You know how Coke can dictate what a supermarket can put into its refrigerators, or next to their products on the selves? Microsoft probably does the same to the vendors in regards to installed alternatives.
I've never heard anyone publicly refer to their own "intellectual property" rights except as a threat.
That's how it was meant to be used. It's a weapon. It's the buzzword for the new combo M-16 with grenade launcher, microwave oven, and boombox survival tool. It might even be trademarked.
If Google did indeed rip off their Chinese counterparts my feeling is... more power to 'em.
Umm, I'm kinda new here, so I'm not sure if this will come out right: 2wrongs != 1right? Who knows with this "new math"...
What the hell, let's go way off topic with a possibly suitable analogy:
China invades Tibet. So that makes it ok to invade Iraq? I wouldn't put it past Bush to use such a pretext. There. I turned it away from racism and bigotry and into US bashing and good old political mud slinging.
But if the subject is plagiarism, well, even I'm against that. It is attempted theft. I say "attempted" because it is impossible to actually be the creator of something that was made by someone else. Until the offender is caught, you could say it's a crime in progress.
Naw, driving is for the birds. It's just that when it comes to flying now, I'd rather do it myself. The airlines are a miserable mess anyways because the customers put up with so much crap and accept such lousy service. Ten hours on the tarmac...jeeze! And that whole system can be shutdown when someone whispers "bimb", I find a bit humorous to tell the truth. Such fragility! Electricity and airplanes don't mix:-)
The entanglements are too much for me to handle. I'll have to accept your premise unless someone points out how much foreign investment there is in those institutions. Anyway I shouldn't really care where the car comes from. I just want a good one. On the subject of your original question, I thought that GM has a big chunk of Toyota, and they do have some factories in the US.
Is it still 1993? Hellooo! It is now 14 years later.
That was the last time that people were injured or killed. Minor incidences that don't result in injury and don't make the papers still abound. To know for sure, I'll have to check air worthiness directives and service bulletins. For something a little more recent, the 777 at least one minor control problem also. They can't wait for "Patch Tuesday". These are new machines. Let's see how they age. If we have a more rapid turnover where we are use these things for only 10 years instead of forty, then great, I can have faith that I'm not riding in a "one-hoss shay". If they try to keep 'em flying for 40-50 years, then I'm keeping my feet on the ground. I have much more faith in old hydraulics than I do in old electronics. We already know what happens when the wiring gets old I feel much safer in a Piper Cub. No wiring at all, and no surly stewardesses and drunken passengers to deal with either.
When it comes to airplanes, I'm pretty conservative, too. I don't care for fly-by-wire, I don't care for 10-15 year old carbon fibre. (Heh, maybe I should just stay away from Airbus) Neither of these are ready for prime time yet. Put your phone next to your speakers and listen to the noise when it rings. I'll grant that it doesn't reach the power supply and blow up the caps. In fact it hasn't caused a crash yet either. But we're talking about a matter of convenience here, so to me, I think it's fine to go nice and slow.
...then call them what they are -- limited monopoly rights granted in exchange for something else.
You're absolutely correct. The term probably came up because people do claim their thoughts as property. Of course if that's the case, they should pay property tax. However, what they are is a bit long winded. We need a catchy phrase. How about T.I.M. Temporary Intellectual Monopoly. No...not sexy enough. How about Publicly United Syndicate Serving Intellectual Endeavors...Close enough?
Copyright controls the distribution of ideas Patents control the methods in which ideas are implemented Trademark control the appearance or signage of ideas
All three serve the same purpose of the claim of ownership. The validity is unimportant for the sake of this discussion. I'm just saying here that the term intellectual property covers these control rather well. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost...or if you prefer: The Eye in the Pyramid, The Golden Apple, and Leviathan:-)
Anyone using the term "Intellectual Property" to group the three of them is either confused or is trying to mislead others.
Not at all. It's no different than grouping Christianity, Muslim, Buddhist, etc. under the banner of "religion". Funny how the concept of religion has striking similarities to that of IP. Both depend on faith in something that doesn't necessarily exist. Well, in one case it definitely doesn't exist.
This "dispute" was and IS necessary to avoid legal problems.
That's my point. The thing is becoming a legal problem with little time for productive code writing. Soon you will need a law degree to program a damn computer. Ah, old days, when the USSR used to restrict access to the photocopy machine, and even the "better" older days when the writers guild could restrict one's access to the first "P2P" device, the printing press. Your copyright law, along with prohibition, is aiding and abetting disrespect for all law. A very basic problem that maybe, probably should be addressed before you reach the event horizon.
I expect it's only a matter of time before we learn how Bush deliberately ditched the MS monopoly judgement.
Won't happen. Unlike Mr. Nixon, Bush will have "properly disposed"(deliberately ditched?) all evidence of any wrongdoing, as that is the only lesson learned from the Watergate incident.
If we're going to treat IP as real property, then we need laws against speculation. "Use it or lose it" is what we should be demanding. Same goes for the Alpha chip. When the question of why we still use x86 was asked a while ago, the answer should have been clear right away. "It's the law."
Umm, I hope I'm not misunderstanding and thinking you believe this is somehow a good thing. This is every bit as loony as the subsidies planned for Digital TV receivers. As a matter of fact, I believe that somebody didn't get the memo that April 1 was last Sunday. "learning purposes"? Waddaya gonna learn? How to work an iPod? Or that your politicians have finally gone over the edge? The spirit of William Proxmire is truly dead.
Slashdot Mirror
You know how Coke can dictate what a supermarket can put into its refrigerators, or next to their products on the selves? Microsoft probably does the same to the vendors in regards to installed alternatives.
I've never heard anyone publicly refer to their own "intellectual property" rights except as a threat.
That's how it was meant to be used. It's a weapon. It's the buzzword for the new combo M-16 with grenade launcher, microwave oven, and boombox survival tool. It might even be trademarked.
So what's all this talk about China not having legal restrictions on the distribution of ideas? (People get mad when I call it IP law)
If Google did indeed rip off their Chinese counterparts my feeling is ... more power to 'em.
Umm, I'm kinda new here, so I'm not sure if this will come out right:
2wrongs != 1right? Who knows with this "new math"...
What the hell, let's go way off topic with a possibly suitable analogy:
China invades Tibet. So that makes it ok to invade Iraq? I wouldn't put it past Bush to use such a pretext. There. I turned it away from racism and bigotry and into US bashing and good old political mud slinging.
But if the subject is plagiarism, well, even I'm against that. It is attempted theft. I say "attempted" because it is impossible to actually be the creator of something that was made by someone else. Until the offender is caught, you could say it's a crime in progress.
Naw, driving is for the birds. It's just that when it comes to flying now, I'd rather do it myself. The airlines are a miserable mess anyways because the customers put up with so much crap and accept such lousy service. Ten hours on the tarmac...jeeze! And that whole system can be shutdown when someone whispers "bimb", I find a bit humorous to tell the truth. Such fragility! Electricity and airplanes don't mix :-)
The entanglements are too much for me to handle. I'll have to accept your premise unless someone points out how much foreign investment there is in those institutions. Anyway I shouldn't really care where the car comes from. I just want a good one. On the subject of your original question, I thought that GM has a big chunk of Toyota, and they do have some factories in the US.
Is it still 1993? Hellooo! It is now 14 years later.
That was the last time that people were injured or killed. Minor incidences that don't result in injury and don't make the papers still abound. To know for sure, I'll have to check air worthiness directives and service bulletins. For something a little more recent, the 777 at least one minor control problem also. They can't wait for "Patch Tuesday". These are new machines. Let's see how they age. If we have a more rapid turnover where we are use these things for only 10 years instead of forty, then great, I can have faith that I'm not riding in a "one-hoss shay". If they try to keep 'em flying for 40-50 years, then I'm keeping my feet on the ground. I have much more faith in old hydraulics than I do in old electronics. We already know what happens when the wiring gets old I feel much safer in a Piper Cub. No wiring at all, and no surly stewardesses and drunken passengers to deal with either.
There is no such thing as an "American" auto company anymore. There hasn't been for a long time. They are all internationally owned.
FAA is very conservative...
When it comes to airplanes, I'm pretty conservative, too. I don't care for fly-by-wire, I don't care for 10-15 year old carbon fibre. (Heh, maybe I should just stay away from Airbus) Neither of these are ready for prime time yet. Put your phone next to your speakers and listen to the noise when it rings. I'll grant that it doesn't reach the power supply and blow up the caps. In fact it hasn't caused a crash yet either. But we're talking about a matter of convenience here, so to me, I think it's fine to go nice and slow.
...then call them what they are -- limited monopoly rights granted in exchange for something else.
You're absolutely correct. The term probably came up because people do claim their thoughts as property. Of course if that's the case, they should pay property tax. However, what they are is a bit long winded. We need a catchy phrase. How about T.I.M. Temporary Intellectual Monopoly. No...not sexy enough. How about Publicly United Syndicate Serving Intellectual Endeavors...Close enough?
I see IP as the control of ideas, or thoughts.
:-)
Copyright controls the distribution of ideas
Patents control the methods in which ideas are implemented
Trademark control the appearance or signage of ideas
All three serve the same purpose of the claim of ownership. The validity is unimportant for the sake of this discussion. I'm just saying here that the term intellectual property covers these control rather well. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost...or if you prefer:
The Eye in the Pyramid, The Golden Apple, and Leviathan
Anyone using the term "Intellectual Property" to group the three of them is either confused or is trying to mislead others.
Not at all. It's no different than grouping Christianity, Muslim, Buddhist, etc. under the banner of "religion". Funny how the concept of religion has striking similarities to that of IP. Both depend on faith in something that doesn't necessarily exist. Well, in one case it definitely doesn't exist.
Probably in his case, he'll just smash it with a hammer. He doesn't have a very positive attitude about recycling.
Actually the tool for hacking paper is scissors. The anti-virus is rock. Oops, does that mean the "protected process" is paper?
This "dispute" was and IS necessary to avoid legal problems.
That's my point. The thing is becoming a legal problem with little time for productive code writing. Soon you will need a law degree to program a damn computer. Ah, old days, when the USSR used to restrict access to the photocopy machine, and even the "better" older days when the writers guild could restrict one's access to the first "P2P" device, the printing press. Your copyright law, along with prohibition, is aiding and abetting disrespect for all law. A very basic problem that maybe, probably should be addressed before you reach the event horizon.
On the other hand, it did work for a certain Rosa Parks...
The hippies already have prior art with the smoke-ins. Weed is still illegal.
I expect it's only a matter of time before we learn how Bush deliberately ditched the MS monopoly judgement.
Won't happen. Unlike Mr. Nixon, Bush will have "properly disposed"(deliberately ditched?) all evidence of any wrongdoing, as that is the only lesson learned from the Watergate incident.
If we're going to treat IP as real property, then we need laws against speculation. "Use it or lose it" is what we should be demanding. Same goes for the Alpha chip. When the question of why we still use x86 was asked a while ago, the answer should have been clear right away. "It's the law."
Umm, I hope I'm not misunderstanding and thinking you believe this is somehow a good thing. This is every bit as loony as the subsidies planned for Digital TV receivers. As a matter of fact, I believe that somebody didn't get the memo that April 1 was last Sunday. "learning purposes"? Waddaya gonna learn? How to work an iPod? Or that your politicians have finally gone over the edge? The spirit of William Proxmire is truly dead.
Disputes over licenses...shooting ourselves in the foot...just like the "grown-ups". Meh! Pitiful!
Damn! With those kind of incentives, I wonder if pencil and paper are safe.
It looks pretty cool...
...fucking...
...fucking...
...fucking...
...fucking...
...fucking...
...fucking...
Cartman's V-Chip isn't working.
Note to people in southern Florida:...
...find some land...