"...the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright."
At what point has a crime been committed? The RIAA seems to think downloading something is a crime. What if you downloaded a file and then deleted it? Has a crime been committed? As pertains to 'fair use' - what if you're doing research? Say...research for a music history class, or production research? Seems to me that would fall under the NOT an infringement category.
Not only that, but how can they prove the file you downloaded was actually a copyrighted song and not some file named the same? Furthermore, if the RIAA is getting into people's systems to poke around, that's a bigger crime, no?
If you can back up software, than why not music? It's not specifically denied in the copyright laws, as far as I can tell. And if you can make a legal backup copy, I assert that you can choose the medium for that backup, i.e. an HDD, or a burned copy.
Damn the man, fight the power.
Absolutely true, regarding the RIAA. In the past, every time artists have sued the labels over accounting, they have found "errors" which benefitted the labels, who them had to pay out to the artists. I repeat - EVERY TIME.
As for the so-called Embroidery Coalition... I called them and told them I thought what they wwere doign was despicable, to which some holier-than-thou southern woman responded that it was all lies (from the grannies) and then hung up on me. Go figure.
You're darn tootin'. Symantec used to, key words "USED TO" be the bomb. Is anyone else scared cuz an article reference how the US gov't uses SAV to "protect" their machines?
If you want real protection, I'd reccommend TrendMicro's OfficeScan. I've switched most of my clients over, and BTWm, three years of AV plus damage cleanup services (DCS) comes in less than SAV, so it's cost effective, too.
In EVERY OfficeScan install I've done, it's identified AT LEAST four pieces of malware, and I don't mean tracking cookies. I've seen new threats try to unistall SAV and I've stopped them, rebooted in SAFE MODE, scanned, cleaned, and repaired, only to find LiveUpdate no longer worked. What good is that? Symantec breaks everything they buy - anyone who also fights with BackupExec on a daily basis knows what I mean. Do yourself a favor... get your clients away from Symantec AV. Not only can you mark it up and make a penny and STILL provide value... it actually WORKS. I'm a 12 year network engineer, so take my advice with a grain of salt. But I kid you not - at least TEN of my clients had malware (nasty shtuff) that SAV did not identify. Protection?! My ass. And the US GOVT uses this stuff! I'm scared, guy n girls... You want to be a PATRIOT? Do everyone a favor and replace SAV.
My $.02 worth.
Slashdot Mirror
...PI. Or 42. Duh. What, is everyone stupid?
"...the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright." At what point has a crime been committed? The RIAA seems to think downloading something is a crime. What if you downloaded a file and then deleted it? Has a crime been committed? As pertains to 'fair use' - what if you're doing research? Say...research for a music history class, or production research? Seems to me that would fall under the NOT an infringement category. Not only that, but how can they prove the file you downloaded was actually a copyrighted song and not some file named the same? Furthermore, if the RIAA is getting into people's systems to poke around, that's a bigger crime, no? If you can back up software, than why not music? It's not specifically denied in the copyright laws, as far as I can tell. And if you can make a legal backup copy, I assert that you can choose the medium for that backup, i.e. an HDD, or a burned copy. Damn the man, fight the power.
Absolutely true, regarding the RIAA. In the past, every time artists have sued the labels over accounting, they have found "errors" which benefitted the labels, who them had to pay out to the artists. I repeat - EVERY TIME.
As for the so-called Embroidery Coalition... I called them and told them I thought what they wwere doign was despicable, to which some holier-than-thou southern woman responded that it was all lies (from the grannies) and then hung up on me. Go figure.
You're darn tootin'. Symantec used to, key words "USED TO" be the bomb. Is anyone else scared cuz an article reference how the US gov't uses SAV to "protect" their machines? If you want real protection, I'd reccommend TrendMicro's OfficeScan. I've switched most of my clients over, and BTWm, three years of AV plus damage cleanup services (DCS) comes in less than SAV, so it's cost effective, too. In EVERY OfficeScan install I've done, it's identified AT LEAST four pieces of malware, and I don't mean tracking cookies. I've seen new threats try to unistall SAV and I've stopped them, rebooted in SAFE MODE, scanned, cleaned, and repaired, only to find LiveUpdate no longer worked. What good is that? Symantec breaks everything they buy - anyone who also fights with BackupExec on a daily basis knows what I mean. Do yourself a favor... get your clients away from Symantec AV. Not only can you mark it up and make a penny and STILL provide value... it actually WORKS. I'm a 12 year network engineer, so take my advice with a grain of salt. But I kid you not - at least TEN of my clients had malware (nasty shtuff) that SAV did not identify. Protection?! My ass. And the US GOVT uses this stuff! I'm scared, guy n girls... You want to be a PATRIOT? Do everyone a favor and replace SAV. My $.02 worth.