Yes, of course there are lots of practical reasons why a case like this would probably never happen or go badly for the plaintiffs. I'm just saying that 'unclean hands' wouldn't apply because it's not an equitable remedy.
For some reason i'm prompted to make a quick legal correction.
The doctrine of unclean hands applies to equitable remedies. Most likely the crackers would sue for damages under a copyright act e.g.DMCA. Damages are not an equitable remedy. The doctrine on unclean hands would not apply.
> I don't watch real ads, so why should I "Imagine" one?
Um, to help you consider one of the potential advantages of extending patents on pop-music? The way a large corporations marketing machine can appropriate such elements of pop-culture, without copyright protections, has wider implications than just a tv add.
(I realise you probably didn't want to take this that question seriously, and just wanted to show how 'edgy' you are by not watching free to air tv, but meh)
One advantage of this is that it will be a little more difficult for crappy adds to use beatles tunes to advertise their products. Imagine "strawberry fields forever" to a streets icecream
FlyByPC wrote:
Archimedes helps invent modern mathematics...
Modern science gives us nifty toys like particle accelerators...
which we're using to read Archimedes' writings.
I'll be amused if the new text showes we all had the wrong idea about Archimedes' ideas, and consequently math and particle accelerators (and thus the new text too).
FlyByPC wrote:
Archimedes helps invent modern mathematics,
Modern math (after surviving the Dark Ages) enables modern science,
Modern science gives us nifty toys like particle accelerators......which we're using to read Archimedes' writings.
I can't help but think the guy would really get a kick out of that.
I'll be amused if the text uncovers showed we all had the wrong idea about Archimedes' math, modern science, particle accelerators and consequently the text in question.
I'll just refer you to FM6's previous comment.
"Before everybody sneers at contorted lawyers logic, note that "GTA confusion" was not the defense of the guy on trial. His defense was that his passenger interfered with his driving. Supposedly he did so while drunkenly imitating a GTA move, but his reasons for doing what he did was not relevent, since his guilt or innocence was not at issue."
Try to cool it with the paranoia. This case isn't threatening the videogame / reality distinction.
I think the real issue here is neither the actual accessibility of the HL2, nor the profits. Australians (like myself) shouldn't have access to the game to generate tax dollars, but rather because the benefits of censoring it don't outweigh the lost civil liberties. Of course I'm assuming the difference between MA15+ and R18 (for those who don't know how to order online) isn't the difference between columbine and not.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, of course there are lots of practical reasons why a case like this would probably never happen or go badly for the plaintiffs. I'm just saying that 'unclean hands' wouldn't apply because it's not an equitable remedy.
For some reason i'm prompted to make a quick legal correction. The doctrine of unclean hands applies to equitable remedies. Most likely the crackers would sue for damages under a copyright act e.g.DMCA. Damages are not an equitable remedy. The doctrine on unclean hands would not apply.
> I don't watch real ads, so why should I "Imagine" one? Um, to help you consider one of the potential advantages of extending patents on pop-music? The way a large corporations marketing machine can appropriate such elements of pop-culture, without copyright protections, has wider implications than just a tv add. (I realise you probably didn't want to take this that question seriously, and just wanted to show how 'edgy' you are by not watching free to air tv, but meh)
One advantage of this is that it will be a little more difficult for crappy adds to use beatles tunes to advertise their products. Imagine "strawberry fields forever" to a streets icecream
FlyByPC wrote: Archimedes helps invent modern mathematics ...
Modern science gives us nifty toys like particle accelerators...
which we're using to read Archimedes' writings.
I'll be amused if the new text showes we all had the wrong idea about Archimedes' ideas, and consequently math and particle accelerators (and thus the new text too).
FlyByPC wrote: Archimedes helps invent modern mathematics, Modern math (after surviving the Dark Ages) enables modern science, Modern science gives us nifty toys like particle accelerators... ...which we're using to read Archimedes' writings.
I can't help but think the guy would really get a kick out of that.
I'll be amused if the text uncovers showed we all had the wrong idea about Archimedes' math, modern science, particle accelerators and consequently the text in question.
I'll just refer you to FM6's previous comment. "Before everybody sneers at contorted lawyers logic, note that "GTA confusion" was not the defense of the guy on trial. His defense was that his passenger interfered with his driving. Supposedly he did so while drunkenly imitating a GTA move, but his reasons for doing what he did was not relevent, since his guilt or innocence was not at issue." Try to cool it with the paranoia. This case isn't threatening the videogame / reality distinction.
I think the real issue here is neither the actual accessibility of the HL2, nor the profits. Australians (like myself) shouldn't have access to the game to generate tax dollars, but rather because the benefits of censoring it don't outweigh the lost civil liberties. Of course I'm assuming the difference between MA15+ and R18 (for those who don't know how to order online) isn't the difference between columbine and not.