Comic Genesis really isn't really comparable. Now Keenspot is a bit more comparable (as it does print collection books) but only mildly so. The difference is, (AFAIK) Seven Seas isn't a webcomic distributor (like Keenspot, Modern Tales and Comic Genesis). It's a comic distributor, that happens to distribute some webcomics. Comic Genesis has more in common with Geocities then it does with Seven Seas.
Not that I'm knocking Comic Genesis. I have many webcomics I read hosted with them, and am active (for me anyway) on their message boards.
Having said that, Str's right, this isn't anything new. Plan Nine Publishing does publish webcomics (and isn't a host or a print on demand system, although I believe it does utilize print on demand, it doesn't accept anyone) and doesn't claim ownership on the work.
Don't you mean, "I'm aware of the risks of terrorism, and I don't give a fuck if 20 guys with box cutters hijack this flight and smash it into a building, killing thousands of people, just so long as I'm not inconvenienced" instead?
Because that's what you're saying, even if you don't realize it.
If it were merely an inconvenience then I wouldn't mind at all. However I dislike it being assumed that I'm a criminal in order to be a customer for a particular company. Scanning my luggage was one thing, but the line has to be drawn somewhere, and I draw it at being forced to take a polygraph test merely so I can hop on a plane.
I also don't do business with mainstream music companies. They assume their customers are criminals as well.
I can't wait until I have to take a lie detector test before boarding a plane. I'm really getting sick of all these invasive security measures. I'm damn glad I won't have to hop on planes for my job.
If only taking a ship was a valid alternative for travelling overseas.
As per many comments made from slashdotters yesterday, here is a sample:
Widespread lawbreaking indicates a problem with the laws, and not with the crime. This is why copyright law is so ineffective.
On the other hand, anecdotally I'd say that at least a third of the population condones non-commercial copyright infringement
The point is, when an act is accepted by a significant proportion of the population, chances are that act is ethical
copyright theft does not have a victim, noone loses anything.
When so many people break the law, maybe there is something wrong with the law.
So obviously Sony (or the company that wrote the code if you want to get pedantic) is right to have infringed upon DVD Jon's code. However you won't see anywhere near as many posts saying as much in this article as the one I linked to. Why? Because GPL infringement affects a lot of members here, and they don't like the idea of their license being abused.
So it all comes down to slashdot isn't the place to go to if you want to hear intelligent debate about copyright laws. You'll just get a lot of chest thumping and hypocritical posts.
How many companies can I badmouth before they shut me up by suing me?
How longer can I criticize the government before I get sent to Guantanamo?
A hell of a lot of people do both EVERY DAY on the internet. The majority of people aren't getting sued or sent to Guantanamo Bay. It doesn't appear that there will be a large amount of people going to either place.
Coercing people by threat of litigation or wrongful imprisonment IS wrong. But that doesn't really have anything to do with the internet. It's a problem in American society, that has moved onto the internet. You can't solve it for the internet only though, without solving it for the rest of society.
Does no-one have the right to privacy anymore? For probable cause before getting searched? (Note: I don't know if these things are protected in Canada's constitution, however I do know that for the most part, while America has been whittling away its citizen's rights, Canada hasn't). I guess New Zealand really is the only place left that can be considered the land of the free.
Then work towards getting a law that allows speeding to overtake people. But until that happens you're breaking the law. That isn't unlucky, that's illegal. Don't complain when the law is enforced.
There's no except. If you don't like speeding laws, or want them higher, work towards it. You can't complain when police enforce the law. That's their job.
If however you get caught at 150MPH when passing a truck at the unfortunate location of a Gatso then that may just be bad luck.
Aaah, no. That's not bad luck. That's illegal. Speeding to overtake somebody (unless that person is a danger to yourself, in which case you should report it to the police ASAP, if only to get out of a speeding fine) is illegal and dangerous. If the truck is driving slowly, then you are able to overtake them without speeding. Otherwise you should have no reason to overtake the truck.
If that's all this was, I'd have no problem with it. Speeding fines are a voluntary tax. Everyone is able to stop paying them whenever they want. You just have to do this funny thing called "follow the law." If you want to be able to do whatever speed you want (like on the german Autobahn (spelling?)) then petition your congress critters (and work towards it with like-minded people and not giving up after one letter) or move to Germany.
However this isn't the only issue with these cameras. There's the privacy issue (will they be able to be used to show I buy drugs? For example, if I happen to stop a drug dealer on the road and talk with them asking for directions, will the fact I spoke with him be all that's needed to have my house searched?) and the cost issue (it aint going to be built for free y'know).
Re:Makes me wonder..
on
King Kong Lived?
·
· Score: 3, Informative
It wasn't withheld though. Everyone's known about Giganticus Blackii for quite some time now.
But in a way, constantly reinfecting himself may have helped his body fight against it. Who knows. I'm no scientist. I think anything up to and including "an act of god" could be the reason he was cured. If more research is ever done, then we can get a definite answer.
Are you saying that if you could help scientists to cure a disease that's killing hundreds of thousands of people every year by devoting a big chunk of your time, you WOULDNT do it?
I would (up to a point), but I want the freedom to choose to do so.
I'm not at all certain he should get the choice not to.
Oh I agree. The second the sick become cured they should have their liberties and freedom to make choices about what they do with their body be taken away. Perhaps it should start with having to be tested indefinitely, and progress to having to donate their non-necessary organs.
If free speach is hurt in any way by anonymonity, then why do the most repressive, anti-free-speach regimes always try to stamp out anonymous speach?
That's the difference between slashdot and a repressive regime. Your post is good in theory. However I have no wish to see tons of GNAA posts on slashdot. So I have to have some way of filtering them. I can choose to surf at 0 or 1, but in that case, I'm filtering out tons of good informative posts merely because they don't conform to slashdot groupthink. Instead I choose to filter based on anonymity instead of slashdot's screwy moderation system. By doing so, I haven't filtered out anyone who has been forced to post because their government is a repressive regime (at least to my knowledge. I surfed slashdot for a few years without filtering out ACs and never encountered someone posting anonymously because of their government). I also haven't ever filtered out anyone who was verifiably posting anonymously because their employer would sue and/or sack them for posting (and because their claims weren't verifiable, their message was pretty much meaningless).
Sure, I do filter out some good posts. But in my experience they're in the minority of crap posted on slashdot. People still have freedom of speech, and I have the freedom to not listen to them.
Also, in a country like America where they do have free speech, it is important to use it responsibly, and a very important part of using it responsibly is being accountable. Most people who post on slashdot anonymously do so because they want to flame, harrass or be a general ass. Which (in my opinion) isn't using free speech responsibly.
As long as our own government continues to breech their responsibilities, I honestly can't focus on other countries.
Great. If everyone in America felt that way you would become irrelevant in the world wide community when it comes to human rights. You can't wait for America to reach perfection, because it will never happen (and the fact everyone disagrees on what perfection is doesn't help).
Even if Cisco stops dealing with Badmanistan, the Badmanistanians can still import from other countries. How do you stop the use?
I think the primary problem for the shareholders is to stop people taking advantage of poor working conditions in foreign countries (which would be illegal in the USA) and to not aid overtly foreign governments to repress it's citizens (an example would be google and China).
Nice try. But this isn't a case of consumers being locked up (in DRM;)) simply for being consumers. This is a case of consumers willingly buying DRM'd products, and then crying foul. There is no law requiring all content be DRM'd (if there was, THEN you would have a point). The only victims are those who make themselves victims. Surely content providers and publishers should be able to include anything they want in their CDs, as long as it's legal?
People always talk about fair use rights. Sure, there are fair use rights. But nowhere in those laws does it say content providers aren't allowed to try to stop you (the DMCA being a sticky issue. Feel free to work towards abolishing this. I'd support you there). If you don't like the DRM, don't buy it. There will always be those who benefit and recognize the benefit from not DRMing their content. Go with them. There's no way they can be forced into DRMing their stuff.
Someone mentioned that there are victims who don't know they're buying DRM'd content. Read your EULA's. If you don't like what the EULA says, either return it and demand a refund (if you're refused THEN you have a case in calling foul) or decide if it's legal, and decide whether or not you want to risk a judge upholding what it says. If you click Agree without reading and understanding it, you have no-one to blame but yourself.
Only the big businesses profit from attempting to screw over their customers (well, I don't know if they profit. But only big businesses attempt it anyway). The little guys do profit from not DRMing their content, which is why they don't. And the content some of them produce is better then the crap the "music industry" creates.
If all the big businesses DRM their stuff up the wazzoo, there'll be plenty of independants to entertain me.
While technically true, why do I care if people are stupid enough to buy crippled music (or is that music from cripples)? I'm not being affected by it, instead I'm enjoying lots of music from a wide range of talented artists at a lower price (and quite likely more talented people). If people want to buy CDs that installs spyware on their computer and allows the company to go in and delete that person's files, what business is it of mine?
like the UK where they try and take away rights from the consumer rights act which are illegal to sign away.
Do they send you to jail for attempting to sign away your consumer rights? "Yes sir, I know it isn't possible for me to sign my rights away. But they had such a shiny pen I wanted to use it. Please don't send me to jail, I promise not to sign my consumer rights away again."
Sorry, it just seemed an odd way to word what you meant.
It's time to take SONY to the woodshed. Don't purchase anything with any SONY signature
So will you be buying the XBOX 360, oh wait. That's a convicted monopolist. I guess your stuck with the Revolution. I hope you don't actually like console games. Or else you'll be stuck playing Pikachu's .
Slashdot Mirror
Comic Genesis really isn't really comparable. Now Keenspot is a bit more comparable (as it does print collection books) but only mildly so. The difference is, (AFAIK) Seven Seas isn't a webcomic distributor (like Keenspot, Modern Tales and Comic Genesis). It's a comic distributor, that happens to distribute some webcomics. Comic Genesis has more in common with Geocities then it does with Seven Seas.
Not that I'm knocking Comic Genesis. I have many webcomics I read hosted with them, and am active (for me anyway) on their message boards.
Having said that, Str's right, this isn't anything new. Plan Nine Publishing does publish webcomics (and isn't a host or a print on demand system, although I believe it does utilize print on demand, it doesn't accept anyone) and doesn't claim ownership on the work.
If it were merely an inconvenience then I wouldn't mind at all. However I dislike it being assumed that I'm a criminal in order to be a customer for a particular company. Scanning my luggage was one thing, but the line has to be drawn somewhere, and I draw it at being forced to take a polygraph test merely so I can hop on a plane.
I also don't do business with mainstream music companies. They assume their customers are criminals as well.
I can't wait until I have to take a lie detector test before boarding a plane. I'm really getting sick of all these invasive security measures. I'm damn glad I won't have to hop on planes for my job.
If only taking a ship was a valid alternative for travelling overseas.
So obviously Sony (or the company that wrote the code if you want to get pedantic) is right to have infringed upon DVD Jon's code. However you won't see anywhere near as many posts saying as much in this article as the one I linked to. Why? Because GPL infringement affects a lot of members here, and they don't like the idea of their license being abused.
So it all comes down to slashdot isn't the place to go to if you want to hear intelligent debate about copyright laws. You'll just get a lot of chest thumping and hypocritical posts.
How many companies can I badmouth before they shut me up by suing me?
How longer can I criticize the government before I get sent to Guantanamo?
A hell of a lot of people do both EVERY DAY on the internet. The majority of people aren't getting sued or sent to Guantanamo Bay. It doesn't appear that there will be a large amount of people going to either place.
Coercing people by threat of litigation or wrongful imprisonment IS wrong. But that doesn't really have anything to do with the internet. It's a problem in American society, that has moved onto the internet. You can't solve it for the internet only though, without solving it for the rest of society.
It's in the first amendment of the Declaration of Independence. Duh.
Sorry, I'm not an expert in every country's constitution. [sarcasm] I'll try to do better next time[/sarcasm].
Thanks to those who responded with an informative post.
Does no-one have the right to privacy anymore? For probable cause before getting searched? (Note: I don't know if these things are protected in Canada's constitution, however I do know that for the most part, while America has been whittling away its citizen's rights, Canada hasn't). I guess New Zealand really is the only place left that can be considered the land of the free.
Then work towards getting a law that allows speeding to overtake people. But until that happens you're breaking the law. That isn't unlucky, that's illegal. Don't complain when the law is enforced.
There's no except. If you don't like speeding laws, or want them higher, work towards it. You can't complain when police enforce the law. That's their job.
If however you get caught at 150MPH when passing a truck at the unfortunate location of a Gatso then that may just be bad luck.
Aaah, no. That's not bad luck. That's illegal. Speeding to overtake somebody (unless that person is a danger to yourself, in which case you should report it to the police ASAP, if only to get out of a speeding fine) is illegal and dangerous. If the truck is driving slowly, then you are able to overtake them without speeding. Otherwise you should have no reason to overtake the truck.
If that's all this was, I'd have no problem with it. Speeding fines are a voluntary tax. Everyone is able to stop paying them whenever they want. You just have to do this funny thing called "follow the law." If you want to be able to do whatever speed you want (like on the german Autobahn (spelling?)) then petition your congress critters (and work towards it with like-minded people and not giving up after one letter) or move to Germany.
However this isn't the only issue with these cameras. There's the privacy issue (will they be able to be used to show I buy drugs? For example, if I happen to stop a drug dealer on the road and talk with them asking for directions, will the fact I spoke with him be all that's needed to have my house searched?) and the cost issue (it aint going to be built for free y'know).
It wasn't withheld though. Everyone's known about Giganticus Blackii for quite some time now.
What's the moral difference between that, and grabbing "Patient Omega" in the name of finding an immunity factor for a disease killing millions?
There isn't. But just because the Bush administration are a sack of unethical shits doesn't mean England has to follow suit quite as much.
But in a way, constantly reinfecting himself may have helped his body fight against it. Who knows. I'm no scientist. I think anything up to and including "an act of god" could be the reason he was cured. If more research is ever done, then we can get a definite answer.
Are you saying that if you could help scientists to cure a disease that's killing hundreds of thousands of people every year by devoting a big chunk of your time, you WOULDNT do it?
I would (up to a point), but I want the freedom to choose to do so.
I'm not at all certain he should get the choice not to.
Oh I agree. The second the sick become cured they should have their liberties and freedom to make choices about what they do with their body be taken away. Perhaps it should start with having to be tested indefinitely, and progress to having to donate their non-necessary organs.
If free speach is hurt in any way by anonymonity, then why do the most repressive, anti-free-speach regimes always try to stamp out anonymous speach?
That's the difference between slashdot and a repressive regime. Your post is good in theory. However I have no wish to see tons of GNAA posts on slashdot. So I have to have some way of filtering them. I can choose to surf at 0 or 1, but in that case, I'm filtering out tons of good informative posts merely because they don't conform to slashdot groupthink. Instead I choose to filter based on anonymity instead of slashdot's screwy moderation system. By doing so, I haven't filtered out anyone who has been forced to post because their government is a repressive regime (at least to my knowledge. I surfed slashdot for a few years without filtering out ACs and never encountered someone posting anonymously because of their government). I also haven't ever filtered out anyone who was verifiably posting anonymously because their employer would sue and/or sack them for posting (and because their claims weren't verifiable, their message was pretty much meaningless).
Sure, I do filter out some good posts. But in my experience they're in the minority of crap posted on slashdot. People still have freedom of speech, and I have the freedom to not listen to them.
Also, in a country like America where they do have free speech, it is important to use it responsibly, and a very important part of using it responsibly is being accountable. Most people who post on slashdot anonymously do so because they want to flame, harrass or be a general ass. Which (in my opinion) isn't using free speech responsibly.
As long as our own government continues to breech their responsibilities, I honestly can't focus on other countries.
Great. If everyone in America felt that way you would become irrelevant in the world wide community when it comes to human rights. You can't wait for America to reach perfection, because it will never happen (and the fact everyone disagrees on what perfection is doesn't help).
Even if Cisco stops dealing with Badmanistan, the Badmanistanians can still import from other countries. How do you stop the use?
I think the primary problem for the shareholders is to stop people taking advantage of poor working conditions in foreign countries (which would be illegal in the USA) and to not aid overtly foreign governments to repress it's citizens (an example would be google and China).
Nice try. But this isn't a case of consumers being locked up (in DRM ;)) simply for being consumers. This is a case of consumers willingly buying DRM'd products, and then crying foul. There is no law requiring all content be DRM'd (if there was, THEN you would have a point). The only victims are those who make themselves victims. Surely content providers and publishers should be able to include anything they want in their CDs, as long as it's legal?
People always talk about fair use rights. Sure, there are fair use rights. But nowhere in those laws does it say content providers aren't allowed to try to stop you (the DMCA being a sticky issue. Feel free to work towards abolishing this. I'd support you there). If you don't like the DRM, don't buy it. There will always be those who benefit and recognize the benefit from not DRMing their content. Go with them. There's no way they can be forced into DRMing their stuff.
Someone mentioned that there are victims who don't know they're buying DRM'd content. Read your EULA's. If you don't like what the EULA says, either return it and demand a refund (if you're refused THEN you have a case in calling foul) or decide if it's legal, and decide whether or not you want to risk a judge upholding what it says. If you click Agree without reading and understanding it, you have no-one to blame but yourself.
Only the big businesses profit from attempting to screw over their customers (well, I don't know if they profit. But only big businesses attempt it anyway). The little guys do profit from not DRMing their content, which is why they don't. And the content some of them produce is better then the crap the "music industry" creates.
If all the big businesses DRM their stuff up the wazzoo, there'll be plenty of independants to entertain me.
No that never works
While technically true, why do I care if people are stupid enough to buy crippled music (or is that music from cripples)? I'm not being affected by it, instead I'm enjoying lots of music from a wide range of talented artists at a lower price (and quite likely more talented people). If people want to buy CDs that installs spyware on their computer and allows the company to go in and delete that person's files, what business is it of mine?
like the UK where they try and take away rights from the consumer rights act which are illegal to sign away.
Do they send you to jail for attempting to sign away your consumer rights? "Yes sir, I know it isn't possible for me to sign my rights away. But they had such a shiny pen I wanted to use it. Please don't send me to jail, I promise not to sign my consumer rights away again."
Sorry, it just seemed an odd way to word what you meant.
Did you even read my post? "I hope you don't actually like console games." I already covered that angle. Sheeesh.
It's time to take SONY to the woodshed. Don't purchase anything with any SONY signature
So will you be buying the XBOX 360, oh wait. That's a convicted monopolist. I guess your stuck with the Revolution. I hope you don't actually like console games. Or else you'll be stuck playing Pikachu's .