If Apple was a smaller co, and didn't already have most of the digital music space marketshare, maybe they would be concerned. We know Microsoft... instead of creating something innovative, they find something innovative already on the market, then release their bastard copy of it, though it be vastly inferior, it is so cheap it they can flood the market, thus driving the poor, young, innovative company that came up with the product in the first place out of business. Apple isn't scared. And they won't say anything. But you know they're thinking "Bring it on, M$... you dumbasses... every step you take, you're gonna double OUR marketshare." Every unit M$ sells will be like free advertising for iPod.
I think it'd be a little more interesting to investigate why Democats can't get their shit together and find someone who is electable... if they could, all the cheating in the world wouldn't help the Repulicans
Most Internet piracy of sound recordings is accomplished using a
technology known as MP3, which stands for Motion Picture Expert Group 1, Audio Layer 3. MP3
simply is an algorithm that compresses a digital music file by a ratio of approximately 12:1, thereby
reducing the size of the file so that it more easily and quickly can be copied, transmitted, and
downloaded over the Internet. There are several other compression technologies used for this purpose,
and many of them produce a high fidelity sound quality. MP3, however, has become the standard for
piracy because it is available for free on the Internet and because it does not incorporate any security to
limit copying and distribution of the sound recording. Thus, once a sound recording has been converted
into the MP3 format, it can be copied and distributed an unlimited number of times, without meaningful
degradation in the sound quality. Once downloaded (i.e. copied and saved to a computer hard drive), a
music file can be played from the computer, or further copied onto home or car stereo equipment, or
portable players, designed for use with MP3 music.
Again, my argument is that it is not a HIGH fidelity duplication, and that although once ripped there is no degridation in quality, the degredation comes from the ripping itself...
So, seems to me like they made it an issue... is it really a non-issue, legally? They can just make unchallenged claims, and if unchallenged, becomes legally true?
(thanks for answering, btw... it all makes me so angry I may get tired of shaking my tiny fists in the air and just go get that law degree)
afaik, since the RIAA made the argument that mp3's were perfect digital copies... that was the original basis of their original argument, wasn't it? That's the argument that shut down Napster, wasn't it?
As an audiophile, I truly believe that focusing on the root cause of all this RIAA gestapo BS would be fruitful: mp3s are NOT an exact duplicate of the digital quality of CDs, not by a long shot. I think the crux of it is that IF the RIAA can shut down Napster because individuals downloaded mp3s, THEN, by the same logic, the RIAA should shutdown radio stations because individuals tape songs off the radio (uh... cassette tapes... anyone rememeber those?).
The reason they can't/don't shut down radio stations is because the copy off the radio is not "digital quality." I submit that mp3s, while digital, are NOT the perfect digital copies the RIAA claim they are (listen to the high-end... cymbols sound like glass breaking, all fuzzy, also, even at higher bit rates the low end becomes less defined), the compression completely changes the original waveform to create something that doesn't sound NEARLY as good as the original uncompressed waveform. mp3s are just about at broadcast quality, but not the digital quality of CDs
I'm not sure, but I'd guess that any disinterested audio engineer would agree... mp3's suck compared to the original digital source. If this is the case (and I guarantee you that it is), then just like radio, mp3 sharing sites will actually help sell music, because once you hear a substandard copy of a song you like, the probability increases that you will purchase CD to hear the quality you desire.
To my knowledge, no one has even attepted the technology argument, or objected to the RIAA's claims that mp3s are "perfect digital copies" of the source waveform. From the initial introduction of this litigation, the RIAA has hoodwinked us, and no one even noticed!
I grew up in the area, moved away, and recently relocated my mother and sister to a neighboring county. I still love the area, but the one thing that strikes you if you've left for ten years and then return is the unhindered, unabashed, unchecked developement. Martin county has some law that prevents construction above 4 stories, which certainly has had a positive effect if you compare Martin with other counties in FL... it... sorta... has retained its charm (in areas of the county). I haven't been everywhere in FL, so I don't know, but St. Lucie county just isn't pretty anymore... its a land of skyrocketing real estate, crowded highways, insane and malicious drivers (95S to the West Palm airport and back is a crap shot... you take your life in your hands), unending strip-malls, endless crappy resteraunts (ok, there's a few really good ones, too) and... people... there's just too many fucking people there, old, young, whatever... there's just too many of you.
This being said... I can't disagree with you more. I see no evidence of the people in St. Lucie that actualy giving a shit... I don't see them doing anything about protecting the natural beauty of the area, and I don't see why they would care if this was built or not.
But Section 115 reform is only "the worst bill you've never heard of" if you don't understand mechanical copyright or compulsory licenses, insist on taking words and phrases out of context and garnishing them with heaps of paranoia. And most of all, forget the fact that it's an opt-in arrangement for a specific kind of digital media distributor - not for you or me. That's some Oops.
The fact that the Section 115 reform amendment is opposed by the Recording Industry Ass. of America president Cary Sherman should demolish the belief that it's a dark and terrible conspiracy by large copyright holders. In fact Sherman is opposing 115 reform precisely because it brings the EFF's desired solution much closer to reality. The EFF proposes a statutory license in all but name - the same flat fee model, but one that comes about through a miraculous epiphany of voluntary agreement. Through kumbaya, rather than Congress, if you like.
The RIAA (and here we must caution against a monolithic view of the lobbyist, as this covers a lot of internal tensions and contradictions) opposes compulsory licenses for digital media because it really quite likes the "relationships, split rights, side agreements and historical antiquities" as they are. Zero priced licenses mean the large labels lose control over pricing - control they've built up over a century. Rather than historical institutions, they simply become one end of a bit stream, and in such a situation, the economics don't favor them.
So watching the EFF swing into action against a bill that weakens the RIAA and paves the way to seeing the EFF's lofty goals realized is rather like watching a dog fruitlessly hump a table. The table too may have four legs, but nothing productive will result from this union.
I think you are being foolishly optimistic. MS has a monopoly. It does not matter that their product is inferior. They have already killed several superior OS's that tried to compete with them and are gaining, not losing desktop market share.
Maybe so... well, I wouldn't say I'm optimistic about the demise of Windows. I'd prefer it immensely if it worked the way it should and was secure enough for me to get a decent night's sleep.... so really, I think, I'm being pessimistic (but I like the way you think). However, considering just my (and everyone elses) most recent 2 nightmares (the Word zero-day thing, and the Symantec exploit), when the matchstick house of an OS collapses, or catches fire (referring to security, er... insecurity), I don't think a monopoly is going to matter anymore.
[i]but I don't think we will be seeing MS office disapearing so easily whether with adobe pdf or not[/i]
Agreed... but this is one of the software titles they will cling to that I was referring to
Office on Mac makes pdfs just fine. I really believe Windows is going to disappear entirely from the desktop within the next 5 years, so Adobe's maneuver becomes moot. No one uses (and most have never heard of) XPS. Windows is broken -- has been broken -- can't be fixed -- and corporations, universities, and governments that use it are bleeding. Vista is a joke. Microsoft will retreat for a time to fixing Exchange and their other sad excuses for servers, but ultimately, they will rest their profiteering entirely on X-Box and a handful of software titles for OS X and hand held devices. Microsoft is a survivor... and they will rise from the ashes of their crappy OS disaster (I realize we're talking about Office... but not really... TFA is actually talking about Office running on Windows) and be a major player again, just not in the OS space.
In theory, sure. But in practise, esp. not in the big towns like Richmond, VA Beach, you'll get your rights stepped all over. And the ACLU won't care because its small potatoes.
The problem is... unless they change the way business is done, they're going to get sued. If contracts were designed around a $10 ticket, and contract states that the promoter gets $5, and TM gets the rest... someone's not going to be happy. The contracts will need to be repenned to use percentages and not strict monetary values, otherwise artists, who only tour because the margins on their product are so low now thanks to the RIAA and still have (had) a decent margin on tickets for their shows, will be screwed coming AND going.
Sorry, man... I can say from personal experience, there is no due process in VA, there is no Miranda.... Virginia is not a State, it is a Commonwealth. US Constitution, for the most part, doesn't seem to apply. If they can't convict you of something they think you did, they will force you to serve the time before you ever get to trial by finding ways to deny you bond. Commonweaths Attorneys tell the Judges what to decide here. Its possible, I'm not saying its true, but its possible there is legitimate justice in bigger towns like Alexandria and Richmond. But otherwise, take the deal. This is a hick state.
I think maybe you're referring to the Coriolis Effect, and, while I think its probably the water jets that cause a toilet in whatever hemisphere to swirl which ever way it does, in the Northern Hemisphere, cyclones rotate counter-clockwise.
I thought low cloud cover actually increased signal strength...? The signals bounce back and forth from the earth to the clouds, instead of travelling up out of the atmosphere... like CB sidebanding (if I understand that correctly)
I live in the shadow of a mountain, and all I know is that on sunny cloudless day, my cell reception sucks; I'd swear its better when it rains. When its dry but overcast I get the strongest signals.
any/. physicists and cell pundits are welcome to explain... thanks
Alex: No. No! NO! Stop it! Stop it, please! I beg you! This is sin! This is sin! This is sin! It's a sin, it's a sin, it's a sin! Dr. Brodsky: Sin? What's all this about sin? Alex: That! Using Ludwig van like that! He did no harm to anyone. Beethoven just wrote music! Dr. Branom: Are you referring to the background score? Alex: Yes. Dr. Branom: You've heard Beethoven before? Alex: Yes! Dr. Brodsky: So, you're keen on music? Alex: YES! Dr. Brodsky: Can't be helped. Here's the punishment element perhaps. . . . . If a man cannot choose, he ceases to be a man. --Anthony Burgess
I was just thinking something along those lines... yes, watching some commercials isn't so bad. What is it that makes them bearable? They are entertaining and I haven't seen them 10 times in the last hour. So perhaps we can live with the new technology, as long as we pass a strict federal advertising law that no advertiser/broadcaster/cable co, etc., is allowed to replay the same commercial twice within, say, a 6 hour period. And maybe there should be a rating system involved, which would dictate ad placement, so that over a short time, all the sucky commercials would be pushed to the late night/early morning/no one's watching slots, and all you'd see during prime times are the really good commercials.
Slashdot Mirror
Funny.
If Apple was a smaller co, and didn't already have most of the digital music space marketshare, maybe they would be concerned. We know Microsoft... instead of creating something innovative, they find something innovative already on the market, then release their bastard copy of it, though it be vastly inferior, it is so cheap it they can flood the market, thus driving the poor, young, innovative company that came up with the product in the first place out of business. Apple isn't scared. And they won't say anything. But you know they're thinking "Bring it on, M$... you dumbasses... every step you take, you're gonna double OUR marketshare." Every unit M$ sells will be like free advertising for iPod.
I think it'd be a little more interesting to investigate why Democats can't get their shit together and find someone who is electable... if they could, all the cheating in the world wouldn't help the Repulicans
uh... and all the blimps (zeppelins, whatever)
Thanks for sharing your knowledge. Now... go get 'em... take no prisoners (and best of luck).
from the original complaint (source: , pg. 11, #41):
Most Internet piracy of sound recordings is accomplished using a technology known as MP3, which stands for Motion Picture Expert Group 1, Audio Layer 3. MP3 simply is an algorithm that compresses a digital music file by a ratio of approximately 12:1, thereby reducing the size of the file so that it more easily and quickly can be copied, transmitted, and downloaded over the Internet. There are several other compression technologies used for this purpose, and many of them produce a high fidelity sound quality. MP3, however, has become the standard for piracy because it is available for free on the Internet and because it does not incorporate any security to limit copying and distribution of the sound recording. Thus, once a sound recording has been converted into the MP3 format, it can be copied and distributed an unlimited number of times, without meaningful degradation in the sound quality. Once downloaded (i.e. copied and saved to a computer hard drive), a music file can be played from the computer, or further copied onto home or car stereo equipment, or portable players, designed for use with MP3 music.
Again, my argument is that it is not a HIGH fidelity duplication, and that although once ripped there is no degridation in quality, the degredation comes from the ripping itself...
So, seems to me like they made it an issue... is it really a non-issue, legally? They can just make unchallenged claims, and if unchallenged, becomes legally true?
(thanks for answering, btw... it all makes me so angry I may get tired of shaking my tiny fists in the air and just go get that law degree)
afaik, since the RIAA made the argument that mp3's were perfect digital copies... that was the original basis of their original argument, wasn't it? That's the argument that shut down Napster, wasn't it?
As an audiophile, I truly believe that focusing on the root cause of all this RIAA gestapo BS would be fruitful: mp3s are NOT an exact duplicate of the digital quality of CDs, not by a long shot. I think the crux of it is that IF the RIAA can shut down Napster because individuals downloaded mp3s, THEN, by the same logic, the RIAA should shutdown radio stations because individuals tape songs off the radio (uh... cassette tapes... anyone rememeber those?).
The reason they can't/don't shut down radio stations is because the copy off the radio is not "digital quality." I submit that mp3s, while digital, are NOT the perfect digital copies the RIAA claim they are (listen to the high-end... cymbols sound like glass breaking, all fuzzy, also, even at higher bit rates the low end becomes less defined), the compression completely changes the original waveform to create something that doesn't sound NEARLY as good as the original uncompressed waveform. mp3s are just about at broadcast quality, but not the digital quality of CDs
I'm not sure, but I'd guess that any disinterested audio engineer would agree... mp3's suck compared to the original digital source. If this is the case (and I guarantee you that it is), then just like radio, mp3 sharing sites will actually help sell music, because once you hear a substandard copy of a song you like, the probability increases that you will purchase CD to hear the quality you desire.
To my knowledge, no one has even attepted the technology argument, or objected to the RIAA's claims that mp3s are "perfect digital copies" of the source waveform. From the initial introduction of this litigation, the RIAA has hoodwinked us, and no one even noticed!
If this argument has never been used... why not?
I grew up in the area, moved away, and recently relocated my mother and sister to a neighboring county. I still love the area, but the one thing that strikes you if you've left for ten years and then return is the unhindered, unabashed, unchecked developement. Martin county has some law that prevents construction above 4 stories, which certainly has had a positive effect if you compare Martin with other counties in FL... it... sorta... has retained its charm (in areas of the county). I haven't been everywhere in FL, so I don't know, but St. Lucie county just isn't pretty anymore... its a land of skyrocketing real estate, crowded highways, insane and malicious drivers (95S to the West Palm airport and back is a crap shot... you take your life in your hands), unending strip-malls, endless crappy resteraunts (ok, there's a few really good ones, too) and... people... there's just too many fucking people there, old, young, whatever... there's just too many of you.
This being said... I can't disagree with you more. I see no evidence of the people in St. Lucie that actualy giving a shit... I don't see them doing anything about protecting the natural beauty of the area, and I don't see why they would care if this was built or not.
Am I the only one wondering if the next iPod will have a VGA display?
Why do we even NEED power lines???!!
But Section 115 reform is only "the worst bill you've never heard of" if you don't understand mechanical copyright or compulsory licenses, insist on taking words and phrases out of context and garnishing them with heaps of paranoia. And most of all, forget the fact that it's an opt-in arrangement for a specific kind of digital media distributor - not for you or me. That's some Oops.
The fact that the Section 115 reform amendment is opposed by the Recording Industry Ass. of America president Cary Sherman should demolish the belief that it's a dark and terrible conspiracy by large copyright holders. In fact Sherman is opposing 115 reform precisely because it brings the EFF's desired solution much closer to reality. The EFF proposes a statutory license in all but name - the same flat fee model, but one that comes about through a miraculous epiphany of voluntary agreement. Through kumbaya, rather than Congress, if you like.
The RIAA (and here we must caution against a monolithic view of the lobbyist, as this covers a lot of internal tensions and contradictions) opposes compulsory licenses for digital media because it really quite likes the "relationships, split rights, side agreements and historical antiquities" as they are. Zero priced licenses mean the large labels lose control over pricing - control they've built up over a century. Rather than historical institutions, they simply become one end of a bit stream, and in such a situation, the economics don't favor them.
So watching the EFF swing into action against a bill that weakens the RIAA and paves the way to seeing the EFF's lofty goals realized is rather like watching a dog fruitlessly hump a table. The table too may have four legs, but nothing productive will result from this union.
Have we been duped??
PDF support is built into OS X, who has no monopoly and are thus in the clear.
/Applications/Microsoft Office 2004/PDFMakerLib
/Applications/Microsoft Office 2004/Office/Startup/PDFMaker.dot
Apparently, Office 2004 for Mac represents a completely different agreement with Adobe. Yes, one can use OS X to make the pdf from, say, Microsoft Word for Mac, but if you have it available to look for yourself, automatically installed with the software is a plug in that allows you to make pdfs from within the application... and its a piece of Microsoft Software, not Adobe, afa I can tell (though the Adobe Acrobat icon appears in its little plug in window). If you have Office for Mac, check out:
-which has the little MS Office "o" logo in the icon, but when you get info on is © Adobe
AND see:
which appears to have a Word doc icon, but, again, getting info reveals the Adobe ©
I think you are being foolishly optimistic. MS has a monopoly. It does not matter that their product is inferior. They have already killed several superior OS's that tried to compete with them and are gaining, not losing desktop market share.
Maybe so... well, I wouldn't say I'm optimistic about the demise of Windows. I'd prefer it immensely if it worked the way it should and was secure enough for me to get a decent night's sleep.... so really, I think, I'm being pessimistic (but I like the way you think). However, considering just my (and everyone elses) most recent 2 nightmares (the Word zero-day thing, and the Symantec exploit), when the matchstick house of an OS collapses, or catches fire (referring to security, er... insecurity), I don't think a monopoly is going to matter anymore.
[i]but I don't think we will be seeing MS office disapearing so easily whether with adobe pdf or not[/i] Agreed... but this is one of the software titles they will cling to that I was referring to
Office on Mac makes pdfs just fine. I really believe Windows is going to disappear entirely from the desktop within the next 5 years, so Adobe's maneuver becomes moot. No one uses (and most have never heard of) XPS. Windows is broken -- has been broken -- can't be fixed -- and corporations, universities, and governments that use it are bleeding. Vista is a joke. Microsoft will retreat for a time to fixing Exchange and their other sad excuses for servers, but ultimately, they will rest their profiteering entirely on X-Box and a handful of software titles for OS X and hand held devices. Microsoft is a survivor... and they will rise from the ashes of their crappy OS disaster (I realize we're talking about Office... but not really... TFA is actually talking about Office running on Windows) and be a major player again, just not in the OS space.
Bootlegs! They must be runnin' pirates!
Hardly anyone remembers the apropos lines...
In theory, sure. But in practise, esp. not in the big towns like Richmond, VA Beach, you'll get your rights stepped all over. And the ACLU won't care because its small potatoes.
The problem is... unless they change the way business is done, they're going to get sued. If contracts were designed around a $10 ticket, and contract states that the promoter gets $5, and TM gets the rest... someone's not going to be happy. The contracts will need to be repenned to use percentages and not strict monetary values, otherwise artists, who only tour because the margins on their product are so low now thanks to the RIAA and still have (had) a decent margin on tickets for their shows, will be screwed coming AND going.
Sorry, man... I can say from personal experience, there is no due process in VA, there is no Miranda.... Virginia is not a State, it is a Commonwealth. US Constitution, for the most part, doesn't seem to apply. If they can't convict you of something they think you did, they will force you to serve the time before you ever get to trial by finding ways to deny you bond. Commonweaths Attorneys tell the Judges what to decide here. Its possible, I'm not saying its true, but its possible there is legitimate justice in bigger towns like Alexandria and Richmond. But otherwise, take the deal. This is a hick state.
I think maybe you're referring to the Coriolis Effect, and, while I think its probably the water jets that cause a toilet in whatever hemisphere to swirl which ever way it does, in the Northern Hemisphere, cyclones rotate counter-clockwise.
I live in the shadow of a mountain, and all I know is that on sunny cloudless day, my cell reception sucks; I'd swear its better when it rains. When its dry but overcast I get the strongest signals.
any /. physicists and cell pundits are welcome to explain... thanks
thar's a good example of dramatic irony... an essential dramatic element usually entirely missing from Star Trek films
/nerd on
/nerd off
will have something to do with the legend of Kirk's cheating the Kobiashi Maru
Van Gough, and Rembrandt, don't be uptight, cause here comes KID DYNOMITE.
Alex: No. No! NO! Stop it! Stop it, please! I beg you! This is sin! This is sin! This is sin! It's a sin, it's a sin, it's a sin!
Dr. Brodsky: Sin? What's all this about sin?
Alex: That! Using Ludwig van like that! He did no harm to anyone. Beethoven just wrote music!
Dr. Branom: Are you referring to the background score?
Alex: Yes.
Dr. Branom: You've heard Beethoven before?
Alex: Yes!
Dr. Brodsky: So, you're keen on music?
Alex: YES!
Dr. Brodsky: Can't be helped. Here's the punishment element perhaps.
.
.
.
.
If a man cannot choose, he ceases to be a man.
--Anthony Burgess
I was just thinking something along those lines... yes, watching some commercials isn't so bad. What is it that makes them bearable? They are entertaining and I haven't seen them 10 times in the last hour. So perhaps we can live with the new technology, as long as we pass a strict federal advertising law that no advertiser/broadcaster/cable co, etc., is allowed to replay the same commercial twice within, say, a 6 hour period. And maybe there should be a rating system involved, which would dictate ad placement, so that over a short time, all the sucky commercials would be pushed to the late night/early morning/no one's watching slots, and all you'd see during prime times are the really good commercials.