I was going to back you up by finding out how many thousands of years it takes to go from organic material to oil, but after 10 minutes of trying to figure it out, all I can come up with is that it takes a long time.
I've also found that it's hard to find side by side comparisons. I've used just about every major NLE out there, and I've come to the conclusion that the reason behind you not being able to find comparisons is that they're all pretty much the same. Aside from a few UI nuances, they all work the same and do the same thing and have the same types of bugs and problems with hardware (as in capture devices).
One of the easiest to work with (once you get used to it) is cinelerra. Don't count it out until you've tried it. I've never used it with HD, but it's supposed play nice.
I could be wrong, but isn't the loophole they use that the user doesn't own anything but the media?
If not, I concede. You win. Reverse engineer Windows to your heart's content. Just don't give what you do to anybody else.
True, the GPL, BSD, and similar licenses are fundamentally different from the a EULA, but their authority comes from the same place: Copyright law.
There is implicit use guidance in the GPL, and that is that you can use the software any way you want (people can't tack other use restrictions on GPL'd stuff).
All rights are reserved (unless otherwise specified).
As much as it may not seem like it, I'm not trying to defend EULAs on moral basis. I'm firmly anti-EULA. I'm just saying you can't avoid legal repercussions by not clicking 'Accept'. My point is: avoid the EULA altogether and use the same laws that give EULAs power to your advantage.
I'm busted! I don't know anythign about EU law at all. In the US there's a thing called de minimus for derivative works. You can read about how it applies to collage work. It's a really vague concept that might cause trouble.
At least in the US, the only way to be sure that it's ok to cut up the picture and make your own art is for the copyright owner to grant you that right explicitly in a license. Otherwise, you have to wonder if your work will be different enough to be considered a new work.
What would be great is if you found a picture under a Creative Commons license.
Copyright and license agreements are hopelessly intertwined. The license agreement dictates what rights the copyright owner grants the user. In effect, the EULA says that you can use the software by copying it's contents to your hard drive/memory only if you abide by the rules it lays out. If you don't abide by those rules, you aren't allowed to copy that. Bypassing the display of the EULA doesn't excuse you from it.
If people don't read the GPL, then incorporate GPL'd code into their programs, that doesn't mean they are excused from it's provisions. They can't not make their source available, and they can't sue people who use their code. It is ultimately the copyright owner's decision how their "property" can be used, and that decision is communicated to the user through a license.
It is your responsibility to understand how you can legally use the picture. Can you display the picture in a public place? Can you make copies? Can you cut out bits of the picture and use it to make your own art? It all depends on what rights the owner of the "intellectual property" that is the picture grants you.
I'm not saying it's right, but it's the way it is.
Unfortuneately, ignorance isn't an excuse that courts generally recognize. The software is copyrighted, and you, the user, are responsible for understanding the license before you USE it. The issue is that before this ruling, customers were deliberately prevented from reading the EULA before they purchased software, then not allowed to return it UNUSED.
That is, unless someone wrote a replacement for PalmOS or a bunch of useful stuff that runs alongside it.
I wonder about the capabilities of the hardware, though. Will Palms be able to handle more demanding apps?
It seems like everybody is saying (moreso in the last story than this one) that this 3d desktop "would be cool if it had better i/o" and everyone is saying autostereo displays and gesture input devices "would be cool if there were something to use them on." The future is now, my friend! Soon we'll all walk in to CompUSA and pick up a 3D interface kit for $200, then hook them up to our already bug-free and feature-rich window managers compliments of Metisse developers.
Well, maybe not soon. We can dream, though.
On the other hand, all that's really stepping onto your property is a few electrons. It's more like someone's standing on the sidewalk in front of your property and talking to you and you're silly enough to talk back and in the process inadvertently give out personal information. Don't get me wrong, though. Spyware sucks. If we could freely push electrons onto people's property then I have a few I'd like to push on gator.
Slashdot Mirror
I saw one in 1985. It could go 88 mph. Everyone knows we'll all have flying cars by 2015 and they'll sell conversion kits for 39999.95
Why is the sky blue, anyway?
I was going to back you up by finding out how many thousands of years it takes to go from organic material to oil, but after 10 minutes of trying to figure it out, all I can come up with is that it takes a long time.
I've also found that it's hard to find side by side comparisons. I've used just about every major NLE out there, and I've come to the conclusion that the reason behind you not being able to find comparisons is that they're all pretty much the same. Aside from a few UI nuances, they all work the same and do the same thing and have the same types of bugs and problems with hardware (as in capture devices). One of the easiest to work with (once you get used to it) is cinelerra. Don't count it out until you've tried it. I've never used it with HD, but it's supposed play nice.
I could be wrong, but isn't the loophole they use that the user doesn't own anything but the media? If not, I concede. You win. Reverse engineer Windows to your heart's content. Just don't give what you do to anybody else.
True, the GPL, BSD, and similar licenses are fundamentally different from the a EULA, but their authority comes from the same place: Copyright law. There is implicit use guidance in the GPL, and that is that you can use the software any way you want (people can't tack other use restrictions on GPL'd stuff).
All rights are reserved (unless otherwise specified). As much as it may not seem like it, I'm not trying to defend EULAs on moral basis. I'm firmly anti-EULA. I'm just saying you can't avoid legal repercussions by not clicking 'Accept'. My point is: avoid the EULA altogether and use the same laws that give EULAs power to your advantage.
I'm busted! I don't know anythign about EU law at all. In the US there's a thing called de minimus for derivative works. You can read about how it applies to collage work. It's a really vague concept that might cause trouble. At least in the US, the only way to be sure that it's ok to cut up the picture and make your own art is for the copyright owner to grant you that right explicitly in a license. Otherwise, you have to wonder if your work will be different enough to be considered a new work. What would be great is if you found a picture under a Creative Commons license.
Copyright and license agreements are hopelessly intertwined. The license agreement dictates what rights the copyright owner grants the user. In effect, the EULA says that you can use the software by copying it's contents to your hard drive/memory only if you abide by the rules it lays out. If you don't abide by those rules, you aren't allowed to copy that. Bypassing the display of the EULA doesn't excuse you from it. If people don't read the GPL, then incorporate GPL'd code into their programs, that doesn't mean they are excused from it's provisions. They can't not make their source available, and they can't sue people who use their code. It is ultimately the copyright owner's decision how their "property" can be used, and that decision is communicated to the user through a license.
It is your responsibility to understand how you can legally use the picture. Can you display the picture in a public place? Can you make copies? Can you cut out bits of the picture and use it to make your own art? It all depends on what rights the owner of the "intellectual property" that is the picture grants you. I'm not saying it's right, but it's the way it is.
Unfortuneately, ignorance isn't an excuse that courts generally recognize. The software is copyrighted, and you, the user, are responsible for understanding the license before you USE it. The issue is that before this ruling, customers were deliberately prevented from reading the EULA before they purchased software, then not allowed to return it UNUSED.
I'm taking bets on how long it will be until Microsoft auditors show up at UC and Eolas to make sure they don't have any pirated copies of Windows.
Just a guess, but there's probably a learning period kind of like what physical rehab patients go through when they lose a limb or forget how to walk.
That is, unless someone wrote a replacement for PalmOS or a bunch of useful stuff that runs alongside it. I wonder about the capabilities of the hardware, though. Will Palms be able to handle more demanding apps?
Let's put the puzzle together. We have:
an autostereo display
a potential 3D input device
and now some desktops (Metisse and Looking Glass) that would actually benefit from this technology.
It seems like everybody is saying (moreso in the last story than this one) that this 3d desktop "would be cool if it had better i/o" and everyone is saying autostereo displays and gesture input devices "would be cool if there were something to use them on." The future is now, my friend! Soon we'll all walk in to CompUSA and pick up a 3D interface kit for $200, then hook them up to our already bug-free and feature-rich window managers compliments of Metisse developers. Well, maybe not soon. We can dream, though.
According to this, Disney is the third largest media conglomerate, although I think they've left off GE for some reason.
On the other hand, all that's really stepping onto your property is a few electrons. It's more like someone's standing on the sidewalk in front of your property and talking to you and you're silly enough to talk back and in the process inadvertently give out personal information. Don't get me wrong, though. Spyware sucks. If we could freely push electrons onto people's property then I have a few I'd like to push on gator.