SIAE documentation is very lacunose, and (I've been told) always an headache. The law is more comprehensible: my current understanding is that any audio or video (I think not software), to which a physical person had acquired rigthful possession of a copy, can be copied by the same person and for the same person, provided the tax on the media has been payed.
There's also a puzzling "or had acquired rightful access", does it mean you can copy rented or aired content? I really do not know.
Furthermore, the net is full of heated discussions on the topic, meaning of course that it's absolutely unclear to most of Italians.
Sorry to reply to myself: after having written the previous post, I decided to do a little proper research, trying to reach official documents (instead of "common tv-news-driven knowledge"), with constrasting results.
IANAL but in fact, it seems that copying copyrighted content is allowed in Italy, under the rules and limits of private copy, that is in short that you do it strictly by yourself and for yourself and the aforementioned tax for the medium has been payed, but there's (at least to me) a little confusion about what kind of content qualifies, due to awkard wording in the law. And I think that's what gives the impression to the layman that the thing is not allowed.
Please ignore the previous post. I'll surely research futher.
... we pay an authors' rights tax (managed by the notorious SIAE) on each writable media (CDs, VHSs, etc.), comprised in the retail price, AND using them to copy content by aforementioned authors is NOT legal, nonetheless.
And it took federal regulation to make that happen. interoperability is a pipe dream.
Federal regulation? ROTFL. Are you aware that there are telephones, lo and behold, also outside USA? And telecoms interoperability works more or less in the same way, fwik. I don't have exact & complete knowledge of all trade agreement among all telecoms in the world, but I do suspect that not all of them are required by some law but simply emerged from the need of the (paying & complaining) users to contact other users. Note, for a significant example, that (exceptions apart) you do can call someone in some place in the world that has no law system in common with yours.
But many of these sites are also businesses, and it makes no sense for them to provide business to their direct competitors. It would be like Amazon referring you to Barnes & Noble if you cannot find the book you're looking for at Amazon.
I disagree. As a better comparison, think about telecoms: users of a telecom do are allowed to call users of other telecoms, with an agreement on a proper compensation model between telecoms.
First, I don't see how the two projects conflict with each other, since their objectives are simply different and not in any way opposing.
Second, I'd like some pointers to "Grumpy Wikipedians" contesting the possibility that "satire and humour can take off in a collaborative environment". If this statement comes from the fact that satire and humor in Wikipedia are not allowed in the compiling of articles, it seems to me a case of complete non-sequitur.
Third, I don't see any confusion here: Wikipedia is an encyclopdia, Uncyclopedia is a satire of an encyclopedia (more or less); it doesn't seem confounding at all to me that there can be some content exchange between the two, especially in the context of humor-related articles and net folklore.
Issue 3 "Tabs and new window" can be resolved by the Clone Window extension.
Issue 5 "The return of the go menu" can be resolved customizing the Navigation Toolbar (just a few clicks).
Don't exactly know about issue 2 "Download UI", but I imagine that some extension would do something similar.
Overall, the author doesn't seem to be familiar with the extension/customization possibilities of Firefox.
There's that old cliché, isn't there - one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter - and if we try and understand that, then maybe we might be able to solve the problems that cause terrorism more easily.
I declare beforehand that I live in Italy, not USA, so the situation might be a little different.
My daughter *loves* school. She loves the work, and looking it over, so would I ( and would have, at her age. ). [...]
I agree to each word from the parent msg, and I don't think that the fact that the children do should learn to apply and commit, since life's not so easy after all, has really nothing to detract from the reasonableness of try to raise them to love knowledge and skill-building, and have fun with them. On the contrary: to love what you do (or at least to love what you are able to love in what you do), can be a great advantage in confronting the uneasy situations of life.
On the other hand, I am absolutely astonished by the number of posts advocating children beating. Maybe I'm just a bohémien European or whatever, but I had the impression that/. was a place where the Free roam. How can a man be a free man if raised by violent coercion?
With regard to that, where I think the grandparent has a point is:
Children nowadays are given more and more freedom and less and less resonsponsibilites.
Well, my understanding is that children should be given freedomandresponsibilities; and this is more important that even knowledge and skills, since I think that we do should try to raise our children as competent engineers, doctors and whatever, but even before and more important, we should try to raise them as citizens, or in the end they will be no more than labourers and consumers.
To be a citizen, love for freedom and will to take responsibilities are both fundamental; but what's the point of will to take responsibilities without love for freedom? To make the perfect slave? No, thank you, not my sons.
I want my sons to be responsible independent free thinkers, even to question my authority, to demand me reasons for, when they feels to.
I do prefer to risk and raise a rebel than to risk and raise a slave.
[1] It is G rated. I guess some people are sick of car chases, boobies and scary monsters - go figure!
Oh, c'mon, how can you possibly be sick of boobies!?
It does seem to be a very interesting movie indeed, and I like penguins just like the next geek, but, please, no need to get upset on boobies, ok? I really don't see why penguins and boobies couldn't get along together like old friends... so much in common, think:
There are a few comments in this thread concerning the point of
being able to buy just one song online vs buying the whole album
in the stores.
Now, while some interesting points are being made, I can't keep myself
from asking: what kind of ultra-pop-hollow-crap music kind are you used
to listen to and, worst, paying for, gentlemen??
Here in the beautiful towns of Bluesia, Hard-rockia and Metal Hill,
it's commonly known that the single on each album is often
the _worst_ song of the album, put together to please the label and
casual listeners, while the juice is in the rest of the album.
Personally, if I bought from iTunes or whatever, I would probably
buy every and each song from an album, I would _never_ be satisfied
with a subset of an album. (Buy only Smoke On The Water and not the
whole Machine Head album? Pure blasphemy!... Pardon the dated but
seminal example: SOTW is wonderful but the other songs aren't less spectacular)
When you are to buy a song that you probably know is the only decent
song of an album, isn't it a sign that you are supporting the wrong
kind of people? (Providing, of course, that you are interested in
people able to offer you a whole album that is worth listen to,
instead of a few isolated lucky good songs in a desolated shallow
sea of nothingness.)
I pointed out this because it seems to me that supporting label-made
hollow artistroids is not far away to support the hollow views of
their labels, which are the main topic. I mean, if they can sell me
shit, they probably realize that they can sell it to me and "protect"
it in shitty ways (DRM, evil pirates campaigns and whatnot), since
I'm an happy shit-eater... Anyone agrees?
Well, this is rather offtopic, but to partly answer to the subject question and JFTR: also here in Italy it's quite common to make jokes about the american "tendency to sue anybody for anything", which is tipically regarded as a bad faith way to make money from someone instead of a way to obtain legal equity.
(Not that in Italy the justice system doesn't have its own problems, to be fair, especially regarding excessive duration of legal proceedings.)
Hom can someone believe that giving away for free something as valueable as a graphics card can be a profitable buisness?
I wouldn't give them a single cent! They should better put their effort in reverse engineering the drivers for already in use hardware.
If I understand the model properly, what is free (as in freedom and beer) in Open Source Hardware in general is not the manufactured hardware itself, but its project.
Slashdot Mirror
Ditto.
I regret deeply not having points to mod the parent up!
This is totally lazy nonsense, get informed!
I agree that we're not all the same, but the whole point is that "race" is a very poor indicator for these differences.
All people are different. Assuming something about a particular person basing on her "race" is exactly what racism is all about.
Well, here I am.
SIAE documentation is very lacunose, and (I've been told) always an headache. The law is more comprehensible: my current understanding is that any audio or video (I think not software), to which a physical person had acquired rigthful possession of a copy, can be copied by the same person and for the same person, provided the tax on the media has been payed.
There's also a puzzling "or had acquired rightful access", does it mean you can copy rented or aired content? I really do not know.
Furthermore, the net is full of heated discussions on the topic, meaning of course that it's absolutely unclear to most of Italians.
Sorry to reply to myself: after having written the previous post, I decided to do a little proper research, trying to reach official documents (instead of "common tv-news-driven knowledge"), with constrasting results.
IANAL but in fact, it seems that copying copyrighted content is allowed in Italy, under the rules and limits of private copy, that is in short that you do it strictly by yourself and for yourself and the aforementioned tax for the medium has been payed, but there's (at least to me) a little confusion about what kind of content qualifies, due to awkard wording in the law. And I think that's what gives the impression to the layman that the thing is not allowed.
Please ignore the previous post. I'll surely research futher.
... we pay an authors' rights tax (managed by the notorious SIAE) on each writable media (CDs, VHSs, etc.), comprised in the retail price, AND using them to copy content by aforementioned authors is NOT legal, nonetheless.
Yes, I'm serious.
Mmmh... simpler: Synaptic! :)
Yes, at the risk to pass as GUI luser, I rather say I love it.
(Mentioned in the Release Candidate annoucement)
Is this telling us something?
First, I don't see how the two projects conflict with each other, since their objectives are simply different and not in any way opposing.
Second, I'd like some pointers to "Grumpy Wikipedians" contesting the possibility that "satire and humour can take off in a collaborative environment". If this statement comes from the fact that satire and humor in Wikipedia are not allowed in the compiling of articles, it seems to me a case of complete non-sequitur.
Third, I don't see any confusion here: Wikipedia is an encyclopdia, Uncyclopedia is a satire of an encyclopedia (more or less); it doesn't seem confounding at all to me that there can be some content exchange between the two, especially in the context of humor-related articles and net folklore.
Issue 3 "Tabs and new window" can be resolved by the Clone Window extension.
Issue 5 "The return of the go menu" can be resolved customizing the Navigation Toolbar (just a few clicks).
Don't exactly know about issue 2 "Download UI", but I imagine that some extension would do something similar.
Overall, the author doesn't seem to be familiar with the extension/customization possibilities of Firefox.
Moore has been so disappointed by the adaptation of TLOEG and FH that he refused to accept any money for any other film adaptations of his work.
No control (by "contract" or whatever) and no money (by choice).
There's that old cliché, isn't there - one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter - and if we try and understand that, then maybe we might be able to solve the problems that cause terrorism more easily.
While I completely agree to Lloyd's point, I wouldn't call the quote a "cliché": it's from Ronald Reagan, about the founding of groups such as the mujahideen in Afghanistan, the Contras in Nicaragua, and Jonas Savimbi's rebel forces in Angola.
I declare beforehand that I live in Italy, not USA, so the situation might be a little different.
My daughter *loves* school. She loves the work, and looking it over, so would I ( and would have, at her age. ). [...]
I agree to each word from the parent msg, and I don't think that the fact that the children do should learn to apply and commit, since life's not so easy after all, has really nothing to detract from the reasonableness of try to raise them to love knowledge and skill-building, and have fun with them. On the contrary: to love what you do (or at least to love what you are able to love in what you do), can be a great advantage in confronting the uneasy situations of life.
On the other hand, I am absolutely astonished by the number of posts advocating children beating. Maybe I'm just a bohémien European or whatever, but I had the impression that
With regard to that, where I think the grandparent has a point is:
Children nowadays are given more and more freedom and less and less resonsponsibilites.
Well, my understanding is that children should be given freedom and responsibilities; and this is more important that even knowledge and skills, since I think that we do should try to raise our children as competent engineers, doctors and whatever, but even before and more important, we should try to raise them as citizens, or in the end they will be no more than labourers and consumers.
To be a citizen, love for freedom and will to take responsibilities are both fundamental; but what's the point of will to take responsibilities without love for freedom? To make the perfect slave? No, thank you, not my sons.
I want my sons to be responsible independent free thinkers, even to question my authority, to demand me reasons for, when they feels to.
I do prefer to risk and raise a rebel than to risk and raise a slave.
It does seem to be a very interesting movie indeed, and I like penguins just like the next geek, but, please, no need to get upset on boobies, ok? I really don't see why penguins and boobies couldn't get along together like old friends... so much in common, think:
waddling.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
(From TFA: "A Rackspace employee mistakenly used the word 'hardware' to describe the contents of a federal order,")
There are a few comments in this thread concerning the point of being able to buy just one song online vs buying the whole album in the stores.
... Pardon the dated but
seminal example: SOTW is wonderful but the other songs aren't less spectacular)
:P
Now, while some interesting points are being made, I can't keep myself from asking: what kind of ultra-pop-hollow-crap music kind are you used to listen to and, worst, paying for, gentlemen??
Here in the beautiful towns of Bluesia, Hard-rockia and Metal Hill, it's commonly known that the single on each album is often the _worst_ song of the album, put together to please the label and casual listeners, while the juice is in the rest of the album.
Personally, if I bought from iTunes or whatever, I would probably buy every and each song from an album, I would _never_ be satisfied with a subset of an album. (Buy only Smoke On The Water and not the whole Machine Head album? Pure blasphemy!
When you are to buy a song that you probably know is the only decent song of an album, isn't it a sign that you are supporting the wrong kind of people? (Providing, of course, that you are interested in people able to offer you a whole album that is worth listen to, instead of a few isolated lucky good songs in a desolated shallow sea of nothingness.)
I pointed out this because it seems to me that supporting label-made hollow artistroids is not far away to support the hollow views of their labels, which are the main topic. I mean, if they can sell me shit, they probably realize that they can sell it to me and "protect" it in shitty ways (DRM, evil pirates campaigns and whatnot), since I'm an happy shit-eater... Anyone agrees?
Uh, sorry for rude terms
As far as I know, there do is a local UK group which is part of the bigger-picture FFII: http://www.ffii.org.uk/
I'd rather say that software piracy will continue to expand as the DRM becomes more and more indistinguishable from raping the rightful users.
Well, this is rather offtopic, but to partly answer to the subject question and JFTR: also here in Italy it's quite common to make jokes about the american "tendency to sue anybody for anything", which is tipically regarded as a bad faith way to make money from someone instead of a way to obtain legal equity.
(Not that in Italy the justice system doesn't have its own problems, to be fair, especially regarding excessive duration of legal proceedings.)