Exactly, which in the case of the car, is the basis for it's purchase. On the other hand, the only contract at the point of sale of Neverwinter Nights, is the verbal agreement with the seller 'I pay you $39.99, you sell me this copy of Neverwinter Nights'
I haven't entered into any other contract, and I DO NOT NEED TO in order to use the software.
In the case of the car, you have my signature on a contract with the dealer of the car, 'I agree to give you $500 a month, you agree to give me use of this vehicle', but, in order for it to have those terms, there needs to be a contract, agreed to by both parties, to those terms. In the case of the PURCHASE of software at a retail store, there is no such contract. I don't go in to lease Neverwinter Nights, I go in to purchase a copy of Neverwinter Nights, and, having done so in good faith, there are NO LIMITS beyond those of copyright law as to how I can use Neverwinter Nights (well, that are enforcable by the creator of the software).
Examing my recent purchase of a copy of Neverwinter Nights, I see no indication at time of SALE that I purchased anything other than what was included in the box. Use of what is included within the bounds of copyright is not something they can restrict without a contract, and, at the time of sale, I have not entered into a contract with Bioware, Atari or any other of the parties that created Neverwinter Nights. I have become the buyer in a buyer seller relationship with Gamestop, in which I exchanged money for the Neverwinter Nights box and it's contents. There is no indication that the transaction was anything else, and therefore IT WAS IN FACT A PURCHASE OF PHYSICAL GOODS.
Now, software not being an entity into which contracts, so long as I do not distribute it and limit my copies of it for my own personal use within the bounds of fair use under the copyright act I may do anything I please with it, including, as part of it's use, installing it on my computer and running it. I may jokingly click 'I agree' while verbally saying 'This is a joke, why would I agree to this you stupid piece of software'. But, so long as I do not tell Bioware (or any of the other possible interested parties) that I agree and do not utilise any of the variouse valuable facilities I might have accsess to if I did in fact agree, I have not in fact agreed to the contract embodied in the EULA.
Now, is this particular case, I am likely to agree to the EULA so as to take advantage of the valuable consideration offered in the form of patches to the game and the use of GameSpy's servers for the playing of the game in an online forum. But, I didn't have to enter into that agreement in order to use the software in the absence of said consideration (such as playing the single player game) and in fact, did so in the absence of EVER communicating with Bioware (or any of the other possibly involved parties) as to my acceptance or lack of acceptance of an contract or license agreement. They don't have the exclusive right to authorise me to use the software, I neither need a license or their permission to use the software, I only need it to use their infrastructure and accsess other considerations provided on the basis of me having accepted the license.
Ok, maybe I'm off in left field, but given that normal atmospheric diffusion of the beams doesn't count as observation, whats to stop someone eavesdropping the beam scatter and side blead at a greater distance than the receiver (and thus, temporally after they have received and decoded the signal)? The only idea I've got is that it somehow requires >50% of the full beam to get an uncorrupted reading, but that doesn't jibe with them using amplification at both ends (or am I missreading the article?) as that implies that their receiver doesn't have enough fidelity to pick it up without amplification. Someone with some idea of the actual basis fro this care to enlighten me (and then explain how, if it can detect observation off of atmospheric scatter, how this doesn't produce FTL comm via selectivly observing and not observing the beam?)
Be uterly and completly screwed as I'm not currently getting any money:)
But yah, the "If you could do anything at all, what would you do?" my answer was, "Conquor the galaxy by force of arms." it always got rather dumbfounded looks so they add qualifiers, "Uhm, limited to our current tech base" and of course the obviouse response is, "Hire someone to build a fleet of Orion class ships and go colonize the asteroid belt. If that turns out well get a really big distributed array to look for some habitable planets and try slowboating it in a really big asteroid habitat." it eventually gets down to the one you posed, at which point it's "Well, if I'm not going to be getting anything for it and don't actually have any extra resources... Uhm, well, that describes my current situation perfectly, so, given the barriars present what do you think I'd like to be doing?" which is to say, "What I'm doing right now."
Err, did we read the same book? The point wasn't that the junk portion of the genome was designed externally but that it was an evolved designing entity engaging in a very large scale distributed genetic computing exercise. In other words, over a long period the genome montecarloed several possibilites, recorded those that had benefits for specific enviromental conditions (though no nescisarrily in general) and cataloged the variouse design options until certain enviromental and historical conditions triggered the radical expression of a new template.
It's probably not how things actually work but is plausible emergent behavior for a complex system that, though unlikely to develop, seems likely to maintain it's own existence and be of survival benefit to the species that developed it.
You're missing the point, it isn't people going delete happy with spam, it's when I get a meg of spam overnight and that fills up my quota on the mail partition that it's EXACTLY like a junk fax impeding important faxs. I litterally never receive email due to spam filling up my meager quota. (Well, on one acount anyways, my primary is still spam free)
Re:Headline is Wrong - Not White Hat
on
WarTalking Arrest
·
· Score: 1
But it wasn't an open door, it was a sign blaring loudly to the world, "come in, we are open"
You can't get hit for tresspassing when you are invited in, do not have to bypass any security to get in and leave when asked.
It's a wireless network broadcasting in the clear and responding in the afirmative to anyone that asks, may I come in?
The decision was made Tuesday, after a computer security analyst demonstrated to Steve Jennings, head of the county's Central Technology Department, and the Houston Chronicle how the system could be compromised
Jennings said he was concerned that the system could be accessed from the outside and that he wanted to learn more about the problem before alerting Bacarisse
Using his cached password IS hacking the server. They don't have permission to accsess the hosting companies computers in that way, which is unauthorised accsess, which, thanks to the PATRIOT act (damned draconian piece of crap), can end up being life in prison. Now, there may be dificulties in extradition but that doesn't stop them (either the department or the individuals) being tried in absentia and make dealing with US entities VERY difficult.
The point isn't that the contract was violated it is that the contract is the only thing giving anyone other than the hosting company the right to do anything with an acount on their computers. The Italian government has no such contract. Under Italian law it may be permissable to break into a third parties system to do things. Under US law, (which are the ones that matters as thats where the servers are and where the third party that is being attacked is) it is a criminal offense and allows for civil redress.
This is especially true if the contract with the original site maintainer is void as then he doesn't even have the right to use the hosting companies computers, never mind the Italian police!
The point is NOT that someone broke a law involving speech. The point is that the Itallian government tresspassed on the equipment of a third party in an illegal manner. They committed terrorist acts (per the PATRIOT act, bleh) against a US corporation on US soil. I don't give a damn why they did it or weather they had the right to do it to an Italian citizen in Italy. They attacked a US entity on US soil, they assaulted the property of our citizens and broke our laws while said property was on our soil.
They are no better than vigilantes and should be treated as such.
The crime wasn't just perpetrated against the original creator of the website (whom the Itallian government, unfortunatly, may have the ability to censor), it was perpetrated against the hosting company. Last I checked they still owned their equipment, ne? Last I checked most contracts for hosting are rather clear about who is authorised to login and make changes and the extent to which they are authorised to make changes. So, a crime was perpatrated against a US company and it's computer assets by members of the Itallian police. Those crimes have both civil and criminal remadies, I urge the hosting company to look into persuing a case against the Itallian police (I also urge other countries to do the same against the US government when it assaults their citizens and companies).
Now I guess I better go email the hosting company.
You are missing the fact that the patent predates the standerd, and that C-Cube Microsystems independently created an algorithm that aparently infringes on the patent.
The final bit of this agrevating concoction is that Forgent recently aquired the previouse owners of the patent.
So, to sum up: JPEG isn't prior art for this patent, the patent significantly predates the JPEG standerd. The patent was applied for in 1986 and issued in 1987. The patent is probably valid. JPEG probably does infringe on it. Patents do not need to be defended to remain valid (though you may not be able to pick up damages for the entire infringing period if you weren't defending the patent)
Just as firestone tires (or any tires for that matter) are not expected to survive anti vehicle mines and spike strips, neither is IIS expected to survive Code Red attacks nor other cracking attempts.
Ok, maybe I'm crazy, but wouldn't any attempt to to enforce the patent against anyone using it in code derived from theirs via the GPL mean that they NEVER were compliant with the GPL to begin with and can be sued for copyright infringement by anyone who owns the copyright to the work they derived their version of Linux from? Part of clause 7 is "For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.", so, in order to be compliant with the GPL they must 'permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly', so, if they later decide to change the royalty free nature of their patent (with regards to the Program) that then they NEVER had the right to distribute it in the first place.
How does this have anything to do with copyright? Claiming that you said something you did not say or support something you do not is either libel, slander or fraud (depending on the context, medium and consequences).
Whether or not you have any control over the work in question has no bearing on whether someone can or cannot be held acountable for fraud...
They do write analysis systems, and both me and my brother trigger them all the time. I'm not a very good player usually, I'm lucky if I can stay even. But sometimes I just zone out and solo two or three rounds in a row and get kicked. He's good all the time, he knows the levels well enough that he snipes hiding places pretty much at random, killing people he not only couldn't know about but did not in fact know about. He pretty much can't play on any server he isn't admin on anymore.
I should be allowed to make an emulator, with my own resources (both development and hardware) to use the games I have purchased from Blizzard since their servers suck and keep dropping me and my friends.
I'm not taking anything from them, I am just choosing not to use a service that they currently provide for free.
This is exactly like building a competing VCR (server) to play the legally purchased video tapes (games). Just because some people might use my VCR to play copied tapes doesn't mean I should be banned from producing my VCR.
The microwave background radiation is light. Light, due to it traveling at the speed of light, HAS NO FRAME OF REFERENCE. Accelerating with respect to the direction of a light source just changes the apparent frequancy of the light. So, with some sources you can find the frame of referance of the source if their are emission lines in the light. One of the properties of the cosmic background radiation is that it doesn't have any spectral lines from it's source so you can't find the frame of reference of it's 'source' (and more properly, there isn't any one frame of referance for the source in the standerd model as the source is an expanding universe of REALLY HOT STUFF)
Slashdot Mirror
On further examination, there is such text, it was however, underneath a stick on pricetag barcode/antitheft thingy... Now thats amusing.
Exactly, which in the case of the car, is the basis for it's purchase. On the other hand, the only contract at the point of sale of Neverwinter Nights, is the verbal agreement with the seller 'I pay you $39.99, you sell me this copy of Neverwinter Nights'
I haven't entered into any other contract, and I DO NOT NEED TO in order to use the software.
In the case of the car, you have my signature on a contract with the dealer of the car, 'I agree to give you $500 a month, you agree to give me use of this vehicle', but, in order for it to have those terms, there needs to be a contract, agreed to by both parties, to those terms. In the case of the PURCHASE of software at a retail store, there is no such contract. I don't go in to lease Neverwinter Nights, I go in to purchase a copy of Neverwinter Nights, and, having done so in good faith, there are NO LIMITS beyond those of copyright law as to how I can use Neverwinter Nights (well, that are enforcable by the creator of the software).
Examing my recent purchase of a copy of Neverwinter Nights, I see no indication at time of SALE that I purchased anything other than what was included in the box. Use of what is included within the bounds of copyright is not something they can restrict without a contract, and, at the time of sale, I have not entered into a contract with Bioware, Atari or any other of the parties that created Neverwinter Nights. I have become the buyer in a buyer seller relationship with Gamestop, in which I exchanged money for the Neverwinter Nights box and it's contents. There is no indication that the transaction was anything else, and therefore IT WAS IN FACT A PURCHASE OF PHYSICAL GOODS.
Now, software not being an entity into which contracts, so long as I do not distribute it and limit my copies of it for my own personal use within the bounds of fair use under the copyright act I may do anything I please with it, including, as part of it's use, installing it on my computer and running it. I may jokingly click 'I agree' while verbally saying 'This is a joke, why would I agree to this you stupid piece of software'. But, so long as I do not tell Bioware (or any of the other possible interested parties) that I agree and do not utilise any of the variouse valuable facilities I might have accsess to if I did in fact agree, I have not in fact agreed to the contract embodied in the EULA.
Now, is this particular case, I am likely to agree to the EULA so as to take advantage of the valuable consideration offered in the form of patches to the game and the use of GameSpy's servers for the playing of the game in an online forum. But, I didn't have to enter into that agreement in order to use the software in the absence of said consideration (such as playing the single player game) and in fact, did so in the absence of EVER communicating with Bioware (or any of the other possibly involved parties) as to my acceptance or lack of acceptance of an contract or license agreement. They don't have the exclusive right to authorise me to use the software, I neither need a license or their permission to use the software, I only need it to use their infrastructure and accsess other considerations provided on the basis of me having accepted the license.
Thats pretty much it.
Ok, maybe I'm off in left field, but given that normal atmospheric diffusion of the beams doesn't count as observation, whats to stop someone eavesdropping the beam scatter and side blead at a greater distance than the receiver (and thus, temporally after they have received and decoded the signal)? The only idea I've got is that it somehow requires >50% of the full beam to get an uncorrupted reading, but that doesn't jibe with them using amplification at both ends (or am I missreading the article?) as that implies that their receiver doesn't have enough fidelity to pick it up without amplification. Someone with some idea of the actual basis fro this care to enlighten me (and then explain how, if it can detect observation off of atmospheric scatter, how this doesn't produce FTL comm via selectivly observing and not observing the beam?)
Be uterly and completly screwed as I'm not currently getting any money :)
But yah, the "If you could do anything at all, what would you do?" my answer was, "Conquor the galaxy by force of arms." it always got rather dumbfounded looks so they add qualifiers, "Uhm, limited to our current tech base" and of course the obviouse response is, "Hire someone to build a fleet of Orion class ships and go colonize the asteroid belt. If that turns out well get a really big distributed array to look for some habitable planets and try slowboating it in a really big asteroid habitat." it eventually gets down to the one you posed, at which point it's "Well, if I'm not going to be getting anything for it and don't actually have any extra resources... Uhm, well, that describes my current situation perfectly, so, given the barriars present what do you think I'd like to be doing?" which is to say, "What I'm doing right now."
Err, did we read the same book? The point wasn't that the junk portion of the genome was designed externally but that it was an evolved designing entity engaging in a very large scale distributed genetic computing exercise. In other words, over a long period the genome montecarloed several possibilites, recorded those that had benefits for specific enviromental conditions (though no nescisarrily in general) and cataloged the variouse design options until certain enviromental and historical conditions triggered the radical expression of a new template.
It's probably not how things actually work but is plausible emergent behavior for a complex system that, though unlikely to develop, seems likely to maintain it's own existence and be of survival benefit to the species that developed it.
You're missing the point, it isn't people going delete happy with spam, it's when I get a meg of spam overnight and that fills up my quota on the mail partition that it's EXACTLY like a junk fax impeding important faxs. I litterally never receive email due to spam filling up my meager quota. (Well, on one acount anyways, my primary is still spam free)
But it wasn't an open door, it was a sign blaring loudly to the world, "come in, we are open"
You can't get hit for tresspassing when you are invited in, do not have to bypass any security to get in and leave when asked.
It's a wireless network broadcasting in the clear and responding in the afirmative to anyone that asks, may I come in?
Doesn't matter, he had permission:
The decision was made Tuesday, after a computer security analyst demonstrated to Steve Jennings, head of the county's Central Technology Department, and the Houston Chronicle how the system could be compromised
Jennings said he was concerned that the system could be accessed from the outside and that he wanted to learn more about the problem before alerting Bacarisse
Using his cached password IS hacking the server. They don't have permission to accsess the hosting companies computers in that way, which is unauthorised accsess, which, thanks to the PATRIOT act (damned draconian piece of crap), can end up being life in prison. Now, there may be dificulties in extradition but that doesn't stop them (either the department or the individuals) being tried in absentia and make dealing with US entities VERY difficult.
The point isn't that the contract was violated it is that the contract is the only thing giving anyone other than the hosting company the right to do anything with an acount on their computers. The Italian government has no such contract. Under Italian law it may be permissable to break into a third parties system to do things. Under US law, (which are the ones that matters as thats where the servers are and where the third party that is being attacked is) it is a criminal offense and allows for civil redress.
This is especially true if the contract with the original site maintainer is void as then he doesn't even have the right to use the hosting companies computers, never mind the Italian police!
The point is NOT that someone broke a law involving speech. The point is that the Itallian government tresspassed on the equipment of a third party in an illegal manner. They committed terrorist acts (per the PATRIOT act, bleh) against a US corporation on US soil. I don't give a damn why they did it or weather they had the right to do it to an Italian citizen in Italy. They attacked a US entity on US soil, they assaulted the property of our citizens and broke our laws while said property was on our soil.
They are no better than vigilantes and should be treated as such.
The crime wasn't just perpetrated against the original creator of the website (whom the Itallian government, unfortunatly, may have the ability to censor), it was perpetrated against the hosting company. Last I checked they still owned their equipment, ne? Last I checked most contracts for hosting are rather clear about who is authorised to login and make changes and the extent to which they are authorised to make changes. So, a crime was perpatrated against a US company and it's computer assets by members of the Itallian police. Those crimes have both civil and criminal remadies, I urge the hosting company to look into persuing a case against the Itallian police (I also urge other countries to do the same against the US government when it assaults their citizens and companies).
Now I guess I better go email the hosting company.
You are missing the fact that the patent predates the standerd, and that C-Cube Microsystems independently created an algorithm that aparently infringes on the patent.
The final bit of this agrevating concoction is that Forgent recently aquired the previouse owners of the patent.
So, to sum up: JPEG isn't prior art for this patent, the patent significantly predates the JPEG standerd. The patent was applied for in 1986 and issued in 1987. The patent is probably valid. JPEG probably does infringe on it. Patents do not need to be defended to remain valid (though you may not be able to pick up damages for the entire infringing period if you weren't defending the patent)
He's a nut job that doesn't understand GR.
gravity propogates at the speed of light but contains velocity and acceleration dependent terms (as it would have to to satisfy relativity)
Just as firestone tires (or any tires for that matter) are not expected to survive anti vehicle mines and spike strips, neither is IIS expected to survive Code Red attacks nor other cracking attempts.
Ok, maybe I'm crazy, but wouldn't any attempt to to enforce the patent against anyone using it in code derived from theirs via the GPL mean that they NEVER were compliant with the GPL to begin with and can be sued for copyright infringement by anyone who owns the copyright to the work they derived their version of Linux from? Part of clause 7 is "For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.", so, in order to be compliant with the GPL they must 'permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly', so, if they later decide to change the royalty free nature of their patent (with regards to the Program) that then they NEVER had the right to distribute it in the first place.
How does this have anything to do with copyright? Claiming that you said something you did not say or support something you do not is either libel, slander or fraud (depending on the context, medium and consequences).
Whether or not you have any control over the work in question has no bearing on whether someone can or cannot be held acountable for fraud...
It does make it right if charging people proportionally would make everyone pay more without actually increasing the profit margin of the company.
vanFlandern is rather missleading.
y .h tml
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/alt.mail/cosmolog
They do write analysis systems, and both me and my brother trigger them all the time. I'm not a very good player usually, I'm lucky if I can stay even. But sometimes I just zone out and solo two or three rounds in a row and get kicked. He's good all the time, he knows the levels well enough that he snipes hiding places pretty much at random, killing people he not only couldn't know about but did not in fact know about. He pretty much can't play on any server he isn't admin on anymore.
Don't buy WC3! Blizard doesn't won't you as a customer as their maliciouse atack on BNETD has demonstrated!
I should be allowed to make an emulator, with my own resources (both development and hardware) to use the games I have purchased from Blizzard since their servers suck and keep dropping me and my friends.
I'm not taking anything from them, I am just choosing not to use a service that they currently provide for free.
This is exactly like building a competing VCR (server) to play the legally purchased video tapes (games). Just because some people might use my VCR to play copied tapes doesn't mean I should be banned from producing my VCR.
The microwave background radiation is light. Light, due to it traveling at the speed of light, HAS NO FRAME OF REFERENCE. Accelerating with respect to the direction of a light source just changes the apparent frequancy of the light. So, with some sources you can find the frame of referance of the source if their are emission lines in the light. One of the properties of the cosmic background radiation is that it doesn't have any spectral lines from it's source so you can't find the frame of reference of it's 'source' (and more properly, there isn't any one frame of referance for the source in the standerd model as the source is an expanding universe of REALLY HOT STUFF)
American Flight 587 out of JFK to the Dominican Republic down in Queens :( Good luck to everyone.