but havent there been congressmen and other officials who have been held up by airport security and such? Christ, I want to say Ted Kennedy was one of them but Im too lazy to fact-check so....wasnt Ted Kennedy one of them?;)
Yes, Ted Kennedy was stopped from boarding planes several tymes because his name was on the Do Not Fly lists. So was Cat Stevens.
Falcon
For those who don't know, Cat Steves was a popular singer song writer in the 1960s and '70s.
You're worried about a nanny state so you want to vote for Bob Barr? The guy wants to control your bedroom and your religion.
The Libertarian Party would not have chosen Bob Barr as it's candidate if he still wanted control. He himself said he was wrong and now opposes government control. I once opposed him but now I can support him. Of course, as with all other politicians, he needs to be monitored.
He led the fight to try and get the Army's first Wiccan Distinctive Faith Group disbanded (he lost that one).
During the 2000 campaign Bush went so for as to say Wicca wasn't a religion "I don't think that witchcraft is a religion. I wish the military would rethink this decision." I'm not one myself but I have studied it and have friends who are Wiccans. Several years ago I probably gave my sister a shock, she's a Christian even though she doesn't act like one all the tyme, when she asked me if I wanted to join a church and I said I was thinking of joining a Wiccan Coven.
Add tot hat the fact that the Libertarians would demolish the what little control the government still exercises on Corporate America
Corporate libertarians perhaps. However: "B7. What would libertarians do about concentrations of corporate power?" Libertarians oppose the power corporations wield. Many corporations got their power by monopoly and Libertarians oppose monopolies. Corporations also offer stockholders limited liability, and Libertarians would end that thus making stockholders liable for actions the corporations take. It's Democrats, and others, who spread such lies that Libertarians would allow corporations to get away with whatever they want.
It was only this year that international tourists to the US were at the levels seen before 9111, from the AP: "The number of international tourists visiting America should exceed pre-Sept. 11 levels this year for the first time since terrorist attacks crippled the travel industry, U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said Friday." Notice it says "should" not does or did. Elsewhere: "Tourists skipping US sites", dated 5 July 2008 and "U.S. share of foreign tourists slipping, travel experts say" dated one day later.
I was at the UofC when Barack Obama was a Constitutional scholar there. There are only a handful of people in this country who know the Constitution better than he does (read his articles from the Law Review). And from what I hear, he's a lover of freedom and a true believer in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Can you show me where the USA Constitution authorizes Obama's health care plan?
Plus, having a young black president will make the jackoff racists' heads explode, which will make for some great entertainment for the next 4/8 years.
Agreed, but it doesn't require Obama. Before he stood up in front of the UN Security Council and said Saddam had all those WMDs, which I'm still waiting to see, I would have supported Colon Powell as president.
At least then we stand a fighting chance of not losing the rest of what once made this country great.
No, I'm voting for Bob Barr. Between McCain and Obama I'd vote for Obama, add Hillary to the ticket though and I'd vote for McCain if his running mate isn't too bad. If there wasn't another person running, but there is. McCain scares me but not as much as Hillary does.
We've got a lot of knuckleheads who still need it spelled out for them, thanks to our corporate media and Republican party that likes to manipulate the weakest minds with ugly racism and sexism.
On the other hand there's the Democratic Party, and the mass media that supports it, that wants to turn the country into a nanny state.
For those of us that DO live in the US, remember, nothing short of a landslide victory for Obama is going to keep the tin-pot dictators of the GOP out of the White House this time.
Yea, who needs the tin-pot, or socialist dictators, when you can have liberty instead by voting for the Libertarian candidate?
Until they just indiscriminately block all packets they can't identify. ISP are already itching to do that.
Let's bring on Open Mesh-net then. Other than my own I see two wifi connections available on my list, however it only lists three with a fourth choice of Other...
the act of downloading(picking up the paper) was not illegal.
The act of downloading, without copyright holder's approval is illegal. The judge in this case is deciding whether the RIAA has to prove anybody downloaded any music. From the "Wired" article: "At issue is whether the RIAA needs to prove that copyrighted music offered by a defendant on a peer-to-peer network was actually downloaded by anyone." If the RIAA can't prove anyone downloaded music he may vacate the defendant's conviction. Further it says the "judge said that the Copyright Act appears to outlaw only an actual transfer of copyrighted material."
It's a civil matter, not a criminal matter. Neither is illegal.
Not according to the Plagiarism Checker, it says "The owner of a copyright gets to decide who can legally make copies of that work. It is illegal to copy large sections of someone else's copyrighted work without permission, even if you give the original author credit." If that's not enough, then let's see what the Copyright Office says: "It is illegal for anyone to violate any of the rights provided by the copyright law to the owner of copyright." Notice the government itself says it's illegal.
Well, OK, distribution. That was implicit in the "making a copy" step in the context of this conversation.
But as I said, making a copy is not illegal, well it might be now. It's distributing copies a person who is not authorized by the copyright holder makes that's illegal. A person could make a copy for backup purposes, a Fair Use practice. Is was also legal to shift a recording from one type of media to another, however I think the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, DMCA, may of made it illegal. When I owned a turntable and a Reel to Reel tape deck that's what I did. The first tyme I played a new LP on the turntable I'd record on tape then put the record away and listen to the tape. When the tape wore out I could rerecord the record, it was like a master recording.
The needle is stiffer for 78s and speeds the wear on your records. Some models offer a way to easily switch needles by flicking a lever.
Ok, I didn't know that. Actually I haven't seen any turntables that play 78s in years. The only record player I've seen that does play 78s is the old Gramophone or Phonograph my sister has, she has a few 78s she plays on it.
the police shouldn't be prevented from, in the course of an investigation, pretending to be a regular Joe or Sally in order to see if someone is selling drugs, for example.
Unless they authorized the uploader to distribute the files, then it isn't a legal upload, no matter who is downloading it.
That's the line the MafiAA uses, however it is not illegal to make available, which is what the uploader is doing. You have the right to swing at me but your right ends where my nose begins.
The copy operation gets initiated from another computer, is the person who initiated the operation (the downloader) responsible? Or is it the person who made it available?
According to the law, it's the downloader who is responsible. In a post on yesterday's article someone offered a good example, sorry I don't recall the person. The example used a newspaper. If I buy a newspaper, read it in a park then leave it on a park bench I'm not breaking the law. Well, depending one where I might be breaking a littering law. But if someone else picks the paper up then copies it and hands out the copies, they are breaking the law if they do not have the copyright holder's permission.
Those downloads, Toder said, cannot be considered unauthorized downloads because the RIAA authorized them.
I don't think that's going to stand up. Undercover cops buy drugs and the state doesn't have to prosecute them for buying them. Why couldn't investigators "illegally" download copyrighted material and still have it considered infringing on the part of the defendant, but not be prosecuted?
As the subject line says, you can't infringe on your own rights. The investigators worked for the copyright owners and had their permission. The police, being part of government, has a Get Out of Jail card.
The last, well all really, turntables I had only had one needle on one arm and they all played 33, 45, and 78rpm records, I played all three though not many 45s. Now 78s might of sounded better using a special needle but they all were able to play on the same one. But maybe that's why I haven't found any new ones that play 78s, I do like some Classical songs.
I don't know if you count Creative Commons as 'open source or public domain' but I've read quite a few good books and short stories under various CC licenses recently.
But how many who release what they create to the Creative Commons are able to make a living at it?
"The Congress shall have Power" is a lot different than "must". If the Founding Fathers wanted it they would have said must. As it is, not all of them believed in either copyrights or patents. From Thomas Jefferson: "He who receives an idea from me, receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening mine." Eventually TJ's friend James Madison convinced him copyrights and patents granted for a short period of tyme could mean more progress than without them. Once so convinced TJ calculated how long their terms should be, using an actuarial table he calculated they should only last 14 years, with one 14 year extension possible. And eventually he got some patents himself.
If your work is worth a damn then you'll have no trouble finding an employer - or starting a business.
Find what type of work? As a copy righter, oops those don't exist, as a copy editor?
If you think writing copy is about "publishing a book" then you've been grossly misled on the breadth of the writing profession
I know, besides a book I was working on I used to write short stories, poems, and I had a magazine editor interested in articles, while working on one she was waiting for an accident I had ended it. Though I would have liked to but couldn't I knew others who wrote music and plays, a long tyme ago I played the clarinet and I have a flute I want to learn to play. I also love the theatre. Advertising businesses also hire writers as well as technical businesses, for manuals, and translation services. However drones would have more fun doing these.
just like all those idiots who think the only way to make money from programming is by putting software in boxes.
At least software businesses can sell service and support, about the closest a writer can come are those drones. "Here, translate this French manual into English." "Write a manual in Chinese." Reminds me of what Halle Berry's character says in "Catwoman", "Sure I majored in Art but now I work for an advertizing agency."
There's this thing called "the web" that you might have heard of.
And the web spits out money like an atm? I haven't seen that yet. If I were a writer I'd want to be pretty sure someone else couldn't take what I spent my tyme writing and sell it without me seeing any money, which the web makes easy.
Or do you consider it only worth counting if it is bound (and gagged) by a publisher?
I don't consider it worth it if I don't get paid. Many open source programmers even get paid, open source businesses pay them to work on the software. The companies even make money providing support. What sort of support can a book writer sale? About the only way I could see a writer being able to make a living writing without copyrights is by having some wealthy benefactor pay them to write, but why would anyone do that? A writer might be able to make money selling autographed hardcopy books, they might release a pdf on the web then sell hardcopies to those are willing to pay, but would it be worth it for the writer?
Slashdot Mirror
but havent there been congressmen and other officials who have been held up by airport security and such? Christ, I want to say Ted Kennedy was one of them but Im too lazy to fact-check so....wasnt Ted Kennedy one of them? ;)
Yes, Ted Kennedy was stopped from boarding planes several tymes because his name was on the Do Not Fly lists. So was Cat Stevens.
Falcon
For those who don't know, Cat Steves was a popular singer song writer in the 1960s and '70s.
You're worried about a nanny state so you want to vote for Bob Barr? The guy wants to control your bedroom and your religion.
The Libertarian Party would not have chosen Bob Barr as it's candidate if he still wanted control. He himself said he was wrong and now opposes government control. I once opposed him but now I can support him. Of course, as with all other politicians, he needs to be monitored.
He led the fight to try and get the Army's first Wiccan Distinctive Faith Group disbanded (he lost that one).
During the 2000 campaign Bush went so for as to say Wicca wasn't a religion "I don't think that witchcraft is a religion. I wish the military would rethink this decision." I'm not one myself but I have studied it and have friends who are Wiccans. Several years ago I probably gave my sister a shock, she's a Christian even though she doesn't act like one all the tyme, when she asked me if I wanted to join a church and I said I was thinking of joining a Wiccan Coven.
Add tot hat the fact that the Libertarians would demolish the what little control the government still exercises on Corporate America
Corporate libertarians perhaps. However: "B7. What would libertarians do about concentrations of corporate power?" Libertarians oppose the power corporations wield. Many corporations got their power by monopoly and Libertarians oppose monopolies. Corporations also offer stockholders limited liability, and Libertarians would end that thus making stockholders liable for actions the corporations take. It's Democrats, and others, who spread such lies that Libertarians would allow corporations to get away with whatever they want.
Falcon
And what happens if ISPs are ordered to block all encrypted packets for which the DHS doesn't hold the keys in escrow?
And what if an ISP has the balls Qwest showed showed when asked for it's records? Qwest itself could do it again.
Falcon
It was only this year that international tourists to the US were at the levels seen before 9111, from the AP: "The number of international tourists visiting America should exceed pre-Sept. 11 levels this year for the first time since terrorist attacks crippled the travel industry, U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said Friday." Notice it says "should" not does or did. Elsewhere: "Tourists skipping US sites", dated 5 July 2008 and "U.S. share of foreign tourists slipping, travel experts say" dated one day later.
Falcon
Bill Clinton, he wanted congress to pass the Comprehensive Anti-terrorism Act of 1995 which would have given him many of the powers the PATRIOT Act gave Bush.
I was at the UofC when Barack Obama was a Constitutional scholar there. There are only a handful of people in this country who know the Constitution better than he does (read his articles from the Law Review). And from what I hear, he's a lover of freedom and a true believer in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Can you show me where the USA Constitution authorizes Obama's health care plan?
Plus, having a young black president will make the jackoff racists' heads explode, which will make for some great entertainment for the next 4/8 years.
Agreed, but it doesn't require Obama. Before he stood up in front of the UN Security Council and said Saddam had all those WMDs, which I'm still waiting to see, I would have supported Colon Powell as president.
Falcon
At least then we stand a fighting chance of not losing the rest of what once made this country great.
No, I'm voting for Bob Barr. Between McCain and Obama I'd vote for Obama, add Hillary to the ticket though and I'd vote for McCain if his running mate isn't too bad. If there wasn't another person running, but there is. McCain scares me but not as much as Hillary does.
We've got a lot of knuckleheads who still need it spelled out for them, thanks to our corporate media and Republican party that likes to manipulate the weakest minds with ugly racism and sexism.
On the other hand there's the Democratic Party, and the mass media that supports it, that wants to turn the country into a nanny state.
For those of us that DO live in the US, remember, nothing short of a landslide victory for Obama is going to keep the tin-pot dictators of the GOP out of the White House this time.
Yea, who needs the tin-pot, or socialist dictators, when you can have liberty instead by voting for the Libertarian candidate?
Falcon
Until they just indiscriminately block all packets they can't identify. ISP are already itching to do that.
Let's bring on Open Mesh-net then. Other than my own I see two wifi connections available on my list, however it only lists three with a fourth choice of Other...
Falcon
I didn't check these very closely but they may be useful.
Thanks.
Falcon
the act of downloading(picking up the paper) was not illegal.
The act of downloading, without copyright holder's approval is illegal. The judge in this case is deciding whether the RIAA has to prove anybody downloaded any music. From the "Wired" article: "At issue is whether the RIAA needs to prove that copyrighted music offered by a defendant on a peer-to-peer network was actually downloaded by anyone." If the RIAA can't prove anyone downloaded music he may vacate the defendant's conviction. Further it says the "judge said that the Copyright Act appears to outlaw only an actual transfer of copyrighted material."
Falcon
The last two CC books I read were by Charles Stross and Cory Doctorow.
I never heard of Charles Stross but Cory Doctorow blogs and can sell ads. His book "Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom" is copyrighted as is "Little Brother".
It's a civil matter, not a criminal matter. Neither is illegal.
Not according to the Plagiarism Checker, it says "The owner of a copyright gets to decide who can legally make copies of that work. It is illegal to copy large sections of someone else's copyrighted work without permission, even if you give the original author credit." If that's not enough, then let's see what the Copyright Office says: "It is illegal for anyone to violate any of the rights provided by the copyright law to the owner of copyright." Notice the government itself says it's illegal.
Falcon
Well, OK, distribution. That was implicit in the "making a copy" step in the context of this conversation.
But as I said, making a copy is not illegal, well it might be now. It's distributing copies a person who is not authorized by the copyright holder makes that's illegal. A person could make a copy for backup purposes, a Fair Use practice. Is was also legal to shift a recording from one type of media to another, however I think the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, DMCA, may of made it illegal. When I owned a turntable and a Reel to Reel tape deck that's what I did. The first tyme I played a new LP on the turntable I'd record on tape then put the record away and listen to the tape. When the tape wore out I could rerecord the record, it was like a master recording.
Falcon
The needle is stiffer for 78s and speeds the wear on your records. Some models offer a way to easily switch needles by flicking a lever.
Ok, I didn't know that. Actually I haven't seen any turntables that play 78s in years. The only record player I've seen that does play 78s is the old Gramophone or Phonograph my sister has, she has a few 78s she plays on it.
Falcon
Copyright violation only exists when a copy is made without authorization of the copyright owner or some special circumstances
The copying isn't illegal, it's giving the copy away or getting the copy without also getting the original that's illegal.
Falcon
the police shouldn't be prevented from, in the course of an investigation, pretending to be a regular Joe or Sally in order to see if someone is selling drugs, for example.
Yes they should, drugs shouldn't be illegal!
Falcon
Unless they authorized the uploader to distribute the files, then it isn't a legal upload, no matter who is downloading it.
That's the line the MafiAA uses, however it is not illegal to make available, which is what the uploader is doing. You have the right to swing at me but your right ends where my nose begins.
Falcon
The copy operation gets initiated from another computer, is the person who initiated the operation (the downloader) responsible? Or is it the person who made it available?
According to the law, it's the downloader who is responsible. In a post on yesterday's article someone offered a good example, sorry I don't recall the person. The example used a newspaper. If I buy a newspaper, read it in a park then leave it on a park bench I'm not breaking the law. Well, depending one where I might be breaking a littering law. But if someone else picks the paper up then copies it and hands out the copies, they are breaking the law if they do not have the copyright holder's permission.
Falcon
Those downloads, Toder said, cannot be considered unauthorized downloads because the RIAA authorized them.
I don't think that's going to stand up. Undercover cops buy drugs and the state doesn't have to prosecute them for buying them. Why couldn't investigators "illegally" download copyrighted material and still have it considered infringing on the part of the defendant, but not be prosecuted?
As the subject line says, you can't infringe on your own rights. The investigators worked for the copyright owners and had their permission. The police, being part of government, has a Get Out of Jail card.
Falcon
Note this post originates from a record store.
The last, well all really, turntables I had only had one needle on one arm and they all played 33, 45, and 78rpm records, I played all three though not many 45s. Now 78s might of sounded better using a special needle but they all were able to play on the same one. But maybe that's why I haven't found any new ones that play 78s, I do like some Classical songs.
Falcon
I don't know if you count Creative Commons as 'open source or public domain' but I've read quite a few good books and short stories under various CC licenses recently.
But how many who release what they create to the Creative Commons are able to make a living at it?
Falcon
And they were authorized by the copyright holders to download them.
Unfortunately she wasn't authorised to upload them. All this means is that in this particular transaction the RIAA can't be sued for their part.
However making them available itself isn't breaking the law, that's just what the MafiAA is trying to get people to believe.
Falcon
English not your native language? Sec 8 says:
"The Congress shall have Power" is a lot different than "must". If the Founding Fathers wanted it they would have said must. As it is, not all of them believed in either copyrights or patents. From Thomas Jefferson: "He who receives an idea from me, receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening mine." Eventually TJ's friend James Madison convinced him copyrights and patents granted for a short period of tyme could mean more progress than without them. Once so convinced TJ calculated how long their terms should be, using an actuarial table he calculated they should only last 14 years, with one 14 year extension possible. And eventually he got some patents himself.
Falcon
If your work is worth a damn then you'll have no trouble finding an employer - or starting a business.
Find what type of work? As a copy righter, oops those don't exist, as a copy editor?
If you think writing copy is about "publishing a book" then you've been grossly misled on the breadth of the writing profession
I know, besides a book I was working on I used to write short stories, poems, and I had a magazine editor interested in articles, while working on one she was waiting for an accident I had ended it. Though I would have liked to but couldn't I knew others who wrote music and plays, a long tyme ago I played the clarinet and I have a flute I want to learn to play. I also love the theatre. Advertising businesses also hire writers as well as technical businesses, for manuals, and translation services. However drones would have more fun doing these.
just like all those idiots who think the only way to make money from programming is by putting software in boxes.
At least software businesses can sell service and support, about the closest a writer can come are those drones. "Here, translate this French manual into English." "Write a manual in Chinese." Reminds me of what Halle Berry's character says in "Catwoman", "Sure I majored in Art but now I work for an advertizing agency."
Falcon
There's this thing called "the web" that you might have heard of.
And the web spits out money like an atm? I haven't seen that yet. If I were a writer I'd want to be pretty sure someone else couldn't take what I spent my tyme writing and sell it without me seeing any money, which the web makes easy.
Or do you consider it only worth counting if it is bound (and gagged) by a publisher?
I don't consider it worth it if I don't get paid. Many open source programmers even get paid, open source businesses pay them to work on the software. The companies even make money providing support. What sort of support can a book writer sale? About the only way I could see a writer being able to make a living writing without copyrights is by having some wealthy benefactor pay them to write, but why would anyone do that? A writer might be able to make money selling autographed hardcopy books, they might release a pdf on the web then sell hardcopies to those are willing to pay, but would it be worth it for the writer?
Falcon