Cases like this have got to be a dime a dozen. As much as registering your work with the Library of Congress helps, it won't until you get to the expensive part where lawyers are involved.
I'd like to see YouTube provide the option of registering your work with THEM. If you're the first person to upload specific material to them, that should count as a tie-breaker in such cases as these. They look at the original asteroid video, they look at the subsequently uploaded video (which will also have slightly poorer video quality after being re-encoded), and then the latter video gets denied if they try what they're trying here.
A watermark embedded by YouTube on encoding would also help make it difficult for people to pull material from their site, and repost it as their own.
One potential issue with LED bulbs that I don't hear people talking about... theft. It's pretty unlikely anyone's going to steal a $1 incandescent bulb, but when these things get over $50 in price, you're left with the problem of "securing" that investment.
Spending $50 or $60 to save money over time doesn't make much sense if the bulb keeps getting stolen.
This isn't really that "forgiving" of an option. You're still getting screwed, because when you go to make an MP3 of your "backed up" tracks off of that Audio CD, you're going to be getting an audibly lower quality file for your troubles.
The music lost quality the first time it was compressed into the WMA format. Burning it to a CD doesn't further reduce the audio quality, but it doesn't undo the compression artifacts either. That second compression will further degrade your music.
Thanks WalMart! If this isn't already illegal, it must become so. I'm not voting for anyone who isn't going to do something about how badly consumers are being treated nowadays.
a) isn't advertised as limited in any context of time of ownership (i.e. a lease or a rental), and
b) choose to discontinue any services necessary to preserve a consumer's rightful access to said product, YOU MUST UNLOCK IT UNDER CONSIDERABLE PENALTY OF LAW.
If a company folds without fulfilling this obligation, the necessary assets (including the DRM code) are seized to allow for the successful discharging of this responsibility, with priority over any other creditor.
I can't believe how many people are crying about "the jury ruining her life", or how she should only be responsible for the value of a few albums, or the fact that she's a single mother.
Are we all such victims now that we've forgotten the very concept of personal responsibility?
No-one's ruining this woman's life but herself. She cavalierly helped herself to something she didn't pay anything for, and then made it available for anyone else to do the same. That act certainly denied the record companies a considerably greater sum of money than the value of each copy of each song that she obtained for herself.
You hate the RIAA, and justly so... they're manipulative, money-grubbing dirtbags with an ethical deficiency so marked that they make Vader look like Ghandi. They twist the facts (every song downloaded equals an actual lost sale? What bullshit!) and abuse our legal processes; what's not to hate?
Their case focuses on something incredibly important, though... that it's not ok to just keep helping yourself to something you haven't paid for. I don't give a damn if "everyone's doing it". You know right from wrong. You must surely understand that there ain't no such thing as a free lunch, but you justify it with any number of excuses, all the while abdicating your own responsibility to yourself.
If you're listening to music, and you enjoy doing so, you should be remunerating those individuals who made it happen, as surely as you're remunerated for your efforts in the workplace. Any justification around that is a complete cop-out.
She broke that code. The law supports punishment for that. She lied about what she did, and bore the brunt of that. That she's a single mom? Meaningless. That she's going to go broke over it all?
The prices I'm quoting are, indeed, pre-tax. The same 8 core Mac Pro, identically configured, is $7904 on the Canadian site, but only $6753 on the U.S. site. Assuming dollar parity, that means it costs me over a thousand dollars more, just because I'm Canadian... a difference of 17%!
I'll be hit with the GST (6%) and PST (7%) whether I buy online in Canada, or drive up from Oregon. I'll pay less on the American purchase, however, as it's a lower sale price; $877.89, vs. $1027.52 in taxes on the Canadian purchase price.
All in all, a difference in total of $1300.63!!! Apple Canada needs to give its head a shake if it thinks Canadian consumers will put up with that kind of premium. I know I won't.
Good point, Kristoph. A morning in the dunes, and an afternoon of Mac shopping in Oregon it is! =-)
And, while I do still have to pay the GST and PST when I shop in the U.S., I'll pay less of it, because the sale price of the Mac will be lower without the 15% premium associated with the Apple Store's Canadian prices.
Sure, they're cheaper... as long as we don't buy them in Canada! I checked out the price difference on the Canadian Apple Store vs. the U.S. alternative the other day. The prices on the Canadian store were about 15% higher, after taking the exchange rate into account.
Consequentially, Apple Canada isn't going to see a dime of my money until they rectify their rectal-cranial inversion, and lower their prices. If they haven't done it by next month, I'll still be picking up my new 8 core Mac Pro, but I'll be doing it in Seattle!
If you're buying the 8 core box, and you're NOT buying a SATA raid w/card to go with it, you're pissing in the wind... because you'll NEVER keep the processors busy enough.. Not so fast (pun intended)... us music types have plenty of plug-ins to run that don't require much drive access, but LOADS of CPU power.
I think the above post warrants some clarification.
First of all I Am Not A Lawyer. Even worse, I'm a recording artist. =-)
Second of all, I don't, for a minute, believe that this is a realistic solution. But first, my issues with the parent post.
My understanding of the current state of copyright law here in Canada is as follows (and I'm open to correction)... you may copy FROM a friend, but you may not copy FOR a friend. That is, I can loan you my prized Leonard Cohen CD and you may make yourself a copy without fear (currently) of prosecution. Were I to burn you a copy, though, I would be breaking the law, and RIAA trained CRIA ninjas would drop from the ceiling and kill me so effectively that my ancestors would cease to exist, too.
It seems that making my ripped music collection available online, where friends may copy FROM it is, therefore, currently legal.
As for comments about our courts not accepting this, and pissed off taxpayers staying the politicians' hand, I think that's overly optimistic righteousness. We already have our tax on blank media, and neither irate taxpayer nor disapproving judge has stopped that.
I find this levy particularly offensive, as I have to pay it when I buy blank CDs for my work (and indeed, to backup the music I'm writing), but I have never received a cent of the monies collected! As I make my music available on the web, rather than through an extortionate deal with a record label, I'm not entitled to my cut, it would seem. And yes, I'm a registered member of SOCAN, Canada's performance rights organisation, and have been for years.
At least I can rest easy knowing that my indie music is supporting needier artists like the Barenaked Ladies and Celine Dion.:]P
Do we have a tag for, "how stupid do they think we are?" yet?
As a recording artist who ISN'T represented by the RIAA, I can't begin to tell you how much I resent these idiots and the credibility-destroying damage they're doing to artist/ fan relations. [/grumble]
So, lets clear up some confusion here. I still don't see anything that sets apart MIDI on Yamaha's player pianos from regular MIDI. Note On/ Off, Velocity, Aftertouch (Key Pressure), Volume and Damper pedal messages aren't anything special. They're all part of the original MIDI spec, which dates back to the 70's!
So far as I can see, there's nothing "hi-def" about Yamaha's MIDI. Anyone who I use to work with at Yamaha want to fill me in? =-)
This story is pretty low on the accuracy scale, at least from a technical standpoint. I don't think they're talking about some new form of MIDI as the teaser statement implies. The author of the article just seems to think that MIDI is "high-def", which is pretty funny, actually. Especially considering how slow MIDI's transmission speed is.
Slashdot Mirror
Cases like this have got to be a dime a dozen. As much as registering your work with the Library of Congress helps, it won't until you get to the expensive part where lawyers are involved.
I'd like to see YouTube provide the option of registering your work with THEM. If you're the first person to upload specific material to them, that should count as a tie-breaker in such cases as these. They look at the original asteroid video, they look at the subsequently uploaded video (which will also have slightly poorer video quality after being re-encoded), and then the latter video gets denied if they try what they're trying here.
A watermark embedded by YouTube on encoding would also help make it difficult for people to pull material from their site, and repost it as their own.
One potential issue with LED bulbs that I don't hear people talking about... theft. It's pretty unlikely anyone's going to steal a $1 incandescent bulb, but when these things get over $50 in price, you're left with the problem of "securing" that investment.
Spending $50 or $60 to save money over time doesn't make much sense if the bulb keeps getting stolen.
My pleasure. :)
We give Apple a pass because where Microsoft just screws us, Apple cuddles with us before it leaves.
This isn't really that "forgiving" of an option. You're still getting screwed, because when you go to make an MP3 of your "backed up" tracks off of that Audio CD, you're going to be getting an audibly lower quality file for your troubles.
The music lost quality the first time it was compressed into the WMA format. Burning it to a CD doesn't further reduce the audio quality, but it doesn't undo the compression artifacts either. That second compression will further degrade your music.
Thanks WalMart! If this isn't already illegal, it must become so. I'm not voting for anyone who isn't going to do something about how badly consumers are being treated nowadays.
I'm NOT getting a Dell.
Asshats.
If you sell or license something that:
a) isn't advertised as limited in any context of time of ownership (i.e. a lease or a rental), and
b) choose to discontinue any services necessary to preserve a consumer's rightful access to said product, YOU MUST UNLOCK IT UNDER CONSIDERABLE PENALTY OF LAW.
If a company folds without fulfilling this obligation, the necessary assets (including the DRM code) are seized to allow for the successful discharging of this responsibility, with priority over any other creditor.
I've been saying this for years, but no-one's paying attention, apparently...
My condolences.
I can't believe how many people are crying about "the jury ruining her life", or how she should only be responsible for the value of a few albums, or the fact that she's a single mother.
Are we all such victims now that we've forgotten the very concept of personal responsibility?
No-one's ruining this woman's life but herself. She cavalierly helped herself to something she didn't pay anything for, and then made it available for anyone else to do the same. That act certainly denied the record companies a considerably greater sum of money than the value of each copy of each song that she obtained for herself.
You hate the RIAA, and justly so... they're manipulative, money-grubbing dirtbags with an ethical deficiency so marked that they make Vader look like Ghandi. They twist the facts (every song downloaded equals an actual lost sale? What bullshit!) and abuse our legal processes; what's not to hate?
Their case focuses on something incredibly important, though... that it's not ok to just keep helping yourself to something you haven't paid for. I don't give a damn if "everyone's doing it". You know right from wrong. You must surely understand that there ain't no such thing as a free lunch, but you justify it with any number of excuses, all the while abdicating your own responsibility to yourself.
If you're listening to music, and you enjoy doing so, you should be remunerating those individuals who made it happen, as surely as you're remunerated for your efforts in the workplace. Any justification around that is a complete cop-out.
She broke that code. The law supports punishment for that. She lied about what she did, and bore the brunt of that. That she's a single mom? Meaningless. That she's going to go broke over it all?
Sounds like karma to me.
^----- It's him!! It's himmmmmm!!!
Wrong.
The prices I'm quoting are, indeed, pre-tax. The same 8 core Mac Pro, identically configured, is $7904 on the Canadian site, but only $6753 on the U.S. site. Assuming dollar parity, that means it costs me over a thousand dollars more, just because I'm Canadian... a difference of 17%!
I'll be hit with the GST (6%) and PST (7%) whether I buy online in Canada, or drive up from Oregon. I'll pay less on the American purchase, however, as it's a lower sale price; $877.89, vs. $1027.52 in taxes on the Canadian purchase price.
All in all, a difference in total of $1300.63!!! Apple Canada needs to give its head a shake if it thinks Canadian consumers will put up with that kind of premium. I know I won't.
Good point, Kristoph. A morning in the dunes, and an afternoon of Mac shopping in Oregon it is! =-)
And, while I do still have to pay the GST and PST when I shop in the U.S., I'll pay less of it, because the sale price of the Mac will be lower without the 15% premium associated with the Apple Store's Canadian prices.
Sure, they're cheaper... as long as we don't buy them in Canada! I checked out the price difference on the Canadian Apple Store vs. the U.S. alternative the other day. The prices on the Canadian store were about 15% higher, after taking the exchange rate into account.
Consequentially, Apple Canada isn't going to see a dime of my money until they rectify their rectal-cranial inversion, and lower their prices. If they haven't done it by next month, I'll still be picking up my new 8 core Mac Pro, but I'll be doing it in Seattle!
Food for thought.
I think the above post warrants some clarification.
:]P
First of all I Am Not A Lawyer. Even worse, I'm a recording artist. =-)
Second of all, I don't, for a minute, believe that this is a realistic solution. But first, my issues with the parent post.
My understanding of the current state of copyright law here in Canada is as follows (and I'm open to correction)... you may copy FROM a friend, but you may not copy FOR a friend. That is, I can loan you my prized Leonard Cohen CD and you may make yourself a copy without fear (currently) of prosecution. Were I to burn you a copy, though, I would be breaking the law, and RIAA trained CRIA ninjas would drop from the ceiling and kill me so effectively that my ancestors would cease to exist, too.
It seems that making my ripped music collection available online, where friends may copy FROM it is, therefore, currently legal.
As for comments about our courts not accepting this, and pissed off taxpayers staying the politicians' hand, I think that's overly optimistic righteousness. We already have our tax on blank media, and neither irate taxpayer nor disapproving judge has stopped that.
I find this levy particularly offensive, as I have to pay it when I buy blank CDs for my work (and indeed, to backup the music I'm writing), but I have never received a cent of the monies collected! As I make my music available on the web, rather than through an extortionate deal with a record label, I'm not entitled to my cut, it would seem. And yes, I'm a registered member of SOCAN, Canada's performance rights organisation, and have been for years.
At least I can rest easy knowing that my indie music is supporting needier artists like the Barenaked Ladies and Celine Dion.
Do we have a tag for, "how stupid do they think we are?" yet?
As a recording artist who ISN'T represented by the RIAA, I can't begin to tell you how much I resent these idiots and the credibility-destroying damage they're doing to artist/ fan relations. [/grumble]
Of your recommendations for alternatives to GoDaddy.com, which ones allow for the alignment of multiple domain expiry dates?
:]P
I have several domains with different expiration dates I'd just as soon only have to deal with ONCE a year.
... two hours to the OTHER side of the world. So how do you guys get AROUND the world in 2 hours? Are you using metric conversions or something?
I stand corrected! =-)
So, lets clear up some confusion here. I still don't see anything that sets apart MIDI on Yamaha's player pianos from regular MIDI. Note On/ Off, Velocity, Aftertouch (Key Pressure), Volume and Damper pedal messages aren't anything special. They're all part of the original MIDI spec, which dates back to the 70's! So far as I can see, there's nothing "hi-def" about Yamaha's MIDI. Anyone who I use to work with at Yamaha want to fill me in? =-)
This story is pretty low on the accuracy scale, at least from a technical standpoint. I don't think they're talking about some new form of MIDI as the teaser statement implies. The author of the article just seems to think that MIDI is "high-def", which is pretty funny, actually. Especially considering how slow MIDI's transmission speed is.
a valient 0.9%, off slightly from last years' 1.9%.
Since when was a difference of more than half your market share slight??!?
-- I'm so cool, I don't need a sig.