its funny that you jump on him for this, yet fail to mention that throughout time he has liscensed out more songs than just about anyone and charged VERY little for the rights to them. have you ever wondered why there are literaly HUNDREDS of dylan tribute/cover albums? (im guessing its not because hes a royalty whore) why so many people (hendrix, the dead, guns and roses, simon and garfunkle, peter paul and mary, etc) have covered his songs over the years? (i dont think its because they wanted to give dylan a dollar for every album they sold)
he lobbied for the extension of copyright for ownership, yeah, youre right, but does it look like he really abuses copyright powers?
not to mention the fact that he deliberately covered warren zevon songs for the past 5 years just so he would HAVE to pay royalties so he could help warrens family cover the mounting costs of his cancer treatment and susequent funeral.
considering long before dylan ever wrote a song he said he wanted to b a musician for fortune and fame, i dont think hes a sellout as much as hes achieving his goals.
or are you just jealous that in spite of millions of arrogant assholes who write him off for one reason or other he was still the voice of several generations, and is still capable of writing songs just as powerful as he did 40 years ago? (albeit playing them live is a different story.)
and his albums decline in quality after the motorcycle accident because he wanted people to leave him the fuck alone and he figured ruining his credibility was a good way to do it.
but then again, what does history know when you can bitch and moan and be as revionist as you want on slashdot?
its not arrogance.
you are paying for a bed to sleep in, maybe some meals a day, and your teachers to do their job.
an internet connection is a privelege, not a right.
there are colleges out there who charge just as much in tuition and dont include internet in your dorms. does that mean theyre breaking some sort of unwritten law? or does it mean theyre jsut being arrogant.
ignore me.
my brain didnt comprehend that right away.
my point stands, but more to the original post and less to the comment its appended to.
my appologies.
working in the IT department at a MAJOR U.S. college has taught me a few things.
One of them is: you never know what you agreed to.
We have a security policy that is roughly 50 pages, and much like EULAs, wether you read it or not, you agree to its terms by using said system.
(especially since our school has a user id/password process to get on the networks, and a special housing policy that must be signed.)
and basicly in there it says that they can remove access to whatever they want whenever they want, and they can tell you want you cant and cant do at any time.
now considering this is outlined in the policy you are agreeing to, i think all other legal precidence goes away.
If the school pays the bills and offers the service free, and ESPECIALLY if they have you sign something acknowledging what they can/cant do, they can close anything they want and youre basicly shit out of luck.
IANAL.
my 2 cents.
Ok, so, what does that have to do with now?
Instead of whatever underhanded business techniques they are working on deep under the earths crust, why dont they just make IE better (again)?
Slashdot Mirror
its funny that you jump on him for this, yet fail to mention that throughout time he has liscensed out more songs than just about anyone and charged VERY little for the rights to them. have you ever wondered why there are literaly HUNDREDS of dylan tribute/cover albums? (im guessing its not because hes a royalty whore) why so many people (hendrix, the dead, guns and roses, simon and garfunkle, peter paul and mary, etc) have covered his songs over the years? (i dont think its because they wanted to give dylan a dollar for every album they sold) he lobbied for the extension of copyright for ownership, yeah, youre right, but does it look like he really abuses copyright powers? not to mention the fact that he deliberately covered warren zevon songs for the past 5 years just so he would HAVE to pay royalties so he could help warrens family cover the mounting costs of his cancer treatment and susequent funeral.
considering long before dylan ever wrote a song he said he wanted to b a musician for fortune and fame, i dont think hes a sellout as much as hes achieving his goals. or are you just jealous that in spite of millions of arrogant assholes who write him off for one reason or other he was still the voice of several generations, and is still capable of writing songs just as powerful as he did 40 years ago? (albeit playing them live is a different story.) and his albums decline in quality after the motorcycle accident because he wanted people to leave him the fuck alone and he figured ruining his credibility was a good way to do it. but then again, what does history know when you can bitch and moan and be as revionist as you want on slashdot?
except that back in the 70s he said that someday he planned on doing an underwear commercial.
ftp://carroll.aset.psu.edu/pub/linux/distributions /fedora/4/
Who is to say she didnt post them and SAY the boyfriend did.
its not arrogance. you are paying for a bed to sleep in, maybe some meals a day, and your teachers to do their job. an internet connection is a privelege, not a right. there are colleges out there who charge just as much in tuition and dont include internet in your dorms. does that mean theyre breaking some sort of unwritten law? or does it mean theyre jsut being arrogant.
ignore me. my brain didnt comprehend that right away. my point stands, but more to the original post and less to the comment its appended to. my appologies.
working in the IT department at a MAJOR U.S. college has taught me a few things. One of them is: you never know what you agreed to. We have a security policy that is roughly 50 pages, and much like EULAs, wether you read it or not, you agree to its terms by using said system. (especially since our school has a user id/password process to get on the networks, and a special housing policy that must be signed.) and basicly in there it says that they can remove access to whatever they want whenever they want, and they can tell you want you cant and cant do at any time. now considering this is outlined in the policy you are agreeing to, i think all other legal precidence goes away. If the school pays the bills and offers the service free, and ESPECIALLY if they have you sign something acknowledging what they can/cant do, they can close anything they want and youre basicly shit out of luck. IANAL. my 2 cents.
I think i'll patent the word WAFFLE. apparantly i can get away with it.
I beg to differ.
In PA, where i live, there is the option to vote Libertarian, Green and Constitution the whole way across.
I got about a million of those. And they all told me to vote for Kerry.
Ok, so, what does that have to do with now? Instead of whatever underhanded business techniques they are working on deep under the earths crust, why dont they just make IE better (again)?
if Microsofts ideas of "aggressive tactics" just ONCE included making a better product?
An hour and a half of some guys hands. This ought to be fantastic!
Hey, I'm voting Badnarik in '04. ;)
i didnt know that saving money was a punishable offense. lock me up, i guess.