You're kidding, right? You're not that naive, are you? The DMCA benefits NOBODY but the **AA. All it does is criminalize the digitization of media currently produced, which means that companies represented by **AA don't have to modify their business plans
No, Im not. It also protects content not owned by the MPAA and the RIAA. Keep that in mind. Also keep in mind, that in a "perfect world" no-one would be all pissed, because NO ONE WOULD BE PIRATING THIS STUFF!.
The DMCA was passed to put the US in compliance with the WIPO treaties. These treaties were created expressly to combat the use of digital technologies that threaten current big business.
Please provide me with an example (either real or theoretical) where anyone else needs or could use the DMCA instead of the remaining existing copyright law.
You answer your own question there. It was to put us in complaince.. regular old US copyright law for a couple of reasons didnt meet "international" criteria. (dont get me started on how I dont care if it did or not).
Basically, the majority of the people I see bitching about the DMCA are those who want to freely pirate and rip media. Now, fair use aside, my suggestion to them is A) pay for what they want, or B) shut the hell up.
I agree fair use needs some work.. but then again, "fair use" is confusing in and of itself. If a school wants to use clips of "gangs of new york" to illustrate points during a class on the history of the bowery, etc, more power to em. Fair Use as far as I'm concerned. However, if it wants to play that movie in the auditorium, and charge students 2 bucks a head to see it, that is _not_ fair use. So saying "schools are paying to use it" is not clear enough.
Actually, your lymphocytes are always turning over. Any antigen you've been exposed to causes them to proliferate and also generate long lasting memory cells which help fight any secondary infection by an identical source. This is why we never get the same flu or cold twice. However, since the flu virus is always mutating, a slight change in form no longer allows your body to recognize it and you are susceptible again and need to go through the process repeatedly.
This is why my wife, who was "deathly allergic" to cats now lives happily with one. It took a few months, and lots of vitamin C to get past the initial swollen-eyes, etc etc, but now (4 years and change) later, the only time she has a problem is if she buries her face in the cat for extended periods of time. (Which has happened when the two nap on the couch.. wish I could have found the camera).
But yeah.. you can develop antibodies and immunity to things.. you can lose them too.. a lot of people who were "immune" to poison ivy find out later that that has changed.
I have often taken a scene out of a rented movie for educational purposes. Re-encoded that scene into divx movie clips of interest. And used them as source materials for topics of discussion. Used the matrix "battery" scene in philosophy for several reasons. Used the "Strange Days" reply scenes in censorship/reality conversations. Technically I am circumventing copyright protection, re-encoding, and electronically distributing these clips. I see that it is no different than when I used to watch the clip in class with borrowed VCR's and a rental tape. Except now the Research questions and materials I ask can be for homework.
I could be wrong, but if I remember my reading properly, you are not in violation of any law doing what you are doing. You are not broadcasting the movie to "paying customers" (which actually isnt DMCA.. that is the standard copyright by the MPAA) and I believe your rights to use parts of things for educational and non-profit are preserved under the DMCA, not eroded.
(IANAL, and its a bit of a confusing law, but thats how I remember reading it.)
Even if this throws out the DMCA, RIAA and the MPAA will just try again with another law to ensure that you are only listening/watching things THEY signed, and making sure you pay WAY to much for them. As long as they have $$ there will be plenty of copyright laws
Bear in mind.. the DMCA was passed, not as an enforcement tool for the RIAA and MPAA, but as protection for virtually all vendors of copyrighted material, and producers of commercial products that dont fall under patent or copyright areas.
The use of it as a strongarm tactic is just a by-product of what was intended to be (and should be, basically) a just and good law. But like many things, it was worded too vaguely, and unfortunately, the number of lawyers who are willing to work for nearly nothing to challenge these things is small (but dedicated and laudible) compared to the number who smell blood in the water and are on corporate retainers.
The naive believe that police would never, ever plant drugs on someone just to set them up. Setting up political dissidents on drug charges did in fact occur many times at one point about 30 years ago. Then it was opposition to US government foreign policy. Perhaps now being too vocal about owning deadly weapons and demanding the right to do so.
Yeah.. but that has been going on for as long as there were police! Nothing has changed in the last three years! And being too vocal about owning weapons? Ruby Ridge and Waco were under Clinton/Reno.
I support the rights of the accused.. and I havent yet seen conclusive evidence that the accused have lost any rights. I have seen it made easier for law enforcement to GATHER evidence.. but I have yet to see a law that says "we can trump up charges out of nothing."
I'm sorry.. but I dont view breaking the law as a cat and mouse game. I also think that the numbers of totally innocent people being "set up" is fairly low. (Remember.. they had to get Al Capone on Income Tax issues.. )
What, you want grenade launchers too? How about a nice cozy Abrahms tank? Or a SCUD launcher? Or why not a nuke? I mean, you have a right to bear arms (although several courts are getting rather fed up by the fact that the ignorant public thinbk that the second amendment grants them the right to bear arms...it doesn't, as the supreme court has had to explain in exasperation many times over: google for it), so why not have a nuke? Or some anthrax? I mean, your government has that, so why shouldn't you?
Uh.. we were given the right to keep and bear arms so that we could resist tyranny. Whether that comes from an outside invader, or from the the government. Remember.. the framers of the constitution had just witnessed exactly what a dedicated group of people with "military weapons" could do to free a tiny country from a huge military force. (timing was really good too.. )
I dont want a tank.. but I do want some clarity in the laws.. and I want to know why a handle makes a gun more dangerous.. or why a 40 round fixed magazine is better than a 40 round removeable magazine.
Im not so concerned with what they "banned".. most of them were cheap import junk anyway.. I'm more concerned with the fact that it pretty much criminalizes millions of gun owners who have broken no laws.
Again, tell me a right you have lost. You listed a number of things the Government changed, but you have yet to mention a right you have lost.
In what way have these laws restricted your ability to do what you did before they were enacted?
Now.. as far as this one:
Restricting access to information about corporate pollution and environmental crimes. This would, incidentally, not only prevent private citizens from researching toxins in their backyards but would even restrict the ability of local governments to get information about environmental crimes in their own neighborhoods.
I find that somewhat hard to believe. It is a really nice blurb, phrased to anger the anti-business folks out there, but I would like to know exactly what makes these things so.
(I suspect it has something to do with some sort of top secret place somewhere in Nevada, that some greeny was screaming about, or something.)
It's not like Germany ever threatened the liberties of the average racially pure German who kept their mouth shut (the majority of Germans, in other words).
Yep.. and its not like I have lost a right under Ashcroft/Bush. Course, I'm a law abiding citizen.. so I guess maybe I'm less concerned with rights regarding, say, how I get out of having drugs in my car once I am hauled into jail for it.
Personally, i think I lost a lot more rights under (during) the Clinton administration than I have under B/A. The assault weapons ban/crime bill, specifically.
Now the automated system is sending you a ticket. One that will be near impossible to get out of, because, you know, computers don't make mistakes.
I have driven for 15 years, and had three jobs that required driving 8 hours a day. I have _never_ run a red light to "avoid" someone behind me coming up fast. Have you? It's a straw man, in my opinion.
How many times will the system ticket you if you are speeding? If I am speeding, I get a ticket and then slow down. An automated system would ticket me over and over and over.
Heres a thought.. DONT SPEED! Howsabout that! I _hate_ chugging down the highway at highway speed, then suddenly being down to 45 (where the limit is 55) because some paranoiac at the front saw a cop and is now "making up" for going 70 before.
So now an automated system is trusted more then you are. This is already a problem in stores. You are leaving a store, then suddenlt some infernal machine is beeping and flashing. So now you are in a position of proving your innocences to the shop keeper*. as a personal note, I will not stop because of that, nor will I let anybody stop me and check my bag as I leave a store. I urge others to do the same.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you dont have anything in the bag you didnt pay for. But I kind of welcome those systems, because I know it keeps prices down. It may not stop _real_ accomplished shoplifters (like the guy I know who used to carry the tool to remove the trackers/dye-packs) but I suspect the majority of thefts are "cause I can" rather than people who are really into shoplifting. (Low number of career shoplifters vs relative high number of people who are kept honest by systems like that).
The sad thing is that there's fewer and fewer people willing to SAY that the Emperor has no clothes these days. Education is a big factor I'm sure, as John Q. Public doesn't have a clue as to what's going on with all the disgusting new laws and acts *cough* Patriot II *cough* that are being (or about to be) passed right under his nose.
You sound like an informed rabble rouser.. Care to tell me a right you have lost? or one you stand to lose? (Not a flame.. an honest question)
What's wrong with Fox news? It appears to be the only outlet providing both conservative and liberal opinions.
You just answered your own question. As far as the left leaners are concerned, anything smacking of "world news" Is simply Bush propaganda. They prefer to watch the pablum that is sanitized to make them feel justified in their wrath.
(This is why I tend to read BBC _first_ and read US news second..)
Yes, I can see that. And what I'm talking about is, how does making war against an islamic nation make the muslims less likely to attack the US, exactly? The primary terrorist threat comes from extremists, not the mainstream of any particular country or government. The idea that violence acts as a deterrant to further violence is simply flawed. Violence begets violence, terror begets terror, war begets war. Fighting for peace is like fsking for chastity
Just as illogical is saying that doing nothign will make them stop. They were unprovoked (as in militarily) attacks. These people are attacking us based out of a religious belief.. and they will keep doing it. The American "now now bigger faster better" way of life has made most americans not realize that terrorists will wait YEARS to make an attack. They are very patient people.
But Doing Nothing is just as bad as attacking, if not worse. At least through attacking we run the chance of making someone think twice.
and I personally, dont think "dont defy us or attempt to pose our will" is such a bad thing to broadcast. If you have the big stick, it is kind of pointless to whittle it to a toothpick!
How is it that people so often assume that brutally attacking and killing people is likely to make them less pissed off?
Who said anything about that? Im talkign about Egypt, Syria, other countries we know are up to their ears in terrorist activities, and who would benefit from a successful strike against the US.
The Cato institute is somewhat interesting. As think tanks go, anyway. But how do you explain Saddam's chief of evil meeting with Mohammed Atta several times in Czech? Chance coincidence?
I am a citizen of one of those countries. By polls 80% of our population is opposed to the war. It is not a coincidence that the supporting countries are relatively small and poor. Their governments have been easier to bribe and pressure. The only country in the worlds where the population is supporting the war is USA, and that's because of the propaganda in mainstream media (the same people who support the war, also believe that it was Saddam Hussein who organized 9/11, which is clearly a nonsense). Even in UK, 70% of people are against the war.
Never said he was responsible.. but he is most definately involved. I have already cited the proof. And a lot of that is from the UK.. not from Pres Bush's "propaganda". (Which I take to mean any press other than leftist, which you dont agree with).
Wrong again. The stock market is just climbing out of the hole where it fell because of the uncertainty. Now that the end is near, we're just restoring the equilibrium.
With the longest sustained gain since the 80s? I dont think you understand economics as well as you think you do. Do you think the huge boom while Clinton was in office was due to Clinton?
There's a huge difference between ending a war, and starting one, hence the the protests. By some accounts, we are ending a war that was started 12 years ago and never finished. Personally, i think the human rights violations _alone_ justify what we are doing.
Iraq is a secular country, and Saddam Hussein is certainly not an islamic crackpot. He has done absolutely nothing to the US that would justify attacking his country and killing hundreds of thousands of people (the first Gulf war killed 100-200000 people and it was mostly in deserts, it is going to be mostly in cities this time).
So the fact that his "special military" have been beheading women on the street suspected of prostitution with swords (the beheading, not the prostitution) is not a sign of an islamic crackpot? His continued railings put him right up there with Kublai Khan (no relation to Shaka or Sing Noon), except he doesnt have the force to back it up. Wanna tell me where you got the figures for "numbers dead" during the gulf war please? If you tell me they are from Iraq, I will simply laugh, and point out that this is a man who saves up dead babies for months so he can stage "funerals" for propaganda purposes, and, strangely, has all baby milk information printed in english in a country where it is hardly spoken.
This is hardly a reason to go to war. There is no reason why someone is his own country should not be allowed to tell the US to 'stick it' once and a while. Additionally the demand that Hussein leave Iraq is insane.
Oh great guru, I have seen the light! YOu are correct.. a man who gassed his own people, and practiced genocide against another, and has consistantly warred with his neighbors to the point of requiring coalition action should be allowed to reign unchecked. And the Holy UN, which imposed sanctions on him 12 years ago and now refuses to even honor or look at those sanctions which have been broken time and again, and refuses to take any action other than followign a rather scripted show of giving "neutral inspectors" things to see but keeping them away from certain areas. You are right.. there is no reason for war here.. let him continue beheading women on the street, and imprisoning and torturing people for 14 years because they sold a roll of film to an undercover military agent.
I agree that Hussein probably has ties to what America has defined as terrorism, but so what? How many puppet regimes have we propped up? How many American dollars buy weaponry for foreign nations as we watch the bloodshed from afar. How many countries must we occupy before we can truly feel safe about the state of the world? All of them?
You counter-argue against yourself in this statement. If we "occupy" a country, we are evil.. because we are taking them over. If we hand the country over to the best pro-tem government we can find or allow to be created from the residents, and arm them so they can _keep_ their country (which is the real issue in that part of the world) we are also evil when we find out they have gone bad. (See also, Shah, Ayatollah, Hussein, Noriega.)
Let me ask you this.. how many american dollars have gone in the last 12 years for humanitarian aid to Iraq, and oil-for-food programs, only to watch it taken by the republican guard and used to feed the military, not the people? How many "innocent civilians" have died because he wanted to test a germ weapon on someone, and had only his own people to do it with? How many people has he run through a plastic-shredding machine designed for recycling?
There are many good reasons to go to war. But one of the _most_ asinine arguments against this particular war I have seen so far is that "innocent civilians" may get hurt. As a great number of ex-pat iraqis have said, even during a war, life would be better than it was under Hussein.
It saddens me that this once great nation has now become the school yard bully of our humble ball of mud.
We arent the bully. the UN is the bully. Apparently out of its ass it pulls decisions about what countries can mass murder their citizens or other countries citizens, and who cannot. Once it has decided that, it sends in nations with their hands tied to "keep the peace". Or it refuses to enforce some embargoes because key nations choose to get around it, but enforces others that end up destroying entire cultures and ways of life.
"we" cannot move against china. We dont have the manpower. Nor does the rest of Europe want to, due to close proximity and the chance of ass-kicking they would recieve. Of course, the way to stop it would be to bankrupt them by not buying their crappy products.. but good ole "Pro USA" Wal-Mart continues to sell crappy Chinese products at a much lower rate than comparable american products, meanwhile bemoaning the loss of jobs and manufacturing.
If 1/10th of the "protesters" realized that what they hate about this country is entirely within their control to fix (The job situation, the economy, "big business screwing the little guy") and put half as much effort into fixing it, rather than making misspelled peace signs or making themselves throw up in a federal building in California, I would have a lot more respect for their cause. But as it is, I view about half of the loudest ones as lobotomized morons who believe everything MTV has to say and could read the WSJ if they were forced to because the big words would throw them off.
Umm, perhaps the reason they can't explain why we're truly at war, is because they can't comprehend ANY good reason to launch a massive, unprovoked invasion, against the clear will of the international community and against international law, against a country that poses little threat to the country launching the attack?
Dude.. 45 countries have supported us. thats three TIMES the number who would have had to vote positive in the UN. Of those who dont, only a handful really matter. get the facts straight. (And realize several of them are the neighboring states..w hich brings us to... )
I have to admit I can't explain why we're truly at war either, economicly it will be disasterous, it has ruined the international diplomatic ties the US once had, and it makes the citizens of the Uninted States more at risk to future terrorist attacks and in the worst case senario could start World War III
Economically, its already helping. Looked at the stock exchange lately? The International Diplomatic Ties basically mean we are the enforcement arm of the UN when they want us, but god forbid they take our feeligns into acount when their cushy oil deals with Iraq may go up in smoke. Where were all these protestors when Clinton got us into Bosnia? For far fewer crimes against humanity than Hussein has racked up, we are over there to this day!.
Come, come, since you're so ready to critisize others for being unable to explain the cause of this war, explain the real reason we are at war, instead of alluding to it in an ambigious manner...
The real reason is threefold, at least. One) Hussein will use the weapons he is undoubtedly building against Israel soon enough. That is a doomsday scenario you dont want to see. Two) He (hussein) has been thumbing his nose at us for 12 years, ignoring our sanctions, and recently, openly mouthing off. THere is little doubt that he has ties to the terrorist activities of the last several years, at least in those who actually read the press, and dont necessarily swallow the leftist jargon hook, line, and sinker. And because we cannot continue to get black eyes and NOT retaliate. The Sept 11 attack was a black eye.. but not nearly the black eye left on us by Hussein continuing his reign of death and destruction in Iraq after we supposedly stopped him 12 years ago. Even Colin Powell says it was a mistake not to finish the job when we had the chance.
If we leave the US as a huge target that never retaliates, there is _nothing_ stopping every islamic crackpot in the world from taking a shot at us. They know we will do nothing. Bush promised to take after Afghanistan and any other country who harbors, funds, or makes possible terrorists/isms, and unlike our previous president, he is following through on his promise.
Those reasons, along with the very real threat that he has nuclear weapons, are the reasons we are at war. (And no, the nuclear weaposn are not a threat to us.. but if you pay any attention to the international politics you quote above, using them against Israel WOULD start world war 3.)
I am an out of work web designer. I have a talent that is shared by thousands upon thousands of twelve year olds sitting in their parents basement. The only jobs I can find with "web design" in them are things I dont want to do. I guess I will start a website whining about it.
Oh give me a BREAK! Life sucks. You were probably getting paid an exhorbitant rate to do a job that just about anyone with half a brain and a handful of good manuals could do, and now, instead of moving out of a dead field, you are bitching and whining that the few jobs available arent what you want. Waah.
Get over it. Go get a _real_ job. Dig ditches. Put roofs on houses. The housing industry is in a huge boom.. I'm sure someone near you could use a dogsbody to carry things around or pick up construction scrap, and pay you a decent wage for a days work.
Great. Then let those other countries observe them when dealing with _their_ military procedures or judicial processes. I'm not talking about other countries here.
(Im not much of a globalist, as you will no doubt come to realize).
Those people are suspects. They might not have done anything.
Then again, they might have. They might have been responsible for setting up the act of killing over 3000 innocent civilians in a few hours a year and a half ago. Sorry. They arent being terribly mistreated. They are being released if it is proven they are not involved. And it is far better treatment than was given to the people they were in control of or the military arm over in the country they came from. They should really count their blessings.
Don't forget.. the "rights" of the "subhumans" (women, christians, jews, etc) that we have in this country are one of the things the fundamentalist nutbark muslims are pissed off at us for in the first place. Why apply something to them that they hate so?
The US government funded Taliban and Saddam a couple of decades ago, and now they employ similar tactics used in repressive regimes (imprisonment without due judicial process). It's just a different matter that the guys wear suits and look cool and the new networks pander to them.
_what_ judicial due process? Due process is an element of the constitution. It applies _only_ to american citizens. If you arent an american, you dont automatically get full constitutional protection. This is not necessarily a bad thing.. this is why "diplomatic immunity" exists.
I love the fact that pinko liberals are whining about the "rights" of people who have been opressing others in their own countries, even to the point of mass genocide in some instances, yet tend to ignore the gravity of the situation of what these people did for a living before ending up in camp Xray.
The rest of your post rings somewhat true.. to I dont really think the military hawks stand to benefit a heck of a lot. Dow and Corning and Boeing might, and the news networks definately will.. but I dont think the military is a "profit machine" for those involved directly in the war.
Go read that MSDS sheet then come back and tell me it is safe. (Yeah.. I know.. the MSDS for Oxygen says it is dangerous too.. and it is. I defy anyone to sit around and breathe pure oxygen).
Now.. I read a few of the "aspartame facts" on the official aspartame page.. I love one quote in particular "In fact, due to the way it is metabolized, it never reaches the organs".
Now, funny that a completely independent study has found that use of aspartame leads to a buildup of formaldehyde in the brain and other organs. Hmmm.
Wonder if maybe Monsanto shoved it through FDA testing?
As for ADD/ADHD.. I really hope you are blessed with a kid who has this "bullshit" affliction. And I really hope you try to beat it out of him like my teachers did.
While I purchased this house because of location and affordability, a lot of the new construction techniques concern me. My brother build a brand-new house and within a year there was mold growing inside of the walls (mositure trapped due to the plastic wrap put on them).
As someone pointed out, the really good housewraps prevent this, as they tend to allow moisture through one-way. but unfortunately, a lot of people dont ask what type is specced when they build a house.. and even worse, in these "plunk in 200 identical house" developments, it is almost guaranteed the builder is cutting corners everywhere he can. (Even on the place my mom built, which was close to a 250K construction job, even though we did all the wallboarding, insulation, wiring, and plumbing), the alleged "builder" totally ignored contractual requests for things, and waved them away as "no-one really does that.. you dont need it." (yeah.. he's a crappy buildier.. but came highly highly reccomended by others who had used him, which kinda makes me think the "others" looked at the blueprints, hemmed, hawwed, pulled their chins like they knew what they were talking about, and were then "happy" with the result.)
What I do know is that the floors squeak (he didnt glue and screw like we asked, he just air-nailed) none of the wall frames are square to ANYTHING, not even CLOSE. (We found this out installing the interior doors.. the amount of shimming we had to do to get to plumb was upwards of half an inch over a six foot run on some of them.) The windows dont open and close right because the framing isnt square.. etc.
But on the mold thing.. I dont know how dangerous mold really is, to people who dont have a mold allergy (fungus allergy). THeres mold _everywhere_, really.
I hate nutrasweet, but are you sure that it wasn't caffiene that was causing the headaches? The same thing happens to me (headaches, stomach aches, etc) when I drink caffinated drinks.
Certain. I drink Dew by the gallon, coffee, tea, pepsi and coke.. (the regualar sugar/corn sweetener kind) and have no problems whatsoever..
One bit of nutrasweet.. WHAM!
Also have that problem with really cheap domestic beers.. bud, coors, etc.. instant headache.. I can only suspect it has something to do with the sugars created by really fast really cheap fermentation. (Which is basically the byproduct of nutrasweet anyway.. alcohol and formaldehyde).
Slashdot Mirror
You're kidding, right? You're not that naive, are you? The DMCA benefits NOBODY but the **AA. All it does is criminalize the digitization of media currently produced, which means that companies represented by **AA don't have to modify their business plans
No, Im not. It also protects content not owned by the MPAA and the RIAA. Keep that in mind. Also keep in mind, that in a "perfect world" no-one would be all pissed, because NO ONE WOULD BE PIRATING THIS STUFF!.
The DMCA was passed to put the US in compliance with the WIPO treaties. These treaties were created expressly to combat the use of digital technologies that threaten current big business.
Please provide me with an example (either real or theoretical) where anyone else needs or could use the DMCA instead of the remaining existing copyright law.
You answer your own question there. It was to put us in complaince.. regular old US copyright law for a couple of reasons didnt meet "international" criteria. (dont get me started on how I dont care if it did or not).
Basically, the majority of the people I see bitching about the DMCA are those who want to freely pirate and rip media. Now, fair use aside, my suggestion to them is A) pay for what they want, or B) shut the hell up.
I agree fair use needs some work.. but then again, "fair use" is confusing in and of itself. If a school wants to use clips of "gangs of new york" to illustrate points during a class on the history of the bowery, etc, more power to em. Fair Use as far as I'm concerned. However, if it wants to play that movie in the auditorium, and charge students 2 bucks a head to see it, that is _not_ fair use. So saying "schools are paying to use it" is not clear enough.
Maeryk
Actually, your lymphocytes are always turning over. Any antigen you've been exposed to causes them to proliferate and also generate long lasting memory cells which help fight any secondary infection by an identical source. This is why we never get the same flu or cold twice. However, since the flu virus is always mutating, a slight change in form no longer allows your body to recognize it and you are susceptible again and need to go through the process repeatedly.
This is why my wife, who was "deathly allergic" to cats now lives happily with one. It took a few months, and lots of vitamin C to get past the initial swollen-eyes, etc etc, but now (4 years and change) later, the only time she has a problem is if she buries her face in the cat for extended periods of time. (Which has happened when the two nap on the couch.. wish I could have found the camera).
But yeah.. you can develop antibodies and immunity to things.. you can lose them too.. a lot of people who were "immune" to poison ivy find out later that that has changed.
Maeryk
I have often taken a scene out of a rented movie for educational purposes. Re-encoded that scene into divx movie clips of interest. And used them as source materials for topics of discussion. Used the matrix "battery" scene in philosophy for several reasons. Used the "Strange Days" reply scenes in censorship/reality conversations. Technically I am circumventing copyright protection, re-encoding, and electronically distributing these clips. I see that it is no different than when I used to watch the clip in class with borrowed VCR's and a rental tape. Except now the Research questions and materials I ask can be for homework.
I could be wrong, but if I remember my reading properly, you are not in violation of any law doing what you are doing. You are not broadcasting the movie to "paying customers" (which actually isnt DMCA.. that is the standard copyright by the MPAA) and I believe your rights to use parts of things for educational and non-profit are preserved under the DMCA, not eroded.
(IANAL, and its a bit of a confusing law, but thats how I remember reading it.)
Maeryk
Even if this throws out the DMCA, RIAA and the MPAA will just try again with another law to ensure that you are only listening/watching things THEY signed, and making sure you pay WAY to much for them. As long as they have $$ there will be plenty of copyright laws
Bear in mind.. the DMCA was passed, not as an enforcement tool for the RIAA and MPAA, but as protection for virtually all vendors of copyrighted material, and producers of commercial products that dont fall under patent or copyright areas.
The use of it as a strongarm tactic is just a by-product of what was intended to be (and should be, basically) a just and good law. But like many things, it was worded too vaguely, and unfortunately, the number of lawyers who are willing to work for nearly nothing to challenge these things is small (but dedicated and laudible) compared to the number who smell blood in the water and are on corporate retainers.
Maeryk
The naive believe that police would never, ever plant drugs on someone just to set them up. Setting up political dissidents on drug charges did in fact occur many times at one point about 30 years ago. Then it was opposition to US government foreign policy. Perhaps now being too vocal about owning deadly weapons and demanding the right to do so.
Yeah.. but that has been going on for as long as there were police! Nothing has changed in the last three years! And being too vocal about owning weapons? Ruby Ridge and Waco were under Clinton/Reno.
I support the rights of the accused.. and I havent yet seen conclusive evidence that the accused have lost any rights. I have seen it made easier for law enforcement to GATHER evidence.. but I have yet to see a law that says "we can trump up charges out of nothing."
I'm sorry.. but I dont view breaking the law as a cat and mouse game. I also think that the numbers of totally innocent people being "set up" is fairly low. (Remember.. they had to get Al Capone on Income Tax issues.. )
Maeryk
What, you want grenade launchers too? How about a nice cozy Abrahms tank? Or a SCUD launcher? Or why not a nuke? I mean, you have a right to bear arms (although several courts are getting rather fed up by the fact that the ignorant public thinbk that the second amendment grants them the right to bear arms...it doesn't, as the supreme court has had to explain in exasperation many times over: google for it), so why not have a nuke? Or some anthrax? I mean, your government has that, so why shouldn't you?
Uh.. we were given the right to keep and bear arms so that we could resist tyranny. Whether that comes from an outside invader, or from the the government. Remember.. the framers of the constitution had just witnessed exactly what a dedicated group of people with "military weapons" could do to free a tiny country from a huge military force. (timing was really good too.. )
I dont want a tank.. but I do want some clarity in the laws.. and I want to know why a handle makes a gun more dangerous.. or why a 40 round fixed magazine is better than a 40 round removeable magazine.
Im not so concerned with what they "banned".. most of them were cheap import junk anyway.. I'm more concerned with the fact that it pretty much criminalizes millions of gun owners who have broken no laws.
I think you are confused.
Maeryk
Again, tell me a right you have lost. You listed a number of things the Government changed, but you have yet to mention a right you have lost.
In what way have these laws restricted your ability to do what you did before they were enacted?
Now.. as far as this one:
Restricting access to information about corporate pollution and environmental crimes. This would, incidentally, not only prevent private citizens from researching toxins in their backyards but would even restrict the ability of local governments to get information about environmental crimes in their own neighborhoods.
I find that somewhat hard to believe. It is a really nice blurb, phrased to anger the anti-business folks out there, but I would like to know exactly what makes these things so.
(I suspect it has something to do with some sort of top secret place somewhere in Nevada, that some greeny was screaming about, or something.)
Maeryk
It's not like Germany ever threatened the liberties of the average racially pure German who kept their mouth shut (the majority of Germans, in other words).
Yep.. and its not like I have lost a right under Ashcroft/Bush. Course, I'm a law abiding citizen..
so I guess maybe I'm less concerned with rights regarding, say, how I get out of having drugs in my car once I am hauled into jail for it.
Personally, i think I lost a lot more rights under (during) the Clinton administration than I have under B/A. The assault weapons ban/crime bill, specifically.
Maeryk
Now the automated system is sending you a ticket. One that will be near impossible to get out of, because, you know, computers don't make mistakes.
I have driven for 15 years, and had three jobs that required driving 8 hours a day. I have _never_ run a red light to "avoid" someone behind me coming up fast. Have you? It's a straw man, in my opinion.
How many times will the system ticket you if you are speeding? If I am speeding, I get a ticket and then slow down. An automated system would ticket me over and over and over.
Heres a thought.. DONT SPEED! Howsabout that! I _hate_ chugging down the highway at highway speed, then suddenly being down to 45 (where the limit is 55) because some paranoiac at the front saw a cop and is now "making up" for going 70 before.
So now an automated system is trusted more then you are.
This is already a problem in stores. You are leaving a store, then suddenlt some infernal machine is beeping and flashing. So now you are in a position of proving your innocences to the shop keeper*. as a personal note, I will not stop because of that, nor will I let anybody stop me and check my bag as I leave a store. I urge others to do the same.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you dont have anything in the bag you didnt pay for. But I kind of welcome those systems, because I know it keeps prices down. It may not stop _real_ accomplished shoplifters (like the guy I know who used to carry the tool to remove the trackers/dye-packs) but I suspect the majority of thefts are "cause I can" rather than people who are really into shoplifting. (Low number of career shoplifters vs relative high number of people who are kept honest by systems like that).
Maeryk
The sad thing is that there's fewer and fewer people willing to SAY that the Emperor has no clothes these days. Education is a big factor I'm sure, as John Q. Public doesn't have a clue as to what's going on with all the disgusting new laws and acts *cough* Patriot II *cough* that are being (or about to be) passed right under his nose.
You sound like an informed rabble rouser.. Care to tell me a right you have lost? or one you stand to lose? (Not a flame.. an honest question)
Maeryk
What's wrong with Fox news? It appears to be the only outlet providing both conservative and liberal opinions.
You just answered your own question. As far as the left leaners are concerned, anything smacking of "world news" Is simply Bush propaganda. They prefer to watch the pablum that is sanitized to make them feel justified in their wrath.
(This is why I tend to read BBC _first_ and read US news second..)
Maeryk
Yes, I can see that. And what I'm talking about is, how does making war against an islamic nation make the muslims less likely to attack the US, exactly? The primary terrorist threat comes from extremists, not the mainstream of any particular country or government. The idea that violence acts as a deterrant to further violence is simply flawed. Violence begets violence, terror begets terror, war begets war. Fighting for peace is like fsking for chastity
Just as illogical is saying that doing nothign will make them stop. They were unprovoked (as in militarily) attacks. These people are attacking us based out of a religious belief.. and they will keep doing it. The American "now now bigger faster better" way of life has made most americans not realize that terrorists will wait YEARS to make an attack. They are very patient people.
But Doing Nothing is just as bad as attacking, if not worse. At least through attacking we run the chance of making someone think twice.
and I personally, dont think "dont defy us or attempt to pose our will" is such a bad thing to broadcast. If you have the big stick, it is kind of pointless to whittle it to a toothpick!
maeryk
How is it that people so often assume that brutally attacking and killing people is likely to make them less pissed off?
Who said anything about that? Im talkign about Egypt, Syria, other countries we know are up to their ears in terrorist activities, and who would benefit from a successful strike against the US.
Maeryk
So the CIA is Lying...
The Cato institute is somewhat interesting. As think tanks go, anyway. But how do you explain Saddam's chief of evil meeting with Mohammed Atta several times in Czech? Chance coincidence?
Maeryk
I am a citizen of one of those countries. By polls 80% of our population is opposed to the war. It is not a coincidence that the supporting countries are relatively small and poor. Their governments have been easier to bribe and pressure. The only country in the worlds where the population is supporting the war is USA, and that's because of the propaganda in mainstream media (the same people who support the war, also believe that it was Saddam Hussein who organized 9/11, which is clearly a nonsense).
Even in UK, 70% of people are against the war.
Never said he was responsible.. but he is most definately involved. I have already cited the proof. And a lot of that is from the UK.. not from Pres Bush's "propaganda". (Which I take to mean any press other than leftist, which you dont agree with).
Wrong again. The stock market is just climbing out of the hole where it fell because of the uncertainty. Now that the end is near, we're just restoring the equilibrium.
With the longest sustained gain since the 80s? I dont think you understand economics as well as you think you do. Do you think the huge boom while Clinton was in office was due to Clinton?
There's a huge difference between ending a war, and starting one, hence the the protests.
By some accounts, we are ending a war that was started 12 years ago and never finished. Personally, i think the human rights violations _alone_ justify what we are doing.
Iraq is a secular country, and Saddam Hussein is certainly not an islamic crackpot. He has done absolutely nothing to the US that would justify attacking his country and killing hundreds of thousands of people (the first Gulf war killed 100-200000 people and it was mostly in deserts, it is going to be mostly in cities this time).
So the fact that his "special military" have been beheading women on the street suspected of prostitution with swords (the beheading, not the prostitution) is not a sign of an islamic crackpot? His continued railings put him right up there with Kublai Khan (no relation to Shaka or Sing Noon), except he doesnt have the force to back it up. Wanna tell me where you got the figures for "numbers dead" during the gulf war please? If you tell me they are from Iraq, I will simply laugh, and point out that this is a man who saves up dead babies for months so he can stage "funerals" for propaganda purposes, and, strangely, has all baby milk information printed in english in a country where it is hardly spoken.
Maeryk
This is hardly a reason to go to war. There is no reason why someone is his own country should not be allowed to tell the US to 'stick it' once and a while. Additionally the demand that Hussein leave Iraq is insane.
Oh great guru, I have seen the light! YOu are correct.. a man who gassed his own people, and practiced genocide against another, and has consistantly warred with his neighbors to the point of requiring coalition action should be allowed to reign unchecked. And the Holy UN, which imposed sanctions on him 12 years ago and now refuses to even honor or look at those sanctions which have been broken time and again, and refuses to take any action other than followign a rather scripted show of giving "neutral inspectors" things to see but keeping them away from certain areas. You are right.. there is no reason for war here.. let him continue beheading women on the street, and imprisoning and torturing people for 14 years because they sold a roll of film to an undercover military agent.
I agree that Hussein probably has ties to what America has defined as terrorism, but so what? How many puppet regimes have we propped up? How many American dollars buy weaponry for foreign nations as we watch the bloodshed from afar. How many countries must we occupy before we can truly feel safe about the state of the world? All of them?
You counter-argue against yourself in this statement. If we "occupy" a country, we are evil.. because we are taking them over. If we hand the country over to the best pro-tem government we can find or allow to be created from the residents, and arm them so they can _keep_ their country (which is the real issue in that part of the world) we are also evil when we find out they have gone bad. (See also, Shah, Ayatollah, Hussein, Noriega.)
Let me ask you this.. how many american dollars have gone in the last 12 years for humanitarian aid to Iraq, and oil-for-food programs, only to watch it taken by the republican guard and used to feed the military, not the people? How many
"innocent civilians" have died because he wanted to test a germ weapon on someone, and had only his own people to do it with? How many people has he run through a plastic-shredding machine designed for recycling?
There are many good reasons to go to war. But one of the _most_ asinine arguments against this particular war I have seen so far is that "innocent civilians" may get hurt. As a great number of ex-pat iraqis have said, even during a war, life would be better than it was under Hussein.
It saddens me that this once great nation has now become the school yard bully of our humble ball of mud.
We arent the bully. the UN is the bully. Apparently out of its ass it pulls decisions about what countries can mass murder their citizens or other countries citizens, and who cannot. Once it has decided that, it sends in nations with their hands tied to "keep the peace". Or it refuses to enforce some embargoes
because key nations choose to get around it, but enforces others that end up destroying entire cultures and ways of life.
"we" cannot move against china. We dont have the manpower. Nor does the rest of Europe want to, due to close proximity and the chance of ass-kicking they would recieve. Of course, the way to stop it would be to bankrupt them by not buying their crappy products.. but good ole "Pro USA" Wal-Mart continues to sell crappy Chinese products at a much lower rate than comparable american products, meanwhile bemoaning the loss of jobs and manufacturing.
If 1/10th of the "protesters" realized that what they hate about this country is entirely within their control to fix (The job situation, the economy, "big business screwing the little guy") and put half as much effort into fixing it, rather than making misspelled peace signs or making themselves throw up in a federal building in California, I would have a lot more respect for their cause. But as it is, I view about half of the loudest ones as lobotomized morons who believe everything MTV has to say and could read the WSJ if they were forced to because the big words would throw them off.
Maeryk
Where's any proof that Iraq has funded Terrorism?
areal photos of camp
terrorist links
more ammo
washington times article
links to Al Qaeda
Is that enough? or do you need more?
maeryk
Umm, perhaps the reason they can't explain why we're truly at war, is because they can't comprehend ANY good reason to launch a massive, unprovoked invasion, against the clear will of the international community and against international law, against a country that poses little threat to the country launching the attack?
Dude.. 45 countries have supported us. thats three TIMES the number who would have had to vote positive in the UN. Of those who dont, only a handful really matter. get the facts straight. (And realize several of them are the neighboring states..w hich brings us to... )
I have to admit I can't explain why we're truly at war either, economicly it will be disasterous, it has ruined the international diplomatic ties the US once had, and it makes the citizens of the Uninted States more at risk to future terrorist attacks and in the worst case senario could start World War III
Economically, its already helping. Looked at the stock exchange lately? The International Diplomatic Ties basically mean we are the enforcement arm of the UN when they want us, but god forbid they take our feeligns into acount when their cushy oil deals with Iraq may go up in smoke. Where were all these protestors when Clinton got us into Bosnia? For far fewer crimes against humanity than Hussein has racked up, we are over there to this day!.
Come, come, since you're so ready to critisize others for being unable to explain the cause of this war, explain the real reason we are at war, instead of alluding to it in an ambigious manner...
The real reason is threefold, at least. One) Hussein will use the weapons he is undoubtedly building against Israel soon enough. That is a doomsday scenario you dont want to see. Two) He (hussein) has been thumbing his nose at us for 12 years, ignoring our sanctions, and recently, openly mouthing off. THere is little doubt that he has ties to the terrorist activities of the last several years, at least in those who actually read the press, and dont necessarily swallow the leftist jargon hook, line, and sinker. And because we cannot continue to get black eyes and NOT retaliate. The Sept 11 attack was a black eye.. but not nearly the black eye left on us by Hussein continuing his reign of death and destruction in Iraq after we supposedly stopped him 12 years ago. Even Colin Powell says it was a mistake not to finish the job when we had the chance.
If we leave the US as a huge target that never retaliates, there is _nothing_ stopping every islamic crackpot in the world from taking a shot at us. They know we will do nothing. Bush promised to take after Afghanistan and any other country who harbors, funds, or makes possible terrorists/isms, and unlike our previous president, he is following through on his promise.
Those reasons, along with the very real threat that he has nuclear weapons, are the reasons we are at war. (And no, the nuclear weaposn are not a threat to us.. but if you pay any attention to the international politics you quote above, using them against Israel WOULD start world war 3.)
Maeryk
I am an out of work web designer. I have a talent that is shared by thousands upon thousands of twelve year olds sitting in their parents basement. The only jobs I can find with "web design" in them are things I dont want to do. I guess I will start a website whining about it.
Oh give me a BREAK! Life sucks. You were probably getting paid an exhorbitant rate to do a job that just about anyone with half a brain and a handful of good manuals could do, and now, instead of moving out of a dead field, you are bitching and whining that the few jobs available arent what you want. Waah.
Get over it. Go get a _real_ job. Dig ditches. Put roofs on houses. The housing industry is in a huge boom.. I'm sure someone near you could use a dogsbody to carry things around or pick up construction scrap, and pay you a decent wage for a days work.
*feh*
Maeryk
Other countries have constitutions
Great. Then let those other countries observe them when dealing with _their_ military procedures or judicial processes. I'm not talking
about other countries here.
(Im not much of a globalist, as you will no doubt come to realize).
Those people are suspects. They might not have done anything.
Then again, they might have. They might have been responsible for setting up the act of killing over 3000 innocent civilians in a few hours a year and a half ago. Sorry. They arent being terribly mistreated. They are being released if it is proven they are not involved. And it is far better treatment than was given to the people they were in control of or the military arm over in the country they came from. They should really count their blessings.
Don't forget.. the "rights" of the "subhumans" (women, christians, jews, etc) that we have in this country are one of the things the fundamentalist nutbark muslims are pissed off at us for in the first place. Why apply something to them that they hate so?
Maeryk
The US government funded Taliban and Saddam a couple of decades ago, and now they employ similar tactics used in repressive regimes (imprisonment without due judicial process). It's just a different matter that the guys wear suits and look cool and the new networks pander to them.
_what_ judicial due process? Due process is an element of the constitution. It applies _only_ to american citizens. If you arent an american, you dont automatically get full constitutional protection. This is not necessarily a bad thing.. this is why "diplomatic immunity" exists.
I love the fact that pinko liberals are whining about the "rights" of people who have been opressing others in their own countries, even to the point of mass genocide in some instances, yet tend to ignore the gravity of the situation of what these people did for a living before ending up in camp Xray.
The rest of your post rings somewhat true.. to I dont really think the military hawks stand to benefit a heck of a lot. Dow and Corning and Boeing might, and the news networks definately will.. but I dont think the military is a "profit machine" for those involved directly in the war.
Maeryk
Nutrasweet aka Aspartame IS safe
h tm
http://www.oralchelation.com/technical/MSDS/p7.
Go read that MSDS sheet then come back and tell me it is safe. (Yeah.. I know.. the MSDS for Oxygen says it is dangerous too.. and it is. I defy anyone to sit around and breathe pure oxygen).
Now.. I read a few of the "aspartame facts" on the official aspartame page.. I love one quote in particular "In fact, due to the way it is metabolized, it never reaches the organs".
Now, funny that a completely independent study has found that use of aspartame leads to a buildup of formaldehyde in the brain and other organs. Hmmm.
Wonder if maybe Monsanto shoved it through FDA testing?
Maeryk
they're all bullshit too!
Fibro-Myalgia most certainly is not bullshit.
As for ADD/ADHD.. I really hope you are blessed with a kid who has this "bullshit" affliction. And I really hope you try to beat it out of him like my teachers did.
Maeryk
While I purchased this house because of location and affordability, a lot of the new construction techniques concern me. My brother build a brand-new house and within a year there was mold growing inside of the walls (mositure trapped due to the plastic wrap put on them).
As someone pointed out, the really good housewraps prevent this, as they tend to allow moisture through one-way. but unfortunately, a lot of people dont ask what type is specced when they build a house.. and even worse, in these "plunk in 200 identical house" developments, it is almost guaranteed the builder is cutting corners everywhere he can. (Even on the place my mom built, which was close to a 250K construction job, even though we did all the wallboarding, insulation, wiring, and plumbing), the alleged "builder" totally ignored contractual requests for things, and waved them away as "no-one really does that.. you dont need it." (yeah.. he's a crappy buildier.. but came highly highly reccomended by others who had used him, which kinda makes me think the "others" looked at the blueprints, hemmed, hawwed, pulled their chins like they knew what they were talking about, and were then "happy" with the result.)
What I do know is that the floors squeak (he didnt glue and screw like we asked, he just air-nailed) none of the wall frames are square to ANYTHING, not even CLOSE. (We found this out installing the interior doors.. the amount of shimming we had to do to get to plumb was upwards of half an inch over a six foot run on some of them.) The windows dont open and close right because the framing isnt square.. etc.
But on the mold thing.. I dont know how dangerous mold really is, to people who dont have a mold allergy (fungus allergy). THeres mold _everywhere_, really.
Maeryk
I hate nutrasweet, but are you sure that it wasn't caffiene that was causing the headaches? The same thing happens to me (headaches, stomach aches, etc) when I drink caffinated drinks.
Certain. I drink Dew by the gallon, coffee, tea, pepsi and coke.. (the regualar sugar/corn sweetener kind) and have no problems whatsoever..
One bit of nutrasweet.. WHAM!
Also have that problem with really cheap domestic beers.. bud, coors, etc.. instant headache.. I can only suspect it has something to do with the sugars created by really fast really cheap fermentation. (Which is basically the byproduct of nutrasweet anyway.. alcohol and formaldehyde).
Maeryk