In other words MobiPocket(a.k.a MobiBooks, a.k.a. MobiReference), a company that packages public domain works up as eBooks and sells the results, listed the book on Amazon via the standard "third party" methods.
The book IS in the public domain in some places, just not in the US. Maybe Mobi didn't do a through check, though it's hard to think that a company that specializes in PD books would make a mistake like that. Or, looking at their site, given the quality of some of their covers, it might be a case where Mobi themselves just get their books from people who 'donate' them and don't do checking.
Either way, Amazon didn't and wouldn't normally do any checking. They assume the seller is legit till proven otherwise.
It's only theft if you accept the idea that selling the book to you was also theft (i.e. you accept the infringement of intellectual property rights = theft) and if you do, then you were, ispo facto, in possession of stolen property and have no claim over it.
If you don't accept that the orginal sale was theft, (i.e. you believe it was simply copy right infringement) then at most the deletion of the book could be would be a violation of the license agreement you made with Amazon. In this case, given that Amazon did not have the permission necessary to enter into that agreement with you and also refunded your money, you aren't going to have much ground to stand on in terms of 'damages'. Amazon did not steal anything. They removed data which they discovered they didn't have a right to provide you.
And I imagine that regardless of Amazon's actions, Mobireference (the company that did the actual infringment of selling the book via Amazon's third party system) is probably open to lawsuit by the rights holders and in hot water wtih Amazon over screwing the pooch.
Granted, this is a good arguement why copyrights need revamping, especially for the digital age - does purchasing an electronic product give you the same rights as purchasing a physical one, what protections should be in place to allow digital consumers to safeguard their purchases and what needs to be in place to allow rights holders safeguard their rights. And it does highlight the flaws of Amazon's implementation with the Kindle, but it isn't worth the breast pounding drama people are attempting to turn it into.
Since the sane answer doesn't actually answer the question (i.e. list a Linux friendly printer) and since by the time the sane answer is posted, there are several answers which aren't the strawmen you posted which do, I think a -1 troll would be appropriate.
The problem with AI's mimicking 'human' actions has nothing to do with a failure of logic or the ability to display randomness.
It has to do with the fact that we've never really understood why we do certain things, because we hold the false notion that for the most part our actions are driven by logic rather than the reality that our logic is driven by our actions. Thus, when someone happens that doesn't fit our model, we ascribe it to randomness despite the fact that it could probably be shown that the same situation would result in the same reaction the majority of the time.
If we actually studied our actions, rather than our rationalizations for why they occur, it'd be a lot easier to model our behavior.
And an AI that doesn't care why we do something but just learns to predict WHAT we will do, is a good first step towards that.
'We reject the view that copyright owners and their licensees are required to provide consumers with perpetual access to creative works.'
That's OK, many of us personally reject the view that the copy rights you hold should last as long as they do. So you keep selling stuff with the intention of breaking it a few years down the road so you can sell it again, and we'll keep not buying it.
Everything Peter does looks impressive while he stands by it. He's like a lesser powered Steve Jobs. However, unlike Steve, Peter's glamour effect only lasts till the product is released. Should Milo ever actually hit the market, it will immediately revert to a simulation of an autistic Eliza with Turrets syndrome and a tendency to stare at crotch rather than your face.
Peter will then appear and indicate that he knew Milo I was going to be this bad, that's why for the past TWO decades, he's been working on Milo II, which will suppose to do everything he actually promised in Milo I and include a loveable dog character for you to interact with as well.
When Milo II finally comes out, it'll be an actual stuffed basset hound.
As a certain other famous 'evil' CEO said "Developers, Developers, Developers".
It may not matter to the end users, but if you are a developer thinking of working out that cool new killer app for the iPhone, hearing that not only does Apple have a horrible record for inconsistent approvals, but even when you are as big as Google and get a signoff from the top levels of the company, you can still have your app pulled retroactively, might mean the difference between giving the project a green light and considering someone else's platform.
No offense dude, but unless you are attempting to do a mock Austin Powers skit where you pretend to be oblivous to the obvious clues in front of your face, you are just being highly dense. Did you even read the TITLE of this article, much less the summary or the article itself?
If they were in violation of the GPL, then they most certainly did not know the copyrights, which makes the rest of your comment about as relevant as Paris Hilton at a Mensa meeting.
Given the rich variety provided on this list of supported devices from Boingo, I would have to say that it must have been intentional douchebaggery on Verizon's part. (i.e. if no one uses the 'free' access, then Verizon doesn't have to pay for it)
Free Realms is very young kid oriented. I was only able to stand the game for about a week before dropping it but the majority of the pay stuff wasn't "uber level" stuff it was "fun stuff".
One of the things about Free Realms is it's a bit Puzzle Piratey, in the sense that different 'occupations' are actually just minigames. Chefs, for instance, play a mashup of one of those ever present bejeweled games for ingredients and a bit of "Cooking Mama" to mix them up.
Mining is another bejewled takeoff, while brawing and regular fighting is a bit more 'generic'. However there are also collectable card games, and even a "tower defense" game.
The some of the professions (and their related miniquests) were pay only. The "tower defense" game was free in one town, but all the 'later' towns were pay only games. Similarly the card games allowed you to do the time old tradition of buying booster packs for your decks.
Then there were the avatar customizations, for instance you could only have one character and a limited choice of clothing for free. Paying allowed you more slots for your characters and of course, more fashion.
For the most part, the real down side to the microtransitions wasn't "oh, people are paying to be better than me" it was just "man, this would be more fun but I have to pay for 'that' part".
Plus, being aimed at a far younger audience, it was a bit hard to convince any of my regular 'crew' to join me on it and like WoW, there were certainly parts where having an group of people you actually knew was essential to being able to enjoy it.
And this relates to Apple limiting their own customers from being able to do things that the other 'big' phones can do how? Sounds like the one a step behind is Apple. This IS about features that are being rolled out for other phones that Apple refuses to allow on the iPhone, the only one playing catchup is Apple here and from the article it's less catchup and more sit on your ass and take a nap.
Heinlein also wrote about a character that was effectively immortal. Banged his daughters, his sisters, his clones, went back in time and banged his mom and his dad, gave his best friend a sex change so he could bang it, got the AI running a planet and the AI running his ship bodies cloned from him (so he could bang them) and really pretty much humped everything that moved, while being a bigger bad ass than the illicit love child of Dirty Harry, Chuck Norris, and Vin Disel.
You are missing or avoiding the question, does the scan of the public domain work, constitute a new work (i.e. now under copyright of the scanner) or is it also in public domain.
And he's also a human with a personality, which influences those decisions based on his world view, likes, dislikes, and etc.
He could just as easily make money hand over fist if he loosen his death-like grip over Apple products and allowed others to play. Licensing money is 'easy' money. He doesn't because he has a control fetish.
Chief, this has nothing to do with lawyers taking over a company. Anyone who has ANY knowledge of Apple's history, especially under Steve Jobs, knows the man and the company he drives has a hard on for absolute control over their devices.
If Steve could find a way to make it profitable, he'd officially stop selling hardware and start leasing.
Yes, our mighty air, land, and sea defenses are the only things keeping back the Canadian horde. Should we falter, even for a second, they will over run us with their strange brews and Tim Hortons.
And I shudder to think what would happen should we blink in our 'Mexican standoff' with our southern neighbors. We could become known for our odd national cusine of Tex-Mex and coffee and doughnuts.
This is what happens when you skip over qualified technicians to hire high school students or college dropouts who are 'good with computers' to save a little money.
Uh, no. This is what happens when you skip over reference checks/spending time to know your employees and hire unscrupulous technicians to save a little money.
"scouring through private photos, stealing passwords and over-charging for basic repairs" == moral problem, not a technical one.
I.E. High school kids and college dropouts, the only people willing to work for that amount of money doing that sort of work, and actually qualified somewhat to do the job. As OP stated.
Slashdot Mirror
Amazon sold this via third party.
In other words MobiPocket(a.k.a MobiBooks, a.k.a. MobiReference), a company that packages public domain works up as eBooks and sells the results, listed the book on Amazon via the standard "third party" methods.
The book IS in the public domain in some places, just not in the US. Maybe Mobi didn't do a through check, though it's hard to think that a company that specializes in PD books would make a mistake like that. Or, looking at their site, given the quality of some of their covers, it might be a case where Mobi themselves just get their books from people who 'donate' them and don't do checking.
Either way, Amazon didn't and wouldn't normally do any checking. They assume the seller is legit till proven otherwise.
It's only theft if you accept the idea that selling the book to you was also theft (i.e. you accept the infringement of intellectual property rights = theft) and if you do, then you were, ispo facto, in possession of stolen property and have no claim over it.
If you don't accept that the orginal sale was theft, (i.e. you believe it was simply copy right infringement) then at most the deletion of the book could be would be a violation of the license agreement you made with Amazon. In this case, given that Amazon did not have the permission necessary to enter into that agreement with you and also refunded your money, you aren't going to have much ground to stand on in terms of 'damages'. Amazon did not steal anything. They removed data which they discovered they didn't have a right to provide you.
And I imagine that regardless of Amazon's actions, Mobireference (the company that did the actual infringment of selling the book via Amazon's third party system) is probably open to lawsuit by the rights holders and in hot water wtih Amazon over screwing the pooch.
Granted, this is a good arguement why copyrights need revamping, especially for the digital age - does purchasing an electronic product give you the same rights as purchasing a physical one, what protections should be in place to allow digital consumers to safeguard their purchases and what needs to be in place to allow rights holders safeguard their rights. And it does highlight the flaws of Amazon's implementation with the Kindle, but it isn't worth the breast pounding drama people are attempting to turn it into.
As they should, since bicycles are suppose to go on the road, not the sidewalk.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvis
I have to say this, you are true to your nick.
If you go to your doctor and say "Hey doc, it hurts when I do this!", despite the humor, it is not a valid response to say "Well stop doing that!"
Since the sane answer doesn't actually answer the question (i.e. list a Linux friendly printer) and since by the time the sane answer is posted, there are several answers which aren't the strawmen you posted which do, I think a -1 troll would be appropriate.
The problem with AI's mimicking 'human' actions has nothing to do with a failure of logic or the ability to display randomness.
It has to do with the fact that we've never really understood why we do certain things, because we hold the false notion that for the most part our actions are driven by logic rather than the reality that our logic is driven by our actions. Thus, when someone happens that doesn't fit our model, we ascribe it to randomness despite the fact that it could probably be shown that the same situation would result in the same reaction the majority of the time.
If we actually studied our actions, rather than our rationalizations for why they occur, it'd be a lot easier to model our behavior.
And an AI that doesn't care why we do something but just learns to predict WHAT we will do, is a good first step towards that.
That's OK, many of us personally reject the view that the copy rights you hold should last as long as they do. So you keep selling stuff with the intention of breaking it a few years down the road so you can sell it again, and we'll keep not buying it.
Everything Peter does looks impressive while he stands by it. He's like a lesser powered Steve Jobs. However, unlike Steve, Peter's glamour effect only lasts till the product is released. Should Milo ever actually hit the market, it will immediately revert to a simulation of an autistic Eliza with Turrets syndrome and a tendency to stare at crotch rather than your face.
Peter will then appear and indicate that he knew Milo I was going to be this bad, that's why for the past TWO decades, he's been working on Milo II, which will suppose to do everything he actually promised in Milo I and include a loveable dog character for you to interact with as well.
When Milo II finally comes out, it'll be an actual stuffed basset hound.
Apparently not, or this article wouldn't exist, would it?
As a certain other famous 'evil' CEO said "Developers, Developers, Developers".
It may not matter to the end users, but if you are a developer thinking of working out that cool new killer app for the iPhone, hearing that not only does Apple have a horrible record for inconsistent approvals, but even when you are as big as Google and get a signoff from the top levels of the company, you can still have your app pulled retroactively, might mean the difference between giving the project a green light and considering someone else's platform.
No offense dude, but unless you are attempting to do a mock Austin Powers skit where you pretend to be oblivous to the obvious clues in front of your face, you are just being highly dense. Did you even read the TITLE of this article, much less the summary or the article itself?
If they were in violation of the GPL, then they most certainly did not know the copyrights, which makes the rest of your comment about as relevant as Paris Hilton at a Mensa meeting.
Given the rich variety provided on this list of supported devices from Boingo, I would have to say that it must have been intentional douchebaggery on Verizon's part. (i.e. if no one uses the 'free' access, then Verizon doesn't have to pay for it)
I hardly do.
Free Realms is very young kid oriented. I was only able to stand the game for about a week before dropping it but the majority of the pay stuff wasn't "uber level" stuff it was "fun stuff".
One of the things about Free Realms is it's a bit Puzzle Piratey, in the sense that different 'occupations' are actually just minigames. Chefs, for instance, play a mashup of one of those ever present bejeweled games for ingredients and a bit of "Cooking Mama" to mix them up.
Mining is another bejewled takeoff, while brawing and regular fighting is a bit more 'generic'. However there are also collectable card games, and even a "tower defense" game.
The some of the professions (and their related miniquests) were pay only. The "tower defense" game was free in one town, but all the 'later' towns were pay only games. Similarly the card games allowed you to do the time old tradition of buying booster packs for your decks.
Then there were the avatar customizations, for instance you could only have one character and a limited choice of clothing for free. Paying allowed you more slots for your characters and of course, more fashion.
For the most part, the real down side to the microtransitions wasn't "oh, people are paying to be better than me" it was just "man, this would be more fun but I have to pay for 'that' part".
Plus, being aimed at a far younger audience, it was a bit hard to convince any of my regular 'crew' to join me on it and like WoW, there were certainly parts where having an group of people you actually knew was essential to being able to enjoy it.
Free Realms seems to not have a problem with that. Yet.
And this relates to Apple limiting their own customers from being able to do things that the other 'big' phones can do how? Sounds like the one a step behind is Apple. This IS about features that are being rolled out for other phones that Apple refuses to allow on the iPhone, the only one playing catchup is Apple here and from the article it's less catchup and more sit on your ass and take a nap.
Heinlein also wrote about a character that was effectively immortal. Banged his daughters, his sisters, his clones, went back in time and banged his mom and his dad, gave his best friend a sex change so he could bang it, got the AI running a planet and the AI running his ship bodies cloned from him (so he could bang them) and really pretty much humped everything that moved, while being a bigger bad ass than the illicit love child of Dirty Harry, Chuck Norris, and Vin Disel.
A good wordsmith, but not exactly Cassandra.
You are missing or avoiding the question, does the scan of the public domain work, constitute a new work (i.e. now under copyright of the scanner) or is it also in public domain.
Slash DOT. Duh!
And he's also a human with a personality, which influences those decisions based on his world view, likes, dislikes, and etc.
He could just as easily make money hand over fist if he loosen his death-like grip over Apple products and allowed others to play. Licensing money is 'easy' money. He doesn't because he has a control fetish.
Chief, this has nothing to do with lawyers taking over a company. Anyone who has ANY knowledge of Apple's history, especially under Steve Jobs, knows the man and the company he drives has a hard on for absolute control over their devices.
If Steve could find a way to make it profitable, he'd officially stop selling hardware and start leasing.
Yes, our mighty air, land, and sea defenses are the only things keeping back the Canadian horde. Should we falter, even for a second, they will over run us with their strange brews and Tim Hortons.
And I shudder to think what would happen should we blink in our 'Mexican standoff' with our southern neighbors. We could become known for our odd national cusine of Tex-Mex and coffee and doughnuts.
Woe indeed. Woe indeed.
I.E. High school kids and college dropouts, the only people willing to work for that amount of money doing that sort of work, and actually qualified somewhat to do the job. As OP stated.