, the "first sale" doctrine does not bar the appellees' copyright infringement claims."
The defendant was placing the original printed images on ceramic tiles, which was decided to be derivative. It's undecided by this case whether simply selling individual pages would be derivative (and doubtful, IMO), and simply framing the pages would be a gray area, as they would still be a print medium.
Sure, as long as he receives adequate compensation for the time, effort, and resources he went through for that return. For me, the value of the time, effort, and mileage needed to return a DVD would be far greater than the selling price of most DVDs.
That's an odd example, since many of the art books I've seen are full of reproductions made without the permission of the original artist. Why should the compiler of that book have more rights than the descendants of Van Gogh, Rembrandt, etc.?
Similarly, I find the continual extension of copyright terms pushed by Disney, et al, exceedingly hypocritical - Disney built its business from freely copying the works of others - the Bros. Grimm, Hans Christian Anderson, Mark Twain, etc. Now, they want to hold our culture hostage to their own profits.
(Are you claiming that the first sale doctrine doesn't cover the case of reselling individual pages from a book? Cite, please.)
"The paper wall of the property deed works just fine â" in a reasonably law-obedient society â" to hold squatters outside of one's house. I don't see, why you'd dismiss the "I thought of it first" paper wall as any less practical."
Physical property is naturally constrained. There's only one person who can occupy a given space, or own a particular thing. If someone else occupies that space, or steals the thing, then the original owner no longer has it.
"Intellectual property" is completely different. If I make a copy of a work, I have taken nothing from the creator.
What's this "paper wall" BS? Are you arguing that any law, simply because it is a law, is proper and just?
So, they pay for 2 employees instead of 1, their COG goes up, sales go down, then they have to fire 1 of the 2 and end up with a smaller, less profitable business than they started with.
And no one is forced into 80 hour work weeks. Slavery was abolished over a century ago. If you don't want to work 80 hours, quit or convince your employer to pay you 1/2 your income (including benefits) if your work is limited to 40 hours.
"Plug in a device, let it download, then come get it the next night."
100 TB / 24 hrs... = 9259259259 bps. So, plug in a device which can store 100 TB into a 10 Gb network port which connects to every data source at full speed, and that's it? A device which can hold 25x 4 TB drives would be pretty big, and it's unlikely all their systems and interconnects are 10G.
"And in the US of A, a corporation is legally a person.
No, I'm not kidding."
No. a corporation can't vote, and does not have all of the rights of a natural person. It is true that for many laws, corporations are included in the definition of "person," but that's not the same as saying they are persons legally - there are limits and exceptions.
Apart from of course getting to mind your own business when paying cash as does the seller and of course no credit fraud which is not blamed on the victim, the seller allowing credit but on an innocent party and of course very simple budgeting based upon what you can afford to spend rather than what you can afford to borrow and pay a ton of interest on...
There isn't a car (at least in the US) where the brakes can't overcome full throttle. All those "unintended acceleration - I was pushing on the brake" reports just point to driver error, at the very least, they weren't pushing on the brake.
But yes, I think in general that M/T drivers do tend to be more aware of how the whole system works.
So, you can't support your argument with facts. Meh.
I only objected to the OP, which made a case which was valid only if the electronic system was purchased anew for every election, which is clearly not the case. Now, you're resorting to straw man arguments totally unassociated with cost. If you want to support the claim that it's more expensive, you need to put some factual numbers behind it.
Slashdot Mirror
Walt Disney has been dead for quite a while, too. Shouldn't Mickey Mouse, then, be in the public domain?
The cited case is nuanced - it hinges on derivative works - "As we have previously concluded that appellant's tile-preparing process results in derivative works and as the exclusive right to prepare derivative works belongs to the copyright holder, the "first sale" doctrine does not bar the appellees' copyright infringement claims."
The defendant was placing the original printed images on ceramic tiles, which was decided to be derivative. It's undecided by this case whether simply selling individual pages would be derivative (and doubtful, IMO), and simply framing the pages would be a gray area, as they would still be a print medium.
That just shows that their plan is working perfectly. See: Newspeak.
Sure, as long as he receives adequate compensation for the time, effort, and resources he went through for that return. For me, the value of the time, effort, and mileage needed to return a DVD would be far greater than the selling price of most DVDs.
That's an odd example, since many of the art books I've seen are full of reproductions made without the permission of the original artist. Why should the compiler of that book have more rights than the descendants of Van Gogh, Rembrandt, etc.?
Similarly, I find the continual extension of copyright terms pushed by Disney, et al, exceedingly hypocritical - Disney built its business from freely copying the works of others - the Bros. Grimm, Hans Christian Anderson, Mark Twain, etc. Now, they want to hold our culture hostage to their own profits.
(Are you claiming that the first sale doctrine doesn't cover the case of reselling individual pages from a book? Cite, please.)
"Right to decide?" Well, from the same vacuum you pulled that "right" from, I'll claim a "right to copy."
"The paper wall of the property deed works just fine â" in a reasonably law-obedient society â" to hold squatters outside of one's house. I don't see, why you'd dismiss the "I thought of it first" paper wall as any less practical."
Physical property is naturally constrained. There's only one person who can occupy a given space, or own a particular thing. If someone else occupies that space, or steals the thing, then the original owner no longer has it.
"Intellectual property" is completely different. If I make a copy of a work, I have taken nothing from the creator.
What's this "paper wall" BS? Are you arguing that any law, simply because it is a law, is proper and just?
Yep. The government has no power or authority to "sell" spectrum.
So, they pay for 2 employees instead of 1, their COG goes up, sales go down, then they have to fire 1 of the 2 and end up with a smaller, less profitable business than they started with.
And no one is forced into 80 hour work weeks. Slavery was abolished over a century ago. If you don't want to work 80 hours, quit or convince your employer to pay you 1/2 your income (including benefits) if your work is limited to 40 hours.
Was it impossible for you to read the GP, which claimed "To ex-filtrate 100 TB of data is going to take a while, no matter how you cut it?"
Clearly, an argument against that claiming it could be done, simply, overnight is incorrect, which I pointed out with hard facts.
"Plug in a device, let it download, then come get it the next night."
100 TB / 24 hrs... = 9259259259 bps. So, plug in a device which can store 100 TB into a 10 Gb network port which connects to every data source at full speed, and that's it? A device which can hold 25x 4 TB drives would be pretty big, and it's unlikely all their systems and interconnects are 10G.
"And in the US of A, a corporation is legally a person. No, I'm not kidding."
No. a corporation can't vote, and does not have all of the rights of a natural person. It is true that for many laws, corporations are included in the definition of "person," but that's not the same as saying they are persons legally - there are limits and exceptions.
You're mistaken.
"ad-hominem attacks on 60 Minutes"
Uh, 60 Minutes isn't a person.
, especially in sentence construction.
Whoosh. The smartphone adds bulk (more than a wallet, for many) and is just one more thing to lose, so get rid of that, too.
"These groups don't actually discriminate against boys. They let them in, and are just labeled and marketed to encourage underrepresented groups."
Like marketing real estate for specific racial groups?
Sexist much?
There isn't a car (at least in the US) where the brakes can't overcome full throttle. All those "unintended acceleration - I was pushing on the brake" reports just point to driver error, at the very least, they weren't pushing on the brake.
But yes, I think in general that M/T drivers do tend to be more aware of how the whole system works.
If the law was intended to prevent psychos from driving taxis, why are medallions limited in number, and what prevents a rich psycho from buying one?
Came to post same. Yep, should have read "generating more power from 'clean' technologies than nuclear, coal or gas."
So, you can't support your argument with facts. Meh.
I only objected to the OP, which made a case which was valid only if the electronic system was purchased anew for every election, which is clearly not the case. Now, you're resorting to straw man arguments totally unassociated with cost. If you want to support the claim that it's more expensive, you need to put some factual numbers behind it.
You're the one claiming increased costs, so the impetus is on you to document them as part of your argument.
Because electronic voting machines are "use once, then throw away" items?
"profit must increase every year."
That's what inflation is for.
Such an offer can be completely legitimate, and is not fraudulent. Sorry for your lack of reading skills, keep trying.