That's mostly self-serving bollocks. If such observation is so good then it would be essential to let everyone know what is being observed and how. Secrecy works against such claims.
Cold war espionage was a very different game. If observation had been so effective, the US would not have built so many nukes - or perhaps the secrecy of such observation allowed the US hawks to spin and get the level of overkill the US eventually achieved.
Perhaps if you stopped treating the rest of the world as your enemy, we'd trust you more with this shit. But Snowden has shown we must not.
Rubbish. 1984 is nothing to do with the Soviet Union and Communism (see Animal Farm for that). 1984 is all about Britain of the day, the growth of domestic fascism and what the totalitarian nature of the wartime regime the country imposed to survive the war with Germany. Orwell was a propagandist for the wartime government. The Daily Hate of 1984 was directly inspired by the Daily Mail (and still justly merits that description today).
Orwell's warning was aimed at Britain and America not Russia.
A US pint is 16 fl oz but an Imperial pint is 20 fl oz. So crossing the atlantic, when I order a pint in a US pub (ok, I mean a large beer in a bar) I feel short changed. Far worse than the fractional percentage differences in the evolution of the litre (note spelling) - which mostly comes down to which is the prime unit. When I was at school we were taught that a kilogram was a litre of water (not the other way round) even though SI had moved on by then.
A lying President is a lying President. How do you know Clinton was honest about anything else now?
We are all liars. YOU are a liar. Yet Clinton was lying about matters that were nothing to do with affairs of state. Meanwhile Bush lies at every turn about affairs of state - and if you doubt me shall we start with the casus bellum - WMD.
And taking this idea of fair use to its conclusion, you're saying that the creators of film, art, etc do not have any exclusive rights to their creations - anyone can just copy them and make money. This is the whole reason copyright exists - to protect the rights of the creator.
What are you some kind of MPAA shill that must make absurd leaps of logic to make his point?
What I SAID was since the copyright owner had been taking advantage of the fanbase to market their IP, some quid pro quo seems perfectly reasonable. While copyright exists to protect the rights of the creator, we as democratic societies also have the rights to limit what those rights are particularly in stupid cases like this. Show me harm to Serenity's sales (which was the original purpose of copyright) and I might start taking you seriously.
Sorry mate, I disagree. You are wrong. You clearly believe in the absolute rights of copyright holders. I believe in fair use and implicit covenants between seller and buyer. But then we in the UK have more of those enshrined in law than you do in the US.
This is one of several comments that assert that since Universal own the IP and there was no format agreement, then Universal were completely right to c&d and even bill their volunteers. Sad loser geeks eh?
However this is missing the point of how viral marketing campaigns are supposed to work. Viral marketing can be scary particularly for large control-freak companies, as the essential point behind viral marketing is to give away control of the brand to the fans / early adopters and let them be a mouthpiece for your product, a voice that other fans and their less fanish friends, family and acquaintances will trust when they wouldn't even notice a conventional marketing campaign via TV, radio, print and billboards.
I wouldn't be surprised if Universal's marketing dept were over the moon with all the fan promotion including Serenity T-shirts (free advertising by the wearer). And at the same time their IP dept were doing the only thing they know how to do. Plenty of YouTube vids were posted by marketing depts only to be retracted by their own lawyeres.
It seems to me that part of the deal with viral marketing is giving away control to the fans and while this may be informal (how do you contract for that 20th C-style?) and the fan volunteers have a right to be treated with respect for their work. Even if that means they make a little money out of the owner's IP. Under the technicalities of the law that may be "unlicenced" use, but there is an implicit grant of rights in marketing a product that we consumers have let slide and given the corporations free rein to trample over. Otherwise every time we told a mate about a great product we'd have to pay a licence fee and balance that by billing the corporation for marketing services. Just as these Browncoats have tried to show...
Seconded! Democracy is brilliant: a good player (built on VLC) plus RSS feed for channels and playlists and built in torrent to get em. And Democracy is not under control of a company who just when you get to like their product will sell out to eBay who'll then treat it like shit.
Er you're not talking about English grammar schools, I think you mean the comprehensive schools of the day. The grammar schools selected for academic ability and were there to produce the managers and industry and administrators of the nation. The comps on the other hand were much as you describe (though in practice a bit more anarchic).
I would like to know, in what way is this law different from court warrant powers demanding one open up their home or safe to police holding said warrant?
I think this is an important point. An awful lot of legislation that goes into our books is badly thought out, but worse, is usually already covered by existing legislation. And as you point out, at the end of the day, a court can insist on you decrypting your data and if you refuse, you risk contempt of court (which is far more serious than it sounds).
Because when I want somebody's ideas on what comprises a democracy, I ask somebody with a peerage.
He's a Life Peer not an inherited aristocrat (we've mostly got rid of those, thank you). You can find the details of what lead to his nomination here.
The closest parallel I can think of would be one of your Chief Justices... They provide some oversight on Parliament's legislation, tend to be less bound by party politics and rarely bothered by winning votes.
Personally, given the parlous state of your nation, I'd think twice about throwing jibes around about democracy.
What they fail and have ever failed to understand is that America's strength is in her people.
I wish I had your faith in the people, friend. Or perhaps to put it another way, if America's strength is in the people, then the brains directing it to their own goals is the elite.
While I'm happy Blizzard is taking this action, you do realize that all the gold farmers are just going to re-purchase the retail copy, right?
Er no. Your account isn't linked to the retail copy it's linked to your credit card, so the gold farmers will in fact need to get new credit cards (ok not that hard, but harder). Persistent online games have a bit of an advantage here in keeping players straight as for most a ban is harder to circumvent.
So um, anyone have a problem with the fact that Checkpoint NGX is closed source firewall software, that quite a few government sites use? It doesn't bother them that there could be a backdoor waiting for the "secret Israeli shutdown code" in every Checkpoint firewall in the world?
I guess no more than it bothers the rest of us that large amounts of software used by our governments probably really does have a "secret US shutdown code". What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right? Oh I forgot, the WTO is only there to protect against anti-US competition.
Duh you fail at the first fence. What is this property of which you speak? Without a state to provide a legal definition of property and currency, you have no trade.
Your reductionism has left nothing I'm afraid.
Dude you're missing the point or you're just one of those "free market" shills that like to use and abuse the term for their own advantage without understanding what it means.
To make a market behave freely requires regulation just as a nation requires regulation to allow its population to live freely.
A dumb question? Ok, why do you want to break copyright?
Why do you want to let the corporations dictate what I can and cannot do with stuff I've bought? Last I heard I lived in an elected democracy that included considerable legislation for consumer protection. But then I live in the UK not the US....
I live in Britain. Trust me when I say you can't own a gun here with the very limited exception of a shot gun if you're a firearm and sporting pistols & rifles which must be kept under lock & key at a gun club. Really. We don't have guns. And neither do our police. (Apart from a very few, none of them trusted after a few recent 'accidents' such as the guy with a table leg and of course the Brazilian, Menezes).
Here in Britain and in much of the rest of Europe, you can not own a firearm legally (for which I am profoundly grateful). I was curious about the OP's comments regarding Australia as I thought they had reasonably strict gun control as well.
Guns and porn are freely allowed, just not to a kid. You need a licence for a gun - you can even carry them arround in the street if you have a permit. Porn is allowed to everyone who's legally old enough.
Really?? It's been a little while since I was down in Oz, but as I understood it you are only allowed a limited range of firearms and handguns in particular (I thought) were prohibited so no question of carrying them in the street, permit or no... I mostly hung around in Sydney so maybe it's different in your state?
Slashdot Mirror
That's mostly self-serving bollocks. If such observation is so good then it would be essential to let everyone know what is being observed and how. Secrecy works against such claims. Cold war espionage was a very different game. If observation had been so effective, the US would not have built so many nukes - or perhaps the secrecy of such observation allowed the US hawks to spin and get the level of overkill the US eventually achieved. Perhaps if you stopped treating the rest of the world as your enemy, we'd trust you more with this shit. But Snowden has shown we must not.
I had hoped that SpaceX might hold higher principles :(
Rubbish. 1984 is nothing to do with the Soviet Union and Communism (see Animal Farm for that). 1984 is all about Britain of the day, the growth of domestic fascism and what the totalitarian nature of the wartime regime the country imposed to survive the war with Germany. Orwell was a propagandist for the wartime government. The Daily Hate of 1984 was directly inspired by the Daily Mail (and still justly merits that description today). Orwell's warning was aimed at Britain and America not Russia.
Litre is the standard spelling for SI units as is gram and second. Nuff said.
A US pint is 16 fl oz but an Imperial pint is 20 fl oz. So crossing the atlantic, when I order a pint in a US pub (ok, I mean a large beer in a bar) I feel short changed. Far worse than the fractional percentage differences in the evolution of the litre (note spelling) - which mostly comes down to which is the prime unit. When I was at school we were taught that a kilogram was a litre of water (not the other way round) even though SI had moved on by then.
What are you some kind of MPAA shill that must make absurd leaps of logic to make his point?
What I SAID was since the copyright owner had been taking advantage of the fanbase to market their IP, some quid pro quo seems perfectly reasonable. While copyright exists to protect the rights of the creator, we as democratic societies also have the rights to limit what those rights are particularly in stupid cases like this. Show me harm to Serenity's sales (which was the original purpose of copyright) and I might start taking you seriously.
Sorry mate, I disagree. You are wrong. You clearly believe in the absolute rights of copyright holders. I believe in fair use and implicit covenants between seller and buyer. But then we in the UK have more of those enshrined in law than you do in the US.
However this is missing the point of how viral marketing campaigns are supposed to work. Viral marketing can be scary particularly for large control-freak companies, as the essential point behind viral marketing is to give away control of the brand to the fans / early adopters and let them be a mouthpiece for your product, a voice that other fans and their less fanish friends, family and acquaintances will trust when they wouldn't even notice a conventional marketing campaign via TV, radio, print and billboards.
I wouldn't be surprised if Universal's marketing dept were over the moon with all the fan promotion including Serenity T-shirts (free advertising by the wearer). And at the same time their IP dept were doing the only thing they know how to do. Plenty of YouTube vids were posted by marketing depts only to be retracted by their own lawyeres.
It seems to me that part of the deal with viral marketing is giving away control to the fans and while this may be informal (how do you contract for that 20th C-style?) and the fan volunteers have a right to be treated with respect for their work. Even if that means they make a little money out of the owner's IP. Under the technicalities of the law that may be "unlicenced" use, but there is an implicit grant of rights in marketing a product that we consumers have let slide and given the corporations free rein to trample over. Otherwise every time we told a mate about a great product we'd have to pay a licence fee and balance that by billing the corporation for marketing services. Just as these Browncoats have tried to show...
You never know they might stop being quite so pissed off at you...
Seconded! Democracy is brilliant: a good player (built on VLC) plus RSS feed for channels and playlists and built in torrent to get em. And Democracy is not under control of a company who just when you get to like their product will sell out to eBay who'll then treat it like shit.
Er you're not talking about English grammar schools, I think you mean the comprehensive schools of the day. The grammar schools selected for academic ability and were there to produce the managers and industry and administrators of the nation. The comps on the other hand were much as you describe (though in practice a bit more anarchic).
The closest parallel I can think of would be one of your Chief Justices... They provide some oversight on Parliament's legislation, tend to be less bound by party politics and rarely bothered by winning votes.
Personally, given the parlous state of your nation, I'd think twice about throwing jibes around about democracy.
Duh you fail at the first fence. What is this property of which you speak? Without a state to provide a legal definition of property and currency, you have no trade. Your reductionism has left nothing I'm afraid.
To make a market behave freely requires regulation just as a nation requires regulation to allow its population to live freely.
Why do you want to let the corporations dictate what I can and cannot do with stuff I've bought? Last I heard I lived in an elected democracy that included considerable legislation for consumer protection. But then I live in the UK not the US....
Yep. Next dumb question?
Argh! Failure to use preview. /firearm/farmer/ !
I live in Britain. Trust me when I say you can't own a gun here with the very limited exception of a shot gun if you're a firearm and sporting pistols & rifles which must be kept under lock & key at a gun club. Really. We don't have guns. And neither do our police. (Apart from a very few, none of them trusted after a few recent 'accidents' such as the guy with a table leg and of course the Brazilian, Menezes).
Here in Britain and in much of the rest of Europe, you can not own a firearm legally (for which I am profoundly grateful). I was curious about the OP's comments regarding Australia as I thought they had reasonably strict gun control as well.
Really?? It's been a little while since I was down in Oz, but as I understood it you are only allowed a limited range of firearms and handguns in particular (I thought) were prohibited so no question of carrying them in the street, permit or no... I mostly hung around in Sydney so maybe it's different in your state?