What's really delightful was MS's response to being told about this development. They sounded quite unhappy, even commented they didn't believe it was allowed under their Windows Media licensing agreements and would have to look into it.
Wouldn't it be just great if Microsoft turned around and sued the RIAA and MPAA for having this done? And wouldn't it be even more fun if they won?:) Sure MS is evil too, but I'd still love to see them turn around and bite the hand they tried to get to feed them.;)
Or an alternative: The entire senior management (this includes the CEO/CIO/CFO and whatever C*O's there are) and board of directors have to go to jail for the term specified, they will be replaced by interim people until the sentence is complete, or the shareholders decide to have the old ones permanently removed.
If you're in senior management and know your own ass may end up in jail for something illegal your company does, you're going to think a LOT harder about what you allow to happen and what you put a stop to. I seriously doubt you'd be ordering the shredding of documents to hide evidence.
One nice thing about this is it gets rid of the two objections you note. It's hard to say "but those people aren't responsible" because senior management IS ultimately responsible for the course of actions there company takes. Does anyone honestly think the CEO of Anderson Consulting didn't know about the orders to shred documents pertaining to Enron? Does anyone think the CEO of Overture (and it's parent company) isn't aware that they're putting trojaned files out there? Don't they deserve to pay the penalty for allowing that to happen? I think so.
You're correct on the difference between entrapment and a sting. (Well not 100%, but it's close enough without getting into boring details, and trust me it's quite boring reading all the relevent cases, I did it once. o_O)
But... I think now that it's been announced in the press they've opened themselves up to a major pot of trouble. Right now I use no P2P software outside of Bittorrent (for downloading Linux ISOs). If I go install Kazaa specifically to search for this file for research purposes and it infects my machine there's no longer a case against me. What they have now is their grand scheme to stop P2P traffic has now attacked my computer. My knowing what it was beforehand will not change the fact that they intentionally created the trojaned file and put it out there. It's the same thing as a computer virus, if I download one for study and goof up and get infected, the virus writer is STILL guilty of creating a computer virus and releasing it into the wild. (This is assuming it's an active virus infecting machines and not just one posted to a research site.)
I don't think the whole "it's a sting" argument will help them much when they inevitably get sued for this. The court's going to look at it just like the do at those who write computer viruses, worms and trojans. Frankly all it is IS a trojan. It plays no audio or video message (this is according to PC World's research), it does not present a "you naughty pirate, pay for your music/video) message in the popups, it just pops up ads, some of which try to install spy/malware without permission.
I just wonder how in the hell they thought this was a good idea. Committing what might even qualify as a federal crime knowingly is generally a bad business strategy.
Better yet, not only tell them how you feel, report their actions to your state attorney's general office, and tell them you're doing so. Feel free to copy and paste from the letter I sent them below:
I recently came across this (http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,119016, 00.asp) PC World Article about your company's actions in creating trojaned windows media files to "seed" onto P2P networks. You should be aware that in several states, your actions will likely qualify as willfull computer hacking, being in the same category of offenses as computer virus, trojan and worm creation & release.
While your actions have not directly affected me (I have no use for P2P software), I am sure they have caused damage to other citizens in my state (Your stste here). I felt you should be aware that I am sending along the information in the PC World article to my state attorney's general office with a request that they look into the legality of your actions under XX state law.
Copyright infringment on P2P networks is both illegal and immoral, but that does not allow those fighting it to break laws as well. I am not sure if your actions are illegal under XX state law or not, but I am sure our attorney general will be able to make that determination.
I urge you to think through the potential ramifications of your actions, and to rethink your current course of action.
Sincerely,
Joe Cool (Or your name here:)
I must admit I was tempted to install Kazaa and search for and download the file mentioned in PC World's article, just so I could tell my state attorney general they tried to hack my computer. I finally decided it wasn't worth the hassle and potential media attention though.:)
I should note that given their current actions I don't trust them so I used a disposable address from Spam Gourmet to send from and only signed my first name. Maybe I'm paranoid, but I figure any company who thinks it's OK to basically attack other people's computers in the name of stopping P2P just can't be trusted to know both my full name and state.
On the flip side, if Ubisoft is going to leave themselves open to a takeover, who are they to complain when it actually happens? I think this is underhanded by EA, but it's perfectly legal. Ubisoft may whine, but has no leg to stand on with regards to a formal complaint.
Perhaps I don't fully understand the market, but pretty much every company is potentially open to a hostile takeover. As long as someone can convince 51% of the existing stockholders to sell to them, they can takeover. Granted there are rules about how they have to go about it, but no public company is truly "safe" from a hostile takeover, only private ones are.
I do agree with your sentiment on not supporting them, how they've gone about this with Ubisoft erased any doubts in my mind that they weren't intentionally abusing their workers. It's really hard to give a company the benefit of the doubt when they keep doing stuff that's at best morally questionable. I certainly am not going to miss their games either, it's not like they've added much to any of their licenses of late, all of them have come across as slicker and less menu-driven (SSX3 started it) but the gameplay's about the same. Hell, I liked SSX Tricky better than SSX3 myself.
However, while the RIAA went after the entire P2P network, despite the legal uses that is could, and to some extent was being put to, the MPAA is just going after copyright infringers. So far at least.
Too late, the way Bittorrent works the actual files are not hosted on the trackers, the tracker contains only info on peers who are participating in the torrent and a hash of the file/file segments so users can verify parts downloaded. If the MPAA wanted to go after the actual infringers, they would be suing the people on the torrent, not the trackers, or the sites that are basically torrent trackers (like Suprnova was, it didn't run any tracker, just linked to the torrent files on whatever tracker they were on).
I think the problem here is not everyone understands fully how Bittorrent works, or they'd be just as pissed as they were about suits against Napster, Kazaa, Grokster, etc. since they trackers are similar to those. The tracker only provides info to find the copyrighted matierial, it does not reside on the server.
It's interesting to note that Lokitorrents keeps a blacklist and rejected torrents (and banned users uploading them) for items on it. They had a policy of adding anything to the blacklist if asked to by the rights holders, most of the stuff on it was from Microsoft since they actually bothered to ask. The MPAA didn't, they just sued instead. Not everyday you can say something is more evil than Microsoft.:)
Re:Keeping it simple: answer to all astroturf post
on
LokiTorrent vs. MPAA
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Have you been paying attention to court cases recently? Obviously there's a legal precedent that what Lokitorrent is doing is illegal.
Really? Last I checked the RIAA lost its suits against Grokster and whoever else was involved in that one. Kazaa was found legal in its original country of origin, the new trial is underway and we have no way of knowing how it will end yet.
If things like Grokster and Kazaa can be legal, exactly HOW would Lokitorrents be illegal? It's even less in control over the content than Grokster and Kazaa are.
Claiming the conspiracy theory that anybody who disagrees with you is an agent of the RIAA or MPAA is just odd - about on level with wearing tinfoil hats.
Actually he didn't say that, he said all the posts in support of this move seemed rather odd for Slashdot, that it looked like the MPAA might have decided to astroturf the site. I agree, normally those against anything the MPAA/RIAA does far outweights those in favor of it here, this whole discussion seems like it's from another site to be honest.
And besides, he forgot one nice point, the MPAA is breaking the DMCA. They are supposed to send cease & desist letters, in the proper format, to the specified DMCA contact address, listing every link/item they find is infringing prior to suing under the common carrier provisions. They failed to do this, and even in the notice of suit have failed to specifiy exactly WHAT was infriging? "[O]ur copyrighted works" could be most anything, they are supposed to enumerate each item. Go search for Scientology on Google and go to the link about stuff removed, you'll see those letters do exactly what they're supposed to, listing every URL they find infringing and want removed.
Maybe Lokitorrents is breaking the law, maybe they aren't, but the MPAA isn't following their own laws they bought from Congress, and that is a true outrage on many fronts.
Boo fucking hoo. And we're supposed to feel outraged at MPAA because?
Well frankly because they're not even following the law that they bought, aka the DMCA. The DMCA requires them to send cease and desist letters before initiating legal action. That they were able to get the letter saying they were suing them to the site owners, they obviously had a way of sending those C&Ds, but chose not to.
If you don't feel outraged that a multi-billion dollar industry who buys laws that trample consumer's rights in favor of their own, then ignore the actual laws they buy, well, what the hell would make you feel outraged?
Do note that the site has a blacklist, and a policy of adding anything to it when the rights holder asks them too. Torrents added that are on the black list are removed, AND the user uploading them are banned. They have all the Microsoft stuff on there that MS asked them to remove and by all accounts have been enforcing the blacklist. The MPAA didn't bother to use this procedure, simply telling them to "remove all our copyrighted works" doesn't cut it, the DMCA even requires that every specific infringing link be submitted in the takedown notice. Frankly the MPAA's wanting Lokitorrents to do their work for them and suing them just because they can afford the lawyers to do it, hoping it'll shut them down without the MPAA actually having to do what they're supposed to do to get things removed.
So to paraphrase you, Boo fucking hoo, I'm not supposed to feel outraged at the MPAA because why?
IAAL, and darned proud of the modern justice system...
3. We all benefit from NOT having a system whereby a well funded organization cannot assume it will win because it can afford lawyers, a system where the big money always wins.
So then you'd be happy to defend me pro-bono against a large corporate entity if they mistakenly include me in a John Doe suit because they transposed two digits in an IP address and got mine instead of the real culprit?
If not, then you just prove that the system only works for those with money, and the more money you have the better chance you have of winning.
BTW, I don't say this to attack you, but I've yet to meet a single lawyer who's principles extend to doing legal work for free. When that issue shows up, principles or not, they want to be paid, upfront as well. If you're truly different, kudos to you, now try to get your fellow lawyers to have some scruples too.
Which absolutly negates ANY defence in the way of "we dont know what people upload, so we cant be made responsible". They check every torrent (because how else would they catch violations of those rules), but are perfectly ok with half-life2 or blade3 on their trackers...
If their policy is only to check against a blacklist that has been created from takedown notices/requests from rights holders then it's a defense. In that case the rights holder failed to notify them of the infringing matierial before filing suit, something the DMCA requires of the rights holders.
Allowing torrents to anything not on the blacklist isn't the same as knowing infringement, it's just assuming everything not blacklisted is ok with the rights holders until they're told otherwise.
If you believe what you are doing is right and legal, why would you say "we'll delete xyz torrents if you ask nicely"?
Simply because if you don't know everything and aren't everywhere at once, you may make a mistake and let something illegal through. Saying they'll take any links down if they are copyrighted and being distributed without permission is a very good indicator that they were trying to be upfront and legal about things. The fact that the MPAA didn't bother to use this pre-existing policy (that works, MS used it and they did what they said they would) isn't going to help the MPAA in court at all, in fact it may get it tossed out in short order as the judge is going to end up asking the MPAA's lawyers "did you request these alleged infringing links be removed before you filed suit?" When the MPAA says no, the suit disolves quickly, it's not going to be allowed to continue when it's obvious the plaintiff didn't follow procedure to stop what they're suing over.
In other words, the MPAA could have resolved the whole thing with a letter notifying Lokitorrents of every torrent link that they found infringing and Loki would have removed them. In fact the DCMA common carrier clauses require the rights holder to not only file a notice first (before suit), it requires it to be done in a certain way, and only to the address the carrier provides for DCMA takedowns. DCMA takedown notices sent to the wrong address, or in the improper format can be legally ignored by the carrier without legal penalty. At least the law required the rights holders to do their research first instead of putting the whole burden on the carriers.
Hire a lawyer? To defend something that's blatenly illegal? People are buying this? The Internet is a great place.
Yes, you'd be stupid not to, even if you planned to plead guilty. Without a lawyer to protect your rights (which you still have even if you DID break a law) you'll end up with the harshest penalty imaginable. Judges really dislike defendants that defend themeselves, so you'd even have judicial bias against you, you wouldn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of coming out with a fair verdict. Frankly the snowball stands a far better chance of lasting longer in hell than you would in court without a lawyer.
After taking a look, I think the MPAA has a legal right to tell these people: "You are infringing on my rights, stop it. If you won't, I'll get a court order that tells you to stop it"
I agree with you, and even on the above point, but it's important to point out that the MPAA didn't do this. Instead of sending Lokitorrent a Cease & Desist letter, they sent them a "We're suing your asses off, take your site down now" letter. I didn't see anything in the letter saying the MPAA would drop the suit if Lokitorrent complied either.
So while the MPAA is certainly within their legal rights, and seemed to be taking a gentler track than the RIAA at first, they've already slipped into the "Batten down the hatches, let's sue everyone we think's doing anything illegal and let them figure out how to defend themselves if they aren't" mode the RIAA has taken.
I'd already been boycotting the US music industry (haven't bought, listened to, downloaded, etc. a single US song since about 1998) and now I get to add the US movie industry too. Not that I bothered to watch much of the crap they put out anyway. The important lesson is that I had been willing to support them in the past, but I find their current actions so distasteful I won't any longer. I also doubt I'll be the only one like this, online trading of Mp3s on P2P networks has gone UP since the RIAA started their lawsuits. I've heard some people say they had started downloading for the first time just to piss the RIAA off. I frankly can't see how these tactics are sound business practice, looks more like rats trying to hold their sinking ships together with legal briefs.
What could congress do? Pass a law with retroactive effects?
Congress technically can't pass an ex post facto law, although it seems they do it anyway. However that's not the issue, there's enough pre-existing matierial to invalidate these patents, and a request from congress to reexamine a patent would guarantee great scrutiny of the patent in question. I'm sure the patents are bogus, for instance my bank's been sending me scanned copies of my cancelled checks for about 12 years now, and they use the scans as the primary check when questions occur (only when the scan isn't clear do they pull the actual paper checks from storage, and charge me for it unless it's their fault.)
But think about it another way, what happens if Congress decides to descretely ask the FBI to investigate this company and it's owners? You think the FBI won't dig deep to find dirt on them to make Congress happy? Pissing off Congress is NOT a good idea, they wield immeasurably power, arguably more than the president does.
Once these guys get their money to the bank (no pun), they're safe.
I wouldn't count on that either, seeing as they're targetting banks. I'd hate to have an account subjected to the kind of scrutiny their accounts would be, any mistake would be caught and charged against them. Better hope they don't try to float any checks.:)
You will never understand the concept of owning something of value, until you actually do own something of value, and some punk comes and takes it away.
I do own things of value, and in the sphere you're hinting at, IP, copyright, etc. I've written music, done research into security issues (not just computer, but all in the digital landscape), and written code. I've had all three stolen in the traditional sense, not just copyrights infringed. I've seen others take music I wrote and pretend it was theirs, get it published and get full credit for it. I've had a person talk to me about my research wanting to include it (and me) in a grant application they were working on turn around and claim the research was theirs and see my name mysteriously disappear completely from their application. I've seen my code stolen by peers and used for profit.
But you know, I still think the FBI has much better things to do. Am I pissed about my ideas being stolen? Hell yeah. Do I think it warrants law enforcement intervention? Hell NO. While I may have suffered even financial losses, the proper place for that to be settled is in court, in a civil suit. The FBI and other law enforcement should be out there going after the criminals that are truly dangerous, who's actions tend to leave dead victims. Even giving tickets to speeders is a better use of resources since the speeders might have crashed and killed someone.
Bottom line, while this was piracy on a fairly massive scale, they weren't killing or maiming people. We're supposed to be in the midst of a war on terror, and the terrorists have shown us they're quite happy to maim and kill. As a US citizen I want the FBI out there hunting down the terrorists, the kidnappers, the rapists and murderers. I don't want to see them going after some guy making copies of DVDs to sell, there are plenty of methods in place for the copyright holders to remedy those situations that don't involve the FBI.
And as for your claim that it was a "massive, worldwide sting operation", it was 120 searches in 24 hours. Not massive by any sreach.
You do realize a normal search of just a house can involve well over 10 law enforcement officers? That we're talking a minimum of 1200 people here (the odds are highly against there being duplication of personnel, especially given the amount of paperwork involved). That 120 searches in 24 hours averages out to 5 searches every HOUR for one day? That's a search every 12 minutes! If that doesn't constitute massive to you, what in the hell does? Yes there are probably that many searches occurring any given day but not for the same sting!
I think what you fail to realize is we don't object to these pirates being brought to justice, but we do object to the FBI being involved in something so petty when compared to all the terrorism, rape, murder, kidnappings, robberies, etc. out there. If I'd heard that a sting took place involving local law enforcement acting in concert as part of a massive civil lawsuit/sting, I'd probably be OK with it. But I want the FBI out there working on the big crimes, and this doesn't qualify.
Or do you think I should have called up my local FBI office when my research was stolen and they should have arranged a sting to arrest the college professor who did it?
What they're claiming is that they own patents covering key processes that banks are required to implement as part of the "Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act" (also known as Check 21) that recently went into effect.
Seeing as that was a federally mandated act, I don't think congress is going to think too highly of this company's actions. This really might lead to patent reform, since the only two ways of getting congress to act seem to be to either pay them lots of money (or should I say "donate" lots of money to their reelection campaigns) or piss them off. The last time they really got fed up over something we got the do not call list which has been pretty successful.
So more power to this crappy little IP company, I can't wait to see what remains of them after congress is done.:)
Or maybe's it's because Apple's QA people know that best way to have software designed to be easy to use is to not encourage them to use right-click kludges. It is impossible to use a Windows machine without a two button mouse and learning context menus. That is not true of Mac OS X.
You disprove your own point, if what you say at the end is true, why did you buy a two button mouse with scroll wheel for your Mac?
Every serious Mac user I've ever known has told me the same thing, "the first you thing you do is throw away the mouse it comes with and buy a two button one." This speaks volumes about the logic of continuing to ship Macs with only one button mice, at least a two button one should be a freaking option for those who prefer it.
Beyond that, as a primarily Windows user (along with Linux) I absolutely HATE having to use a Mac without a two button mouse. There are far too many things I'm accustomed to doing on both Windows and Linux by right clicking that are suddenly no longer available. I have to hunt through menus to find the same functions wasting my time. I find it hard to believe that Apple's QA thing it's better to make users memorize keyboard + mouse combos or hunt through menus when a simple right click would suffice. If any interface is using "kludges" I'd say it's the Macs when used with a one button mouse.
But even if we accept the argument that right clicking as part of the interface is somehow bad, why doesn't Apple at least provide a scroll wheel? I can't see any argument to support the absence of a scroll wheel, it's so much easier, quicker, and even easier on the wrists to use one.
I don't know if it's Steve Jobs' fault that Apple still provides only one button mice or not, but whoever's fault it is it's a relic that needs to stop.
You're either seriously misinformed, too lazy to look up the real facts or just trolling actually. While Japan is certainly far from perfect, this is a totally unfair attack.
but something must be seriously fucked up with a nation that produces millions of locked-away teenagers,
It's called Hikikomori so you can look up more info on it. Yes there are a million teens who have this problem, but there are many millions who don't. The problem isn't considered a disease (at least not yet), and the problems that trigger it are problems that occur elsewhere as well. From this site: "For reasons ranging from bullying to exam failure, some young people are shutting themselves away in their rooms and having as little direct contact with the outside world as possible. Many are suicidal, but lack the will to make good their morbid fantasies." From what I've read (in the past, can't find the exact links right now) it's a combination that generally causes it. It's not just bad grades or bullying, but a combination of those and/or other factors. Faced with that kind of pressure kids in any country are going to have trouble dealing with it. In fact, China and Korea have problems with high teen suicide rates (just like Japan) largely due to all three placing such importance on doing well on school. If China and Korea aren't seeing problems similiar to Hikikomori yet, they will in the future.
As for why the US doesn't, well kids here by and large don't give a damn if they do well in school so that's one less pressure to trigger something like this. But we do have bullying in schools, in spades in fact, and we have nothing to be proud of in the results it can cause, remember Columbine? What's sad is we didn't really learn anything from that tragedy, the initial response was to ban wearing black trenchcoats and to target teens with similar interests to the two instigators for further scrutiny. What needs to be done is to focus on the kids who are the bullys and punish them for bullying others. Until bullying, which is the root problem, is addressed other incidents like Columbine are likely to happen. I hope I'm wrong there, but I doubt it.
unending streams of paedophilic tentacle rape comics
On please, you know absolutely nothing about manga. Yeah there is tentacle rape stuff, but it's just a drop in the sea. Japan produces comics for all ages, and they're quite popular. It's everywhere, and most of it is decidedly NOT pedophilic or tentacle rape. And of the stuff that is, as another pointed out it's not necessarily pedophilic, it's cultural issues that lead to the creation of it. (And BTW, the US has some blame in that, we're the ones who applied the first anti-obscenity laws to Japan post WWII.)
and expensive robots to keep its elderly people sane.
At least they're trying to do something about the problem, exacly what are we doing here in the US? At best we're building more nursing homes to stuff the elderly into so we can forget them. Hardly a higher moral ground.
Say what you want about the bloated corpulence of USofAia, but I'd take physical problems over crippling psychological problems and abandonment of the elderly.
What say you buck the general American trend of presuming you know everything about a country you've not even been to and stop acting all high and mighty when you're clueless. While Japan isn't perfect, neither is the US and in the grand scheme of things the US probably has more to be ashamed of. We also have our share of crippling psychological problems, you just don't appear to be aware of them either. (Do you even watch/read the news?) Depression is becoming epidemic and one of the top prescription drugs people get busted for having is Xanax. Xanax isn't a narcotic, it's an anti-anxiety medication.
This doesn't apply just to the CS related fields but in most fields. (Obviously some like engineering are exceptions though.) What's important is that you have the degree, not where it's from or even what it's in. Having a BS/BA shows that you finish what you start, and that you have at least a base level of knowledge. Generally it also proves you know how to learn, and if you don't workplaces will figure that our real fast. (Of course in that case you have bigger worries.)
I have BS in CS from a major state university, but they're not known to have one of the top CS programs out there. It hasn't hindered me in finding a job, frankly what did was experience. My career track's been in systems administration and a good 99% of what I do on a daily basis I did not learn from any classes I took. I learned far more in a summer fellowship that's been directly related to my career than I ever did in classes at the university. Unfortunately after the dotcom crash it became hard to find sysadmin work without having a much longer work record (and with different systems) than I had.
Frankly I'd recommend you stop worrying about where your degree is from (and your Dad should as well, although I realize that may be hard to get him to do). What you really need to do is start preparing for post-graduation now. Look for fellowhips and internships, don't be afraid to put graduation off a few years to do Coop even. Once you graduate having that work experience (even if it's unpaid) will make it far easier to get a job. You also need to be sure you're doing things outside of just taking classes. Get involved in some organizations, consider student government or other ways to get involved on campus. By all means join your professional organizations now while it's easier and cheaper (frankly I wish I'd joined the ACM while in school, although it hasn't really hurt me). If you have good grades seek out honor societies to join, and accept any offered. (These can really help on a Resume, especially at first, as they show you not only got the degree but that you excelled at what you were learning.) I actually got invited into (and accepted) honor societies outside of CS and general academia, and yes they've helped, particular the history one since it shows I'm good at research.
You should also consider doing a semester or year of study abroad. Not only does it help when hunting a job (you'll be considered more wordly and for International companies it can be a deal maker), it's the best chance you'll ever have to spend time in another country.
But bottom line, enjoy college while you're still at it. You'll have far less free time once you're out and working a job.:)
FWIW, I helped teach first year studies classes at my university. I also learned most of this firsthand, both through essentially going to college twice (and learning what not to do the first time) and from experiences since I graduated.
I wonder how they'd handle cars that drive across the state border to fill up? What happens when they need to fill up intra-state on a trip later on? They get a $500 tank of gas thanks to built-up readings?
For that matter how would they handle out of state vehicles? They can't get any gas since they're missing out on the required collected info? (For that matter, this would apply to legacy vehicles made before the system was implemented.)
Don't get me wrong. I think that the MPAA is doing some really terrible things. I don't want to get sued for downloading a movie that I own a license for but is damaged. And I don't think that suing a customer base is a good way to engender good-will. But the consituent corporations of the MPAA are only interested in profit. And intimidating those who use their products without paying for them may actually be a smart strategy to protect those profits.
Except it's already backfired on them with me. Personally I find most of what Hollywood puts out trash so I'd grab a copy of a movie to see if it was worthwhile, if it did I'd go catch it in the theater and buy the DVD on release. Over the last 2-3 years I've watched in the theater and bought more movies than in the 10 previous years combined.
Of course now I won't bother, unless it's something I know I'll like I'll skip the theater altogether. I might rent a DVD occasionally of something I'm curious about, but frankly I doubt it. I'm not interested in supporting an industry who acts like the MPAA is now. I stopped buying US music about five years ago because of the way the RIAA member companies act (in particular how they treat their artists). I no longer even listen to the radio either, I have a CD/Mp3 player and plenty of import Jpop and Anime CDs to listen to.
From my perspective the MPAA's committing suicide, they just don't know it yet. This is especially nuts in the face of the explosion of the low-priced DVD market. They're putting out back catalog and crap stuff at $5.50 and even $1 and people are buying it like it's going out of style. Sure they don't make as much profit per disc on those but they also don't have to spend a dime promoting them. That's bonus money to them, most of this stuff wouldn't have been put out on DVD before, it was just gathering dust in vaults.
And what does the average end user do when it starts auto-installing itself anytime the DVD is used on a computer?
Better yet, what does the average end user do when it not only auto-installs when you play the DVD on your computer, it's both required so you can actually play the damned thing and it's against the law to bypass the installation in any way. Then you won't be able to play your legally purchased DVDs on your Linux machine, under penalty of law. (Because we know they're not going to offer a Linux version of this program.)
There have already been well publicised cases of families having to settle with the RIAA because of a child's filesharing activities.
I expect this will be promoted by the MPAA as a way for parents to ensure that their children don't get the family in trouble.
While I don't support what the MPAA's doing here (because this is essentially a legal protection racket, (even if you're innocent it'll cost you too much to defend yourself to fight it so everyone settles) at least they're trying a bit harder than the RIAA to be realistic. If they do indeed promote this tool to parents so they can avoid potential lawsuits because of what their kids downloaded that's great. The RIAA's already proven they'd rather sue the family of a 12yo girl than take any reasonable course of action.
Of course then again the MPAA does have the advantage of seeing, and avoiding, the RIAA's biggest mistakes, so perhaps I'm being too generous.
Wonder how long will it be until the court systems can no longer hear cases for rape/murder/theft/etc. because they're too busy processing RIAA and MPAA John Doe lawsuits? Perhaps by then the American public will wake up and do something about it. What can be done I'm not sure though (calling and writing our "representatives" doesn't seem to help since they mostly seem to conform to their corporate masters, not the actual public.)
It seems like people just are not aware that you can go to pretty much any clothing store and ask for your clothes to be tailored for free.
Umm in what reality? Here where I live the only places that even have staff to do alterations are the stores selling suits, and they all charge extra for it. Apparently the logic is that they discount the suits so you have to pay extra for things like alterations.
Overlooking that most people buy clothes at the Mall or Wal-mart. Go ahead and see if they do alterations at all, much less free. And good luck with it, as I've yet to see a single store in any Mall do alterations (at any price) and Wal-mart sure as hell doesn't.
If you're really able to get alterations done for free where you are, consider yourself very lucky, most people don't have that option.
Slashdot Mirror
Wouldn't it be just great if Microsoft turned around and sued the RIAA and MPAA for having this done? And wouldn't it be even more fun if they won? :) Sure MS is evil too, but I'd still love to see them turn around and bite the hand they tried to get to feed them. ;)
If you're in senior management and know your own ass may end up in jail for something illegal your company does, you're going to think a LOT harder about what you allow to happen and what you put a stop to. I seriously doubt you'd be ordering the shredding of documents to hide evidence.
One nice thing about this is it gets rid of the two objections you note. It's hard to say "but those people aren't responsible" because senior management IS ultimately responsible for the course of actions there company takes. Does anyone honestly think the CEO of Anderson Consulting didn't know about the orders to shred documents pertaining to Enron? Does anyone think the CEO of Overture (and it's parent company) isn't aware that they're putting trojaned files out there? Don't they deserve to pay the penalty for allowing that to happen? I think so.
But... I think now that it's been announced in the press they've opened themselves up to a major pot of trouble. Right now I use no P2P software outside of Bittorrent (for downloading Linux ISOs). If I go install Kazaa specifically to search for this file for research purposes and it infects my machine there's no longer a case against me. What they have now is their grand scheme to stop P2P traffic has now attacked my computer. My knowing what it was beforehand will not change the fact that they intentionally created the trojaned file and put it out there. It's the same thing as a computer virus, if I download one for study and goof up and get infected, the virus writer is STILL guilty of creating a computer virus and releasing it into the wild. (This is assuming it's an active virus infecting machines and not just one posted to a research site.)
I don't think the whole "it's a sting" argument will help them much when they inevitably get sued for this. The court's going to look at it just like the do at those who write computer viruses, worms and trojans. Frankly all it is IS a trojan. It plays no audio or video message (this is according to PC World's research), it does not present a "you naughty pirate, pay for your music/video) message in the popups, it just pops up ads, some of which try to install spy/malware without permission.
I just wonder how in the hell they thought this was a good idea. Committing what might even qualify as a federal crime knowingly is generally a bad business strategy.
I must admit I was tempted to install Kazaa and search for and download the file mentioned in PC World's article, just so I could tell my state attorney general they tried to hack my computer. I finally decided it wasn't worth the hassle and potential media attention though. :)
I should note that given their current actions I don't trust them so I used a disposable address from Spam Gourmet to send from and only signed my first name. Maybe I'm paranoid, but I figure any company who thinks it's OK to basically attack other people's computers in the name of stopping P2P just can't be trusted to know both my full name and state.
-
On the flip side, if Ubisoft is going to leave themselves open to a takeover, who are they to complain when it actually happens? I think this is underhanded by EA, but it's perfectly legal. Ubisoft may whine, but has no leg to stand on with regards to a formal complaint.
Perhaps I don't fully understand the market, but pretty much every company is potentially open to a hostile takeover. As long as someone can convince 51% of the existing stockholders to sell to them, they can takeover. Granted there are rules about how they have to go about it, but no public company is truly "safe" from a hostile takeover, only private ones are.I do agree with your sentiment on not supporting them, how they've gone about this with Ubisoft erased any doubts in my mind that they weren't intentionally abusing their workers. It's really hard to give a company the benefit of the doubt when they keep doing stuff that's at best morally questionable. I certainly am not going to miss their games either, it's not like they've added much to any of their licenses of late, all of them have come across as slicker and less menu-driven (SSX3 started it) but the gameplay's about the same. Hell, I liked SSX Tricky better than SSX3 myself.
-
However, while the RIAA went after the entire P2P network, despite the legal uses that is could, and to some extent was being put to, the MPAA is just going after copyright infringers. So far at least.
Too late, the way Bittorrent works the actual files are not hosted on the trackers, the tracker contains only info on peers who are participating in the torrent and a hash of the file/file segments so users can verify parts downloaded. If the MPAA wanted to go after the actual infringers, they would be suing the people on the torrent, not the trackers, or the sites that are basically torrent trackers (like Suprnova was, it didn't run any tracker, just linked to the torrent files on whatever tracker they were on).I think the problem here is not everyone understands fully how Bittorrent works, or they'd be just as pissed as they were about suits against Napster, Kazaa, Grokster, etc. since they trackers are similar to those. The tracker only provides info to find the copyrighted matierial, it does not reside on the server.
It's interesting to note that Lokitorrents keeps a blacklist and rejected torrents (and banned users uploading them) for items on it. They had a policy of adding anything to the blacklist if asked to by the rights holders, most of the stuff on it was from Microsoft since they actually bothered to ask. The MPAA didn't, they just sued instead. Not everyday you can say something is more evil than Microsoft. :)
-
Have you been paying attention to court cases recently? Obviously there's a legal precedent that what Lokitorrent is doing is illegal.
Really? Last I checked the RIAA lost its suits against Grokster and whoever else was involved in that one. Kazaa was found legal in its original country of origin, the new trial is underway and we have no way of knowing how it will end yet.If things like Grokster and Kazaa can be legal, exactly HOW would Lokitorrents be illegal? It's even less in control over the content than Grokster and Kazaa are.
-
Claiming the conspiracy theory that anybody who disagrees with you is an agent of the RIAA or MPAA is just odd - about on level with wearing tinfoil hats.
Actually he didn't say that, he said all the posts in support of this move seemed rather odd for Slashdot, that it looked like the MPAA might have decided to astroturf the site. I agree, normally those against anything the MPAA/RIAA does far outweights those in favor of it here, this whole discussion seems like it's from another site to be honest.And besides, he forgot one nice point, the MPAA is breaking the DMCA. They are supposed to send cease & desist letters, in the proper format, to the specified DMCA contact address, listing every link/item they find is infringing prior to suing under the common carrier provisions. They failed to do this, and even in the notice of suit have failed to specifiy exactly WHAT was infriging? "[O]ur copyrighted works" could be most anything, they are supposed to enumerate each item. Go search for Scientology on Google and go to the link about stuff removed, you'll see those letters do exactly what they're supposed to, listing every URL they find infringing and want removed.
Maybe Lokitorrents is breaking the law, maybe they aren't, but the MPAA isn't following their own laws they bought from Congress, and that is a true outrage on many fronts.
-
Boo fucking hoo. And we're supposed to feel outraged at MPAA because?
Well frankly because they're not even following the law that they bought, aka the DMCA. The DMCA requires them to send cease and desist letters before initiating legal action. That they were able to get the letter saying they were suing them to the site owners, they obviously had a way of sending those C&Ds, but chose not to.If you don't feel outraged that a multi-billion dollar industry who buys laws that trample consumer's rights in favor of their own, then ignore the actual laws they buy, well, what the hell would make you feel outraged?
Do note that the site has a blacklist, and a policy of adding anything to it when the rights holder asks them too. Torrents added that are on the black list are removed, AND the user uploading them are banned. They have all the Microsoft stuff on there that MS asked them to remove and by all accounts have been enforcing the blacklist. The MPAA didn't bother to use this procedure, simply telling them to "remove all our copyrighted works" doesn't cut it, the DMCA even requires that every specific infringing link be submitted in the takedown notice. Frankly the MPAA's wanting Lokitorrents to do their work for them and suing them just because they can afford the lawyers to do it, hoping it'll shut them down without the MPAA actually having to do what they're supposed to do to get things removed.
So to paraphrase you, Boo fucking hoo, I'm not supposed to feel outraged at the MPAA because why?
-
IAAL, and darned proud of the modern justice system...
So then you'd be happy to defend me pro-bono against a large corporate entity if they mistakenly include me in a John Doe suit because they transposed two digits in an IP address and got mine instead of the real culprit?3. We all benefit from NOT having a system whereby a well funded organization cannot assume it will win because it can afford lawyers, a system where the big money always wins.
If not, then you just prove that the system only works for those with money, and the more money you have the better chance you have of winning.
BTW, I don't say this to attack you, but I've yet to meet a single lawyer who's principles extend to doing legal work for free. When that issue shows up, principles or not, they want to be paid, upfront as well. If you're truly different, kudos to you, now try to get your fellow lawyers to have some scruples too.
-
Which absolutly negates ANY defence in the way of "we dont know what people upload, so we cant be made responsible". They check every torrent (because how else would they catch violations of those rules), but are perfectly ok with half-life2 or blade3 on their trackers...
If their policy is only to check against a blacklist that has been created from takedown notices/requests from rights holders then it's a defense. In that case the rights holder failed to notify them of the infringing matierial before filing suit, something the DMCA requires of the rights holders.Allowing torrents to anything not on the blacklist isn't the same as knowing infringement, it's just assuming everything not blacklisted is ok with the rights holders until they're told otherwise.
-
If you believe what you are doing is right and legal, why would you say "we'll delete xyz torrents if you ask nicely"?
Simply because if you don't know everything and aren't everywhere at once, you may make a mistake and let something illegal through. Saying they'll take any links down if they are copyrighted and being distributed without permission is a very good indicator that they were trying to be upfront and legal about things. The fact that the MPAA didn't bother to use this pre-existing policy (that works, MS used it and they did what they said they would) isn't going to help the MPAA in court at all, in fact it may get it tossed out in short order as the judge is going to end up asking the MPAA's lawyers "did you request these alleged infringing links be removed before you filed suit?" When the MPAA says no, the suit disolves quickly, it's not going to be allowed to continue when it's obvious the plaintiff didn't follow procedure to stop what they're suing over.In other words, the MPAA could have resolved the whole thing with a letter notifying Lokitorrents of every torrent link that they found infringing and Loki would have removed them. In fact the DCMA common carrier clauses require the rights holder to not only file a notice first (before suit), it requires it to be done in a certain way, and only to the address the carrier provides for DCMA takedowns. DCMA takedown notices sent to the wrong address, or in the improper format can be legally ignored by the carrier without legal penalty. At least the law required the rights holders to do their research first instead of putting the whole burden on the carriers.
-
Hire a lawyer? To defend something that's blatenly illegal? People are buying this? The Internet is a great place.
Yes, you'd be stupid not to, even if you planned to plead guilty. Without a lawyer to protect your rights (which you still have even if you DID break a law) you'll end up with the harshest penalty imaginable. Judges really dislike defendants that defend themeselves, so you'd even have judicial bias against you, you wouldn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of coming out with a fair verdict. Frankly the snowball stands a far better chance of lasting longer in hell than you would in court without a lawyer.-
After taking a look, I think the MPAA has a legal right to tell these people: "You are infringing on my rights, stop it. If you won't, I'll get a court order that tells you to stop it"
I agree with you, and even on the above point, but it's important to point out that the MPAA didn't do this. Instead of sending Lokitorrent a Cease & Desist letter, they sent them a "We're suing your asses off, take your site down now" letter. I didn't see anything in the letter saying the MPAA would drop the suit if Lokitorrent complied either.So while the MPAA is certainly within their legal rights, and seemed to be taking a gentler track than the RIAA at first, they've already slipped into the "Batten down the hatches, let's sue everyone we think's doing anything illegal and let them figure out how to defend themselves if they aren't" mode the RIAA has taken.
I'd already been boycotting the US music industry (haven't bought, listened to, downloaded, etc. a single US song since about 1998) and now I get to add the US movie industry too. Not that I bothered to watch much of the crap they put out anyway. The important lesson is that I had been willing to support them in the past, but I find their current actions so distasteful I won't any longer. I also doubt I'll be the only one like this, online trading of Mp3s on P2P networks has gone UP since the RIAA started their lawsuits. I've heard some people say they had started downloading for the first time just to piss the RIAA off. I frankly can't see how these tactics are sound business practice, looks more like rats trying to hold their sinking ships together with legal briefs.
-
What could congress do? Pass a law with retroactive effects?
Congress technically can't pass an ex post facto law, although it seems they do it anyway. However that's not the issue, there's enough pre-existing matierial to invalidate these patents, and a request from congress to reexamine a patent would guarantee great scrutiny of the patent in question. I'm sure the patents are bogus, for instance my bank's been sending me scanned copies of my cancelled checks for about 12 years now, and they use the scans as the primary check when questions occur (only when the scan isn't clear do they pull the actual paper checks from storage, and charge me for it unless it's their fault.)But think about it another way, what happens if Congress decides to descretely ask the FBI to investigate this company and it's owners? You think the FBI won't dig deep to find dirt on them to make Congress happy? Pissing off Congress is NOT a good idea, they wield immeasurably power, arguably more than the president does.
-
Once these guys get their money to the bank (no pun), they're safe.
I wouldn't count on that either, seeing as they're targetting banks. I'd hate to have an account subjected to the kind of scrutiny their accounts would be, any mistake would be caught and charged against them. Better hope they don't try to float any checks.-
You will never understand the concept of owning something of value, until you actually do own something of value, and some punk comes and takes it away.
I do own things of value, and in the sphere you're hinting at, IP, copyright, etc. I've written music, done research into security issues (not just computer, but all in the digital landscape), and written code. I've had all three stolen in the traditional sense, not just copyrights infringed. I've seen others take music I wrote and pretend it was theirs, get it published and get full credit for it. I've had a person talk to me about my research wanting to include it (and me) in a grant application they were working on turn around and claim the research was theirs and see my name mysteriously disappear completely from their application. I've seen my code stolen by peers and used for profit.But you know, I still think the FBI has much better things to do. Am I pissed about my ideas being stolen? Hell yeah. Do I think it warrants law enforcement intervention? Hell NO. While I may have suffered even financial losses, the proper place for that to be settled is in court, in a civil suit. The FBI and other law enforcement should be out there going after the criminals that are truly dangerous, who's actions tend to leave dead victims. Even giving tickets to speeders is a better use of resources since the speeders might have crashed and killed someone.
Bottom line, while this was piracy on a fairly massive scale, they weren't killing or maiming people. We're supposed to be in the midst of a war on terror, and the terrorists have shown us they're quite happy to maim and kill. As a US citizen I want the FBI out there hunting down the terrorists, the kidnappers, the rapists and murderers. I don't want to see them going after some guy making copies of DVDs to sell, there are plenty of methods in place for the copyright holders to remedy those situations that don't involve the FBI.
-
And as for your claim that it was a "massive, worldwide sting operation", it was 120 searches in 24 hours. Not massive by any sreach.
You do realize a normal search of just a house can involve well over 10 law enforcement officers? That we're talking a minimum of 1200 people here (the odds are highly against there being duplication of personnel, especially given the amount of paperwork involved). That 120 searches in 24 hours averages out to 5 searches every HOUR for one day? That's a search every 12 minutes! If that doesn't constitute massive to you, what in the hell does? Yes there are probably that many searches occurring any given day but not for the same sting!I think what you fail to realize is we don't object to these pirates being brought to justice, but we do object to the FBI being involved in something so petty when compared to all the terrorism, rape, murder, kidnappings, robberies, etc. out there. If I'd heard that a sting took place involving local law enforcement acting in concert as part of a massive civil lawsuit/sting, I'd probably be OK with it. But I want the FBI out there working on the big crimes, and this doesn't qualify.
Or do you think I should have called up my local FBI office when my research was stolen and they should have arranged a sting to arrest the college professor who did it?
Seeing as that was a federally mandated act, I don't think congress is going to think too highly of this company's actions. This really might lead to patent reform, since the only two ways of getting congress to act seem to be to either pay them lots of money (or should I say "donate" lots of money to their reelection campaigns) or piss them off. The last time they really got fed up over something we got the do not call list which has been pretty successful.
So more power to this crappy little IP company, I can't wait to see what remains of them after congress is done. :)
-
1. See SCOs pioneering efforts in the field
Step 3 in this case is Sue Large Corporations (aka banks) with gobs of cash.2. Dust off old patents
3. ?????
4. Profit
-
when I bought my Logitech mouse for my G5.
You disprove your own point, if what you say at the end is true, why did you buy a two button mouse with scroll wheel for your Mac?Or maybe's it's because Apple's QA people know that best way to have software designed to be easy to use is to not encourage them to use right-click kludges. It is impossible to use a Windows machine without a two button mouse and learning context menus. That is not true of Mac OS X.
Every serious Mac user I've ever known has told me the same thing, "the first you thing you do is throw away the mouse it comes with and buy a two button one." This speaks volumes about the logic of continuing to ship Macs with only one button mice, at least a two button one should be a freaking option for those who prefer it.
Beyond that, as a primarily Windows user (along with Linux) I absolutely HATE having to use a Mac without a two button mouse. There are far too many things I'm accustomed to doing on both Windows and Linux by right clicking that are suddenly no longer available. I have to hunt through menus to find the same functions wasting my time. I find it hard to believe that Apple's QA thing it's better to make users memorize keyboard + mouse combos or hunt through menus when a simple right click would suffice. If any interface is using "kludges" I'd say it's the Macs when used with a one button mouse.
But even if we accept the argument that right clicking as part of the interface is somehow bad, why doesn't Apple at least provide a scroll wheel? I can't see any argument to support the absence of a scroll wheel, it's so much easier, quicker, and even easier on the wrists to use one.
I don't know if it's Steve Jobs' fault that Apple still provides only one button mice or not, but whoever's fault it is it's a relic that needs to stop.
You're either seriously misinformed, too lazy to look up the real facts or just trolling actually. While Japan is certainly far from perfect, this is a totally unfair attack.
It's called Hikikomori so you can look up more info on it. Yes there are a million teens who have this problem, but there are many millions who don't. The problem isn't considered a disease (at least not yet), and the problems that trigger it are problems that occur elsewhere as well. From this site: "For reasons ranging from bullying to exam failure, some young people are shutting themselves away in their rooms and having as little direct contact with the outside world as possible. Many are suicidal, but lack the will to make good their morbid fantasies." From what I've read (in the past, can't find the exact links right now) it's a combination that generally causes it. It's not just bad grades or bullying, but a combination of those and/or other factors. Faced with that kind of pressure kids in any country are going to have trouble dealing with it. In fact, China and Korea have problems with high teen suicide rates (just like Japan) largely due to all three placing such importance on doing well on school. If China and Korea aren't seeing problems similiar to Hikikomori yet, they will in the future.
As for why the US doesn't, well kids here by and large don't give a damn if they do well in school so that's one less pressure to trigger something like this. But we do have bullying in schools, in spades in fact, and we have nothing to be proud of in the results it can cause, remember Columbine? What's sad is we didn't really learn anything from that tragedy, the initial response was to ban wearing black trenchcoats and to target teens with similar interests to the two instigators for further scrutiny. What needs to be done is to focus on the kids who are the bullys and punish them for bullying others. Until bullying, which is the root problem, is addressed other incidents like Columbine are likely to happen. I hope I'm wrong there, but I doubt it.
On please, you know absolutely nothing about manga. Yeah there is tentacle rape stuff, but it's just a drop in the sea. Japan produces comics for all ages, and they're quite popular. It's everywhere, and most of it is decidedly NOT pedophilic or tentacle rape. And of the stuff that is, as another pointed out it's not necessarily pedophilic, it's cultural issues that lead to the creation of it. (And BTW, the US has some blame in that, we're the ones who applied the first anti-obscenity laws to Japan post WWII.)
At least they're trying to do something about the problem, exacly what are we doing here in the US? At best we're building more nursing homes to stuff the elderly into so we can forget them. Hardly a higher moral ground.
What say you buck the general American trend of presuming you know everything about a country you've not even been to and stop acting all high and mighty when you're clueless. While Japan isn't perfect, neither is the US and in the grand scheme of things the US probably has more to be ashamed of. We also have our share of crippling psychological problems, you just don't appear to be aware of them either. (Do you even watch/read the news?) Depression is becoming epidemic and one of the top prescription drugs people get busted for having is Xanax. Xanax isn't a narcotic, it's an anti-anxiety medication.
And frankly when it comes t
I have BS in CS from a major state university, but they're not known to have one of the top CS programs out there. It hasn't hindered me in finding a job, frankly what did was experience. My career track's been in systems administration and a good 99% of what I do on a daily basis I did not learn from any classes I took. I learned far more in a summer fellowship that's been directly related to my career than I ever did in classes at the university. Unfortunately after the dotcom crash it became hard to find sysadmin work without having a much longer work record (and with different systems) than I had.
Frankly I'd recommend you stop worrying about where your degree is from (and your Dad should as well, although I realize that may be hard to get him to do). What you really need to do is start preparing for post-graduation now. Look for fellowhips and internships, don't be afraid to put graduation off a few years to do Coop even. Once you graduate having that work experience (even if it's unpaid) will make it far easier to get a job. You also need to be sure you're doing things outside of just taking classes. Get involved in some organizations, consider student government or other ways to get involved on campus. By all means join your professional organizations now while it's easier and cheaper (frankly I wish I'd joined the ACM while in school, although it hasn't really hurt me). If you have good grades seek out honor societies to join, and accept any offered. (These can really help on a Resume, especially at first, as they show you not only got the degree but that you excelled at what you were learning.) I actually got invited into (and accepted) honor societies outside of CS and general academia, and yes they've helped, particular the history one since it shows I'm good at research.
You should also consider doing a semester or year of study abroad. Not only does it help when hunting a job (you'll be considered more wordly and for International companies it can be a deal maker), it's the best chance you'll ever have to spend time in another country.
But bottom line, enjoy college while you're still at it. You'll have far less free time once you're out and working a job. :)
FWIW, I helped teach first year studies classes at my university. I also learned most of this firsthand, both through essentially going to college twice (and learning what not to do the first time) and from experiences since I graduated.
For that matter how would they handle out of state vehicles? They can't get any gas since they're missing out on the required collected info? (For that matter, this would apply to legacy vehicles made before the system was implemented.)
-
Don't get me wrong. I think that the MPAA is doing some really terrible things. I don't want to get sued for downloading a movie that I own a license for but is damaged. And I don't think that suing a customer base is a good way to engender good-will. But the consituent corporations of the MPAA are only interested in profit. And intimidating those who use their products without paying for them may actually be a smart strategy to protect those profits.
Except it's already backfired on them with me. Personally I find most of what Hollywood puts out trash so I'd grab a copy of a movie to see if it was worthwhile, if it did I'd go catch it in the theater and buy the DVD on release. Over the last 2-3 years I've watched in the theater and bought more movies than in the 10 previous years combined.Of course now I won't bother, unless it's something I know I'll like I'll skip the theater altogether. I might rent a DVD occasionally of something I'm curious about, but frankly I doubt it. I'm not interested in supporting an industry who acts like the MPAA is now. I stopped buying US music about five years ago because of the way the RIAA member companies act (in particular how they treat their artists). I no longer even listen to the radio either, I have a CD/Mp3 player and plenty of import Jpop and Anime CDs to listen to.
From my perspective the MPAA's committing suicide, they just don't know it yet. This is especially nuts in the face of the explosion of the low-priced DVD market. They're putting out back catalog and crap stuff at $5.50 and even $1 and people are buying it like it's going out of style. Sure they don't make as much profit per disc on those but they also don't have to spend a dime promoting them. That's bonus money to them, most of this stuff wouldn't have been put out on DVD before, it was just gathering dust in vaults.
-
And what does the average end user do when it starts auto-installing itself anytime the DVD is used on a computer?
Better yet, what does the average end user do when it not only auto-installs when you play the DVD on your computer, it's both required so you can actually play the damned thing and it's against the law to bypass the installation in any way. Then you won't be able to play your legally purchased DVDs on your Linux machine, under penalty of law. (Because we know they're not going to offer a Linux version of this program.)-
There have already been well publicised cases of families having to settle with the RIAA because of a child's filesharing activities.
While I don't support what the MPAA's doing here (because this is essentially a legal protection racket, (even if you're innocent it'll cost you too much to defend yourself to fight it so everyone settles) at least they're trying a bit harder than the RIAA to be realistic. If they do indeed promote this tool to parents so they can avoid potential lawsuits because of what their kids downloaded that's great. The RIAA's already proven they'd rather sue the family of a 12yo girl than take any reasonable course of action.I expect this will be promoted by the MPAA as a way for parents to ensure that their children don't get the family in trouble.
Of course then again the MPAA does have the advantage of seeing, and avoiding, the RIAA's biggest mistakes, so perhaps I'm being too generous.
Wonder how long will it be until the court systems can no longer hear cases for rape/murder/theft/etc. because they're too busy processing RIAA and MPAA John Doe lawsuits? Perhaps by then the American public will wake up and do something about it. What can be done I'm not sure though (calling and writing our "representatives" doesn't seem to help since they mostly seem to conform to their corporate masters, not the actual public.)
-
It seems like people just are not aware that you can go to pretty much any clothing store and ask for your clothes to be tailored for free.
Umm in what reality? Here where I live the only places that even have staff to do alterations are the stores selling suits, and they all charge extra for it. Apparently the logic is that they discount the suits so you have to pay extra for things like alterations.Overlooking that most people buy clothes at the Mall or Wal-mart. Go ahead and see if they do alterations at all, much less free. And good luck with it, as I've yet to see a single store in any Mall do alterations (at any price) and Wal-mart sure as hell doesn't.
If you're really able to get alterations done for free where you are, consider yourself very lucky, most people don't have that option.