Don't you think that this hate, the blindness and stupidity it will inevitably cause, is going to utterly destroy Obama's chances ? How can a democrat, the "party of feminism" for example demand that gov. Palin "take care of her family instead of going for vice president" ? I mean do you seriously expect a position like that to gain you any votes ?
You'd better start providing direct quotes, with sources.
ElectricTurtle has said that what Jason Fortuny did wasn't anything wrong, and that he is a good person. Frankly, I don't care whether ElectricTurtle knows Fortuny or not. His approval of Fortuny's conduct says plenty about him.
So it is OK for cooks to spit in your food, as they can get away with it.
No, it's wrong whether they get caught or not. Unfortunately, there's more to what happens to people than what they deserve. The guy getting the music illegally is better off than the legal buyer. The rewards and punishments that come from this situation encourage people to do things that are both illegal and immoral.
Also I guess your point also makes it ok to steal the code of any open source project and release it in your own closed product, I mean, the code was there to grab, I took it, now it's mine, how does the license matter now when I have the code?
Decline the license if you want, but then regular copyright law prohibits you from giving away any copies at all.
The GPL also doesn't prohibit anything the end user would normally be allowed to do. You can't redistribute somone else's code as closed source, with or without agreeing to the GPL. With the GPL, you go from no redistribution to restricted redistribution.
I have yet to hear anybody answer that question with something that doesn't boil down to "everybody else is doing it".
I don't see the problem with that argument. I'd be happy to keep up with my friends on, say, ham radio nets, but none of them are on there -- they're all on Facebook.
Try taking that logic with your own finances before you try shoving it on the rest of the country. "Hey honey, I'm going to ask my boss to give me a pay cut so we have more money!"
Actually, they're suggesting that with lower taxes, people's pre-tax income would be higher, and that increase would offset the revenue lost from lowering the tax rate (e.g. 20% of 50,000 is less than 18% of 60,000). True or not, it still only works until tax rates are fall below a certain point.
is there any politically workable way to change the law and make software unpatentable again?
I've heard it suggested that SCOTUS might overturn software patents on the whole, but for that to happen, someone would have to bring a case up that high and challenge the patentability of software.
Slashdot Mirror
You'd better start providing direct quotes, with sources.
If you say so.... 10m has been lots fun this summer and last summer, and 40m and 20m still haven't let me down.
So, something of a modernized letter of marque?
How about the contents of any file on your hard drive that the game is capable of reading? Not saying they would, just that they could.
ElectricTurtle has said that what Jason Fortuny did wasn't anything wrong, and that he is a good person. Frankly, I don't care whether ElectricTurtle knows Fortuny or not. His approval of Fortuny's conduct says plenty about him.
Knowing an asshat isn't what reflects poorly on GGP. It's insisting that he's a "cool guy."
Either that or he republished copyrighted things without the copyright holders' permission. *shrug*
Does it say how they manage to spend that much money?
After that, think long and hard about the alternative.
No, it's wrong whether they get caught or not. Unfortunately, there's more to what happens to people than what they deserve. The guy getting the music illegally is better off than the legal buyer. The rewards and punishments that come from this situation encourage people to do things that are both illegal and immoral.
Or they're adding more than their share of value to the economy. In any case, where does this money go if it's being taken out of the economy?
My first thought was "Chicago Symphony Orchestra."
A shoplifter is far more likely to get caught and punished.
I don't think GP was suggesting that computer scientists needn't know how to make software.
Decline the license if you want, but then regular copyright law prohibits you from giving away any copies at all.
The eBay scenario still leaves him some plausible deniability: "I thought I was buying a legit copy."
The GPL also doesn't prohibit anything the end user would normally be allowed to do. You can't redistribute somone else's code as closed source, with or without agreeing to the GPL. With the GPL, you go from no redistribution to restricted redistribution.
There are no points of law being disputed in your example.
I'm pretty sure one-sided cases of "your word against his" don't decide points of law, just points of fact.
Seriously though, there's more to math than equations -- algorithms, theorems, sets, groups, graphs, etc.
I don't see the problem with that argument. I'd be happy to keep up with my friends on, say, ham radio nets, but none of them are on there -- they're all on Facebook.
Why do I suspect that that's how you define "drunk with a real problem"?
Actually, they're suggesting that with lower taxes, people's pre-tax income would be higher, and that increase would offset the revenue lost from lowering the tax rate (e.g. 20% of 50,000 is less than 18% of 60,000). True or not, it still only works until tax rates are fall below a certain point.
I've heard it suggested that SCOTUS might overturn software patents on the whole, but for that to happen, someone would have to bring a case up that high and challenge the patentability of software.
That doesn't work for physical devices (e.g. this CD player next to me is not copyrightable, no matter how many unique features it may have).