But seriously, if you've bought something with Windows DRM, you could spent a few minutes searching around on Bittorrent and download a DRM-free version of it.
IANAL etc.
But to me there is a clear distinction -- in one case, you're manipulating a file that you acquired (likely legally, since it's DRM'd). In the other case, someone is distributing a file that is a copyrighted work -- not fair use.
I don't want to get into the whole debate about whether copyright is Evil (tm), but from a personal liability point-of-view, I'd think it also much easier to justify fair use when you remove the DRM yourself than if you acquire a DRM-free version via bittorrent. Maybe not easier to justify it to **AA lawyers, but at least easier to justify it to yourself:)
It's not to cover the costs of recycling, it's to cover administrative costs and to act as a disincentive for people to return defective merchandise.
This is just like a 'restocking fee' when you return a mattress, or any other consumer good -- they can't call it a 'restocking fee' however, since it's not being put back on the shelf (at least not without refurbishing).
Is this going to get a wider release or is their market targeting pretty squarely focused on people soft on piracy? It's a little bit like making an anti-STD video for people who never get laid.
Hey, why don't you forward links to the movies to friends/family members/acquaintances who might not be aware of the 'other side'?
Or even burn a copy gfor those who are a little less web-savvy? Maybe even send a copy to your local and state legislators, along with a letter about why they need to watch the film? I know I will be.
Thank you for your timely suggestion regarding the future fate of Microsoft. Based on your idea, we have calculated that maximal profits over the next 10-year period can be achieved by doing exactly as you suggest.
And of course, even that is considered long-term planning in today's corporate world.
Sincerely, Preston Winfield CEO, AAA LBO Company #2
I like the comparison of Best Picture Oscar and Snakes on a Plane. Seriously though, I wouldn't be surprised if that film actually wins best film.
I'd like to thank the motherf***ing Academy for this got-damn award. I'd also like to thank my motherf***ing wife, my motherf***ing agent, and the motherf***ing director.
It's not about stock analysis. It's about Sony's plethora of recent screw-ups finally catching up to them on the Street. It's about recognizing that there is now the perception in the financial world that things aren't quite right in the house of Sony.
Now they will have to have an entire U-Haul truck rented to store all the hobo corpses.
Storage? Who said anything about storage? Leftovers get sent to the food pantry -- we need to make sure the specimens for our next harvest are well-fed.
as opposed to 6%-8% in a month (or a year) which is what most "safe" investments claim.
Actually, no "safe" investment would claim even 6-8% annually. They can talk about past performance all they want, but they'll never be stupid enough to even project a figure... and all the quotes of past history will include the disclaimer that past performance is not a guarantor of future performance.
So they get about the same return as relatively safe investments and all it takes is a whole bunch of extra work and risk.
RTFA. That's not an annual rate of return, thats a one to two day rate of return. 4.9% was the average 1-day rate, I don't care to do the math right now, but over the course of a year (holidays and weekends excluded), that compounds to a gajillion percent.
Nope. I think TMM picked up his ball and went home because everyone was bashing him for formulaic google-then-wikipedia-link karma-whoring. I could be wrong (and probably am).
but I've watched the UK government pour millions of public money into open source products that would have been beter spent on licences for comercial ones.
Sure, but in the long run, maybe we'll all be better off for the money government invests in OSS. Kind of like a subsidy for a very important but fledgling industry.
Wait, scratch the "kind of like" from that last sentence fragment.
After having read all of the coverage here on Slashdot, I'm confident Sony will make this up with the overwhelming future success of the PS3.
I know your post was a tongue-in-cheek, but it brings up an interesting (in my mind) point about Sony's profitability in re: the PS3:
Since Sony will be losing cash with each PS3 produced and sold (in the US, not sure about Japan or the UK or Europe)... wouldn't lagging demand and lower production of the PS3 be beneficial to their short-term interests? At what sales volume does the market consider PS3 saturation high enough to make Blu-Ray viable as a revenue generator?
Jeez, even customer loyalty schemes are an equivalent in meatspace. There's a lot of prior art on this sort of thing.
Since when has meatspace prior art prevented a software patent from being approved? "It's just like $physicalprocess, except it's on a computer."
And as for the implications of a social networking site downgrading service to nebulously-defined 'bad' users, the effect is quite simple -- you lose those users to your competition. Good-bye clicks, good-bye revenue. Though, of course, 'bad' users could be those that don't demonstrably make money for the site by clicking on ads...
WTF is this - the "Mad Money" show? I thought 2001 finished off the day traders.
Huh? The comment about stock price was made (I believe) to indicate that there is a growing concern in the financial sector about Sony's future profitability -- which is something no one on Slashdot should be surprised about, given the kind of coverage we tend to see here[1]. It demonstrates that the Street is as aware of Sony's myriad problems as your typical non-fanboy nerd.
Also, 2001 killed off the marginally unsuccessful day traders -- there are still plenty of successful ones around[2].
[1] Whether that's because there is some submitter/editorial bias here, or because Sony has caused reality to be 'biased' against them, I'm not sure.
[2] As evidenced by the still-increasing volume (June 24, 2005 holds the record for highest daily volume of traded shares) -- 2001 saw the NYSE hit 2 billion shares traded in a single day; in 2005 we hit over 3 billion in a single day. This is not driven by long-term investors.
I wish folks would stop using that word and find another one. "Harvest" gets a lot of folks riled up and gives them the impression that people are going to be farmed (or whatever) for their parts.
Maybe you misunderstand how the political process works wrt Fundamentalists here in the US. Fundies like Pat Robertson and Lou Dobbs energize their followers through the use of wedge issues. They are often helped along by political strategists such as Rove. This is how the Red Revolution has happened in the interior states.
Second, why do you keep putting 'religious' and 'non-materialist' together? The terms are unrelated and not even close to synonymous. Often, they are directly opposed.
Third, you assume that by "Fundies" I mean religious people. Far from it. Fundamentalists are a subset of religious people, and it is my contention that they, among others, voting for Neoconservatives on the basis of 'religious' issues, have enabled the worst US government of the past century to exist. Christian Fundamentalists vote based on establishing theocratic government, and the Neocons have done an excellent job of marrying Fundie issues to smash-and-grab corporate government.
Slashdot Mirror
First they need to figure out if it's dead or alive, and whether it should be treated as both.
Then when they are cetain that the cat is alive|dead, they need to figure out where they are.
But to me there is a clear distinction -- in one case, you're manipulating a file that you acquired (likely legally, since it's DRM'd). In the other case, someone is distributing a file that is a copyrighted work -- not fair use.
I don't want to get into the whole debate about whether copyright is Evil (tm), but from a personal liability point-of-view, I'd think it also much easier to justify fair use when you remove the DRM yourself than if you acquire a DRM-free version via bittorrent. Maybe not easier to justify it to **AA lawyers, but at least easier to justify it to yourself
This is just like a 'restocking fee' when you return a mattress, or any other consumer good -- they can't call it a 'restocking fee' however, since it's not being put back on the shelf (at least not without refurbishing).
Why waste all that screen space? If/when it goes down, post a link to cache or a mirror. Or even post the text, when it goes down.
Or even burn a copy gfor those who are a little less web-savvy? Maybe even send a copy to your local and state legislators, along with a letter about why they need to watch the film? I know I will be.
Dear Marco,
Thank you for your timely suggestion regarding the future fate of Microsoft. Based on your idea, we have calculated that maximal profits over the next 10-year period can be achieved by doing exactly as you suggest.
And of course, even that is considered long-term planning in today's corporate world.
Sincerely, Preston Winfield
CEO, AAA LBO Company #2
It's not about stock analysis. It's about Sony's plethora of recent screw-ups finally catching up to them on the Street. It's about recognizing that there is now the perception in the financial world that things aren't quite right in the house of Sony.
(Apologies to Jonathan Swift, or his descendents)
Nope. I think TMM picked up his ball and went home because everyone was bashing him for formulaic google-then-wikipedia-link karma-whoring. I could be wrong (and probably am).
I sue you
They sue me
We're all part of a
Lawyer-enriching Copyright industry that contributes little to the public good.
Does that rhyme?
Wait, scratch the "kind of like" from that last sentence fragment.
I can't wave goodbye, I've got a sandwich in my hand so I'd fall out of my tree, you insensitive clod!
Yes, apparently I'm one of those who will be 'left behind' -- both by the brain drain, and by the Rapture. Sigh.
Since Sony will be losing cash with each PS3 produced and sold (in the US, not sure about Japan or the UK or Europe)... wouldn't lagging demand and lower production of the PS3 be beneficial to their short-term interests? At what sales volume does the market consider PS3 saturation high enough to make Blu-Ray viable as a revenue generator?
I haven't uploaded for a while, so I'm still waiting for my shower of 3/8" Moly bits to complete.
And as for the implications of a social networking site downgrading service to nebulously-defined 'bad' users, the effect is quite simple -- you lose those users to your competition. Good-bye clicks, good-bye revenue. Though, of course, 'bad' users could be those that don't demonstrably make money for the site by clicking on ads...
Also, 2001 killed off the marginally unsuccessful day traders -- there are still plenty of successful ones around[2].
[1] Whether that's because there is some submitter/editorial bias here, or because Sony has caused reality to be 'biased' against them, I'm not sure.
[2] As evidenced by the still-increasing volume (June 24, 2005 holds the record for highest daily volume of traded shares) -- 2001 saw the NYSE hit 2 billion shares traded in a single day; in 2005 we hit over 3 billion in a single day. This is not driven by long-term investors.
Thinned-from-the-herd?
Ripped-from-the-blastoc
'Cultured'?
Unfortunately, I'm not sure there are too many more-tasteful options than 'harvested.'
Maybe you misunderstand how the political process works wrt Fundamentalists here in the US. Fundies like Pat Robertson and Lou Dobbs energize their followers through the use of wedge issues. They are often helped along by political strategists such as Rove. This is how the Red Revolution has happened in the interior states.
Second, why do you keep putting 'religious' and 'non-materialist' together? The terms are unrelated and not even close to synonymous. Often, they are directly opposed.
Third, you assume that by "Fundies" I mean religious people. Far from it. Fundamentalists are a subset of religious people, and it is my contention that they, among others, voting for Neoconservatives on the basis of 'religious' issues, have enabled the worst US government of the past century to exist. Christian Fundamentalists vote based on establishing theocratic government, and the Neocons have done an excellent job of marrying Fundie issues to smash-and-grab corporate government.