That's like saying that if Company A patented NewGizmo but made it out of oak wood, that Company B could come along and make it exactly the same except made of maple wood to get around the patent.
No it isn't. You see by writing in another programing language the inputs and outputs are the same but how the program gets those results are different. That's what an implementation is. It's a specific method for starting at A and getting to B. Your analogy would be closer to if I created and ran the program on a PC instead of a Mac. Then the implementation would be the same.
They want to pay the *fair* rate - which Nokia is obliged to give them.
Huh, this is an aspect of patent law I've never heard of. I was under the impression that the owner of the patent could simple tell everyone to fark off and not license it to anyone. Can you show me this "fair rate" clause? Who gets to determine what a "fair rate" is? In other words, I call BS.
Apple hasn't and can't patent an idea. They have a specific implementation implemented
All software patents are patenting an idea. If it was an implementation what would be patented is the source code which is already covered by copyright. Show me one software patent that isn't patenting an idea but an actual implementation. If the patent was on the implementation rather than the idea I should be able to implement it in another language and not be liable under the patent.
The government has plenty to hide. I'm sure that there are plenty of things that some people in our government know that should not be known by many (most, if not all) people outside of some agencies.
While I'll agree with the above, when your embarrassed about the secrets that are leaked one has to question the ethos of what's being kept secret. Yeah, things should be secret and divulging certain information could put people and money at risk. But when things are kept secret because they're embarrassing or questionable (ACTA, telco immunity, torture) it should be illegal to keep such secret. And so far the appearance is the "Oh yes, we'll be more open" Obama administration has been as bad as, if not worse than, the "None of your farking business" Bush administration in this respect.
We are BOFH. You want Mutual Assured Destruction? We make the USAF look like wusses.
Can you image the mobilization when the Sans infocon turns red. A couple postings on Slashdot, Techdirt, Fark and the like and there'll be 1000's of the best in the world focused on it. We may be the most connected but that also means we have the best militia in the world for fighting this kind of attack. Fuck the government. It'll be weeks after the attack is defeated before they even figure out it was an organized attack. The scary part is the stupid laws they'll pass after they realize it.
it's going to be a nation wide army of several hundred thousand IT admins working 70 hour weeks
Ummm...you must not know many sysadmins. Under conditions like that it'd be more like a minimum of 20+ hours a day maybe catching cat naps at the office surviving on mountain dew delivered pizza. Ain't a sysadmin I know who would be tempted to leave the office under those circumstances. Think of the challenge.
I don't know. However, if I had to guess I would say no. If you look at the state of 3d video drivers, and gimp, the closed source version is typically better. Windows drivers are almost always better for video cards. Photoshop is better than gimp.
You do know the hardware drivers for Windows are written by the hardware companies. Of course drivers written by the hardware manufacturer are better than reversed engineered ones.
Lets see. I can take some hardware stick in a linux cd and install a pretty much fully functional system 99% of the time with a few possible issues like wireless network drivers. I pull up fancy software installion app and have at my fingertips 1000s of applications that met pretty much any functional requirement I can think of that can be installed with a mouse click or 2. I take the same hardware and install Windows. Now the fun starts. First I have figure out what kind of network interfaces are used. Then I have to go to another computer and find the network drivers online, load them on a cd and install them on the windows system. Ok next I have to register my system with Microsoft or else they'll shut my system down in a month or 2. Now I go searching for video drivers, wireless network drivers, etc... Ok drivers are all installed and functioning. Now I have to buy and install the anti-virus software. Next it's off to the store to spend $1000s on office software, photoshop and whatever else I need. Then I have to come home and stick in the cds for all the software I bought, enter the software keys or whatever else DRM crap they implement. Heaven forbid you loose the key and have to reinstall something.
I'll go so far as to say I think patents could solve much of the trouble we are currently having pulling our selves/society in to the digital information age.
Arcane patent and copyright laws are the major obstacles preventing society's move into the digital age. I dare say they're a major contributing factor to the current economic situation. Instead of society being able to embrace new efficiencies they're are being tied up in legal fees and monopolies rents. The music industry is the perfect example. Technology allows for a way to reduce the distribution cost of music to almost nothing and instead of embracing this tremendous new efficiency they fight it tooth and nail. Pretty much any software project of any significance is going to violate multiple patents in a system where linked lists can be patented. Just think of where we'd be if they had started issuing similar software patents in the 60's.
The only hope is instituting a independent invention defense that invalidates the patent do to obviousness. If someone, or especially more than one someone, comes up with the same idea you patented independently I'd say it pretty much proves the idea was obvious to someone skilled in the art. Just because your the first one to do something that advances in technology have made possible doesn't mean it isn't obvious and wouldn't have have occurred a week or 2 later if you'd been hit by a truck. it certainly shouldn't give you monopoly rents for what is in essence eternity in terms of technological advancement. Just think of where the tech industry was 17 years ago.
On the other hand, the guy with thirty years experience probably expects to leave the office at the end of the day and not work overnight and on weekends.
The more experienced programmer you won't have to work nights and weekends to complete the project. 30 years experience provides the foresight to avoid the development black holes that create the situations where you have to work nights and weekends to complete the project.
Because the FBI and CIA are wasting huge resources tracking down and chasing CD and DVD counterfeiters acting as the private police for a group of corporations who have convinced the governments of the world, through extensive bribes, that they're obsolete business models are vital to the modern world.
My one issue with Truecrypt is that it doesn't support multiply keys. That's almost essential in a real world environment. Why the hell don;t they add that?
You see outside powers invading your culture, your country, and your freedom to live as you want. Stop doing that, and you will stop terrorism. No fences are needed when you let people be.
The Taliban had themselves a nice little islamic state set up in Afghanistan where no one was bothering them. They were free to rape and stone women to there hearts desire. What did they use it for? As a terrorist training camp to attack western culture that wasn't doing anything at all to them. So lets see...according to you they attack us slaughtering thousands of civilians and were just supposed to do what? How many terrorist attacks did it take before their country was invaded? And don't even mention the invasions of Iraq as a justification. Iraq was about as far from an islamic state as you can get pre-invasion. It's closer to one now than it was under Saddam.
I'm also going to throw out there that their "culture" is such that women are oppressed to the point that they get stoned to death as justice after they are raped just to mention one aspect of it. This is a "culture" that needs to be invaded.
The odds of airborne terror are so low it's ridiculous that we focus on it as much as we do.
Whats even more amazing is the complete lack of concern that ten of thousands (in the US alone) are killed and hundred of thousands injured and maimed on the roads every day. What is it about people that they have absolutely no concern for something that's fairly likely to injure or kill them while something that is only an extremely remote possibility causes them to freak out in fear.
Damnit, never have mod points when you need them. This needs to be modded up to +10 informative and be required reading for all the idiots who except the current concepts on climatology and global warming as gospel. The reality is we, including the climatologist, don't really know because the science isn't advance enough.
Which is a little bit scary, when you consider the potential problems if global warming is real and we realize that too late! So I certainly think it is worth understanding better.
This is the critical part. Efforts should be spent on understanding it better rather than on trying to reverse something we have an incomplete understanding of. The fact of the matter is, that the lack of full understanding could (I dare say is likely to) result in our efforts to correct the situation to actually make it worse and/or introduce worse problems.
One must often have intent to perform an action before they can be found guilty of a crime.
I think you're looking at this wrong. The law she broke states nothing anywhere about violating copyright. The law she broke is for operating a recording device in a theater. She certainly had intent to operate the recording device. She didn't accidentally and/or unintentionally activate the device. So her transgression has nothing in any way to do with copyright or fair use or whether or not she even filmed the movie actually.
They almost certainly would. The prosecutor just has to make it clear that the only relevant fact is that he did download the images. It's completely irrelevant to his guilt or innocence that he immediately deleted the images. These laws leave absolutely no wiggle room with regards to intent.
Ok, so regardless of the whole argument over whether any short portion of the video would be "Fair Use" and all of the other reasons we'd argue that this was completely legal...
See the actually law here. And please mod it up. Fair use doesn't enter into it. You use a recording device in a theater you go to jail. That's the law. It's that simple. She has no defense.
At least from the story, it sounds like law was not followed to its intent.
Intent? That has nothing to do with it. The law states if you're filming the moving in a theater you go to jail. There's nothing in the law about intent. She should do 3 years.
I definitely hope this gets some good media exposure as I believe most folks are going to side with her even if it's not the letter of the law.
Who do you think owns the main stream media? The same companies that are paying our government to pass these for these ridiculous copyright laws is who. You really think they'd cover this in an unbiased way? Her only hope is those lowlife thieves and copiers in the blogging community who do nothing but steal all the hard work done by the ever sacrificing main stream reporters and use their hard work to make money that the main stream media can't seem to find a way to make money off of. The scary part is, even worse, they're pushing for even more power in controlling all forms of media and information dissemination. Just look at the leaks about the ultra secret ACTA negotiations.
She violated the law. She goes to jail. It's that simple. The laws as written leave no room for intent.
Slashdot Mirror
That's like saying that if Company A patented NewGizmo but made it out of oak wood, that Company B could come along and make it exactly the same except made of maple wood to get around the patent.
No it isn't. You see by writing in another programing language the inputs and outputs are the same but how the program gets those results are different. That's what an implementation is. It's a specific method for starting at A and getting to B. Your analogy would be closer to if I created and ran the program on a PC instead of a Mac. Then the implementation would be the same.
They want to pay the *fair* rate - which Nokia is obliged to give them.
Huh, this is an aspect of patent law I've never heard of. I was under the impression that the owner of the patent could simple tell everyone to fark off and not license it to anyone. Can you show me this "fair rate" clause? Who gets to determine what a "fair rate" is? In other words, I call BS.
Apple hasn't and can't patent an idea. They have a specific implementation implemented
All software patents are patenting an idea. If it was an implementation what would be patented is the source code which is already covered by copyright. Show me one software patent that isn't patenting an idea but an actual implementation. If the patent was on the implementation rather than the idea I should be able to implement it in another language and not be liable under the patent.
The government has plenty to hide. I'm sure that there are plenty of things that some people in our government know that should not be known by many (most, if not all) people outside of some agencies.
While I'll agree with the above, when your embarrassed about the secrets that are leaked one has to question the ethos of what's being kept secret. Yeah, things should be secret and divulging certain information could put people and money at risk. But when things are kept secret because they're embarrassing or questionable (ACTA, telco immunity, torture) it should be illegal to keep such secret. And so far the appearance is the "Oh yes, we'll be more open" Obama administration has been as bad as, if not worse than, the "None of your farking business" Bush administration in this respect.
We are BOFH. You want Mutual Assured Destruction? We make the USAF look like wusses.
Can you image the mobilization when the Sans infocon turns red. A couple postings on Slashdot, Techdirt, Fark and the like and there'll be 1000's of the best in the world focused on it. We may be the most connected but that also means we have the best militia in the world for fighting this kind of attack. Fuck the government. It'll be weeks after the attack is defeated before they even figure out it was an organized attack. The scary part is the stupid laws they'll pass after they realize it.
it's going to be a nation wide army of several hundred thousand IT admins working 70 hour weeks
Ummm...you must not know many sysadmins. Under conditions like that it'd be more like a minimum of 20+ hours a day maybe catching cat naps at the office surviving on mountain dew delivered pizza. Ain't a sysadmin I know who would be tempted to leave the office under those circumstances. Think of the challenge.
I don't know. However, if I had to guess I would say no. If you look at the state of 3d video drivers, and gimp, the closed source version is typically better. Windows drivers are almost always better for video cards. Photoshop is better than gimp.
You do know the hardware drivers for Windows are written by the hardware companies. Of course drivers written by the hardware manufacturer are better than reversed engineered ones.
Lets see. I can take some hardware stick in a linux cd and install a pretty much fully functional system 99% of the time with a few possible issues like wireless network drivers. I pull up fancy software installion app and have at my fingertips 1000s of applications that met pretty much any functional requirement I can think of that can be installed with a mouse click or 2. I take the same hardware and install Windows. Now the fun starts. First I have figure out what kind of network interfaces are used. Then I have to go to another computer and find the network drivers online, load them on a cd and install them on the windows system. Ok next I have to register my system with Microsoft or else they'll shut my system down in a month or 2. Now I go searching for video drivers, wireless network drivers, etc... Ok drivers are all installed and functioning. Now I have to buy and install the anti-virus software. Next it's off to the store to spend $1000s on office software, photoshop and whatever else I need. Then I have to come home and stick in the cds for all the software I bought, enter the software keys or whatever else DRM crap they implement. Heaven forbid you loose the key and have to reinstall something.
Now which is better again?
On top of that, the writing staff needed to produce the comments would probably break the billion dollar mark.
Ummm...apparently you haven't read any of the comments. More like a few million banana's.
I'll go so far as to say I think patents could solve much of the trouble we are currently having pulling our selves/society in to the digital information age.
Arcane patent and copyright laws are the major obstacles preventing society's move into the digital age. I dare say they're a major contributing factor to the current economic situation. Instead of society being able to embrace new efficiencies they're are being tied up in legal fees and monopolies rents. The music industry is the perfect example. Technology allows for a way to reduce the distribution cost of music to almost nothing and instead of embracing this tremendous new efficiency they fight it tooth and nail. Pretty much any software project of any significance is going to violate multiple patents in a system where linked lists can be patented. Just think of where we'd be if they had started issuing similar software patents in the 60's.
The only hope is instituting a independent invention defense that invalidates the patent do to obviousness. If someone, or especially more than one someone, comes up with the same idea you patented independently I'd say it pretty much proves the idea was obvious to someone skilled in the art. Just because your the first one to do something that advances in technology have made possible doesn't mean it isn't obvious and wouldn't have have occurred a week or 2 later if you'd been hit by a truck. it certainly shouldn't give you monopoly rents for what is in essence eternity in terms of technological advancement. Just think of where the tech industry was 17 years ago.
Note to data center migration teams teams when moving large production databases, copy, don't cut!!!!!
rsync is your friend. Never copy or cut. For pretty much anything.
On the other hand, the guy with thirty years experience probably expects to leave the office at the end of the day and not work overnight and on weekends.
The more experienced programmer you won't have to work nights and weekends to complete the project. 30 years experience provides the foresight to avoid the development black holes that create the situations where you have to work nights and weekends to complete the project.
The NFL takes the farce of "intellectual property" to such absurd levels that even congressmen might be able to see the lack of clothing.
They aren't even in the same ballpark as the Olympics when it comes to Imaginary Property abuses.
Because the FBI and CIA are wasting huge resources tracking down and chasing CD and DVD counterfeiters acting as the private police for a group of corporations who have convinced the governments of the world, through extensive bribes, that they're obsolete business models are vital to the modern world.
My one issue with Truecrypt is that it doesn't support multiply keys. That's almost essential in a real world environment. Why the hell don;t they add that?
You see outside powers invading your culture, your country, and your freedom to live as you want. Stop doing that, and you will stop terrorism. No fences are needed when you let people be.
The Taliban had themselves a nice little islamic state set up in Afghanistan where no one was bothering them. They were free to rape and stone women to there hearts desire. What did they use it for? As a terrorist training camp to attack western culture that wasn't doing anything at all to them. So lets see...according to you they attack us slaughtering thousands of civilians and were just supposed to do what? How many terrorist attacks did it take before their country was invaded? And don't even mention the invasions of Iraq as a justification. Iraq was about as far from an islamic state as you can get pre-invasion. It's closer to one now than it was under Saddam.
I'm also going to throw out there that their "culture" is such that women are oppressed to the point that they get stoned to death as justice after they are raped just to mention one aspect of it. This is a "culture" that needs to be invaded.
The odds of airborne terror are so low it's ridiculous that we focus on it as much as we do.
Whats even more amazing is the complete lack of concern that ten of thousands (in the US alone) are killed and hundred of thousands injured and maimed on the roads every day. What is it about people that they have absolutely no concern for something that's fairly likely to injure or kill them while something that is only an extremely remote possibility causes them to freak out in fear.
When you have nothing you have nothing to loose.
Ummm...especially given where he was from, the crotch bomber had pretty much everything.
Damnit, never have mod points when you need them. This needs to be modded up to +10 informative and be required reading for all the idiots who except the current concepts on climatology and global warming as gospel. The reality is we, including the climatologist, don't really know because the science isn't advance enough.
Which is a little bit scary, when you consider the potential problems if global warming is real and we realize that too late! So I certainly think it is worth understanding better.
This is the critical part. Efforts should be spent on understanding it better rather than on trying to reverse something we have an incomplete understanding of. The fact of the matter is, that the lack of full understanding could (I dare say is likely to) result in our efforts to correct the situation to actually make it worse and/or introduce worse problems.
One must often have intent to perform an action before they can be found guilty of a crime.
I think you're looking at this wrong. The law she broke states nothing anywhere about violating copyright. The law she broke is for operating a recording device in a theater. She certainly had intent to operate the recording device. She didn't accidentally and/or unintentionally activate the device. So her transgression has nothing in any way to do with copyright or fair use or whether or not she even filmed the movie actually.
Why weren't they arrested & charged too?
Well if you had actually read the relevant law that Hatta was kind enough to look up and post you would have seen:
who knowingly operates an audiovisual recording function of a device
And thus would have the answer to your question.
Fire the lawyer. No jury will convict.
They almost certainly would. The prosecutor just has to make it clear that the only relevant fact is that he did download the images. It's completely irrelevant to his guilt or innocence that he immediately deleted the images. These laws leave absolutely no wiggle room with regards to intent.
What the fuck kind of crooked cop would put somebody in a cell for this?
Strangely for the cops not to be crooked they have to enforce the law as put forth by our elected government. If they didn't they would be crooked.
Ok, so regardless of the whole argument over whether any short portion of the video would be "Fair Use" and all of the other reasons we'd argue that this was completely legal...
See the actually law here. And please mod it up. Fair use doesn't enter into it. You use a recording device in a theater you go to jail. That's the law. It's that simple. She has no defense.
At least from the story, it sounds like law was not followed to its intent.
Intent? That has nothing to do with it. The law states if you're filming the moving in a theater you go to jail. There's nothing in the law about intent. She should do 3 years.
I definitely hope this gets some good media exposure as I believe most folks are going to side with her even if it's not the letter of the law.
Who do you think owns the main stream media? The same companies that are paying our government to pass these for these ridiculous copyright laws is who. You really think they'd cover this in an unbiased way? Her only hope is those lowlife thieves and copiers in the blogging community who do nothing but steal all the hard work done by the ever sacrificing main stream reporters and use their hard work to make money that the main stream media can't seem to find a way to make money off of. The scary part is, even worse, they're pushing for even more power in controlling all forms of media and information dissemination. Just look at the leaks about the ultra secret ACTA negotiations.
She violated the law. She goes to jail. It's that simple. The laws as written leave no room for intent.