Except that by putting it up under a license which would clearly allow exactly the use Virgin made of it, the photographer's representing that he does have the right to grant that license for that use.
Nope. The photographer owns the copyright to the photo. The CC license in this case speaks to the photographers copyright in the photo, not the model's interest in it. The photographer can't control what anyone else does with the photo. The law (in the US) takes that into account and holds the end user responsible for the use the end user puts it to.
A photo like this with a recognizable person can be used for news or editorial purposes without a release, and also for art (the photographer selling fine art prints). A model release is required for advertising use, always. There are many areas in between where a release is not required. Many commercial users require a model release always because they don't want to spend $$$ defending a lawsuit even if they'll win.
In this case, the photographer only has rights if fickr added the CC license or if Virgin violated the CC license. Otherwise, he gave up his rights. Virgin has no case against him unless he indicated that he had a model release for the shot. The model (or guardians) never released the photo, so the model has a claim against anyone using it for most promotional/advertising purposes.
Now it's SCOpokes
on
SCO Loses
·
· Score: 3, Funny
the new term for delayed litigation!
Re:It's not Microsoft you should be worried about
on
Vista is Watching You
·
· Score: 1
It's the government. If the government leans on them to ramp up the monitoring of their users, then the public will be truly SOL. Remember when MS lost the anti-trust suit but the penalties amounted to a wrist slap? Are you -sure- that built in Vista monitoring wasn't part of the settlement?
there seems to be no negative impact on the vendors that sign these deals
I was preparing to install a new mail server for my employer when the Novell deal happened. I had OpenSuSE ready to install, but switched to CentOS instead. Where could you find figures for folks like me?
Well, when Amazon was starting out there was a continuous flood of Amazon spam in the usenet groups I read. They seemed to be encouraging 'our affiliates are spamming not us' spam. I've never done business with them because of that. The one click patent and the 'geo locate and quote higher prices if we think you'll pay more' e-commerce system cemented that opinion.
A few years back there was momentum in Colorado to tell the Feds to shove it with respect to over reaching its powers over the states. The response to the threat of withholding funds was creative. They planned to pass a law requiring Federal taxes to be collected by the state of Colorado, which would forward what it considered the appropriate amount to the Feds.
We did that at Leasing Associates from roughly 1993 until early 2006 using Datarace (brand) equipment - voice, compressed and full duplex. Certainly voice as a sideband over whatever leased line you've got was very common before 1995. All of the mux manufacturers had equipment to do it. The datarace equipment could route TCP/IP, but the equipment encapsulated each type of traffic and sent it to the other mux via a proprietary protocol to the other mux.
There were ISDN router boxes touted around that time as being able to route voice and data at the same time, using small packets, compression, and QOS to keep the voice from breaking up. The setups I remember were analog->voip->analog though, and were used to tie corporate phone systems.
It sound like this is a patent on existing packet switched voice tech, but specifying which devices the endpoints would be and what the transport protocol would be. Private PC->voip-PC was common, and private analog->voip->analog was common. There were regulatory barriers to doing PC->voip->analog AND tying into the PSTN (public phone system). Privately our 1993 system allow a branch office to press a one button extension on their phone, get a dial tone from the corp. office phone system, and make any call they wanted to. It just wasn't done with TCP/IP because other protocols are much more efficient.
The Unlimited Data Plans and Features MAY NOT be used for any other purpose.
What they really don't want you doing is using skype with your smartphone to make international/long distance (or heck, local) calls without paying for any minutes at all. Why, with a smartphone you could IM without paying $$$ per k for text messaging -- maybe even email photos out of a camera phone without paying Verison a special photo transfer fee. The horror!
Competition. Viacom's Ifilm property has less of the market, and hopes to block popular activity on Gootube while allowing that same activity on Ifilm to boost market share. That strengthens the arguement a bit.
I'm not sure the judge will or should accept a tu quoque ("you're one too")
Virtualization might help by allowing compartmentalization. Restrict the VM to only data that the 'win98 only' software requires, and the other data is safer on the winXP side. If most of the sensitive data can be shielded from win98 this way, it would be a large win.
Of course, if the win98 apps require access to all of the important data this won't help.
Do any VMs allow granular per process access to host system data? If so, data access from the VM to Host could be restricted to the approved apps.
Many new apps won't run as a normal user because of file permissions. The problems is that XP does not tell you which file/feature/registry item caused the question.
I want a permissions profiler! A virtual machine to run a program in that tracks all of the security object requirements, provides a report, and a group with the exact required permissions for the program. The report should highlight system level requirements to point out any system 'normal admin' rights required to run the software.
Run program in wrapper, check report, assign user to generated group -- no un-needed permissions granted.
Floppies: Cheap, convenient, and sufficient for most people. Zip files, 120MB floppy (whatever it was called): Expensive, more reliable, more storage, more features, etc., FAILURE.
CDR - Cheap, bigger than zip, no click of death, records audio CDs = kiss of death for the zip drive
USB keychain drives are slowly nailing the coffin lid on floppy drives.
Say you get sued for DOWNLOADING, not uploading, 5 $GENERIC songs. Could you not simply go out and buy the CDs that those songs are on (cash purchase at used record store) and claim fair use?
Nope. The mp3 is a different 'work' even if derived from the same CD you own. Under the current (BS) laws you may make an mp3 yourself if you don't have to bypass content protection. You may not aquire an mp3 somebody else created without infringing.
Anyone know what would happen if he could produce byte identical mp3s to the downloaded ones, and show he legally possesed the mp3s? i.e. You can get a copy of a work you have rights to (CD). You can make an mp3 (format shift). Can you get a copy of that mp3? (legally)
I want my cake. BellSouth is benefiting from the services it's subscribers are accessing over the network. BellSouth uses this access to sell monthly network access subscriptions to my (and everyone else's) content. BellSouth is selling my content. Pay up bitch.
2) I thought 2006 was the year the American public would wake up to the way they're manipulated (can you remember having the same contempt for the french prior to their [justified] opposition to Iraq II?)
Justified? You mean the French Government accepting bribes through the Oil for Food program, and opposing Iraq II so that the bribes would continue and not be discovered?
I don't think manipulated sheeple ever wake up. Sometimes a better manipulator convinces them that they've been manipulated by the existing guy. The new manipulator has their best interests at heart, of course. It is similar for every countries public.
By offering the disks much cheaper than standard disks are today they could influence the hardware market. Store shelf, old CD title, 20$, new DRMed disk that needs the new DRM'ed hardware, same title, 3$. Something like that, side by side.
Cheaper? From the music industry?!?! I doubt it. That would lower the perceived value of the new format. The new format will be priced the same or higher. New music will be available with DRM only formats for the first few months. Later, CDs will be the 'legacy' format that can still be bought, but at an increased price to cover the cost of supporting this older technology. Software makers do this all the time. If adoption isn't quick enough, all CDs can be produced with reduced quality to make sure the new format is superior by comparison.
The music industry can freeze you out by not producing CDs, crippling the audio quality, or inflating the price. Lets hope they don't have the will to do it.
Usenet is a discussion forum free of direct corporate control. In the comp.databases.*yourdatabase* group, critical messages don't disappear. Often the folks who wrote key parts of a system will answer technical questions. There are no flash ads, no shockwave, and no popups blocking your view of the content.
Bandwidth is not an issue for a large ISP. Having a local server reduces the need for bandwidth, if your users use the local server. Of course if you don't inform new users anything about the service, much less provide client software or a web client, of course average folks will never find out about it.
This is about control, not cost. Yahoo forums are controlled by Yahoo and generate Yahoo ad revenue. Yahoo posts won't be in Google groups. This is about Yahoo, the other comments are excuses.
Is it wrong to state that if you tie any software to DRM software, it is unlawful under the DMCA to remove it, talk about it, or look at it?
What if I market a program promising detailed astronomical photos. The program actually pops up a goatse.cx picture every five minutes. The cool feature is that the program is unified with DRM functions so that even if you can locate the software past the DRM, you can't remove it without also removing the DRM software.
Wouldn't it be illegal under the DMCA to ever remove or disable this software once it is installed?
it wasn't trolling and you are wrong. He already takes a huge piece of each 99 cent download, and the Music labels wanted to make more money. The option would be for steve to take a smaller cut, or raise the price. He only talked about the higher price when spreading his FUD.
Variable pricing isn't 'one button mouse' simple. Apple values simplicity. Apple covets market share for player sales as well as online music sales. Raising the cost of iTunes music would hurt market share and reduce Ipod dominance. I don't think it is much of a mystery why Steve doesn't want to raise iTunes prices.
If there were people roaming the streets by the millions carrying around grenade launchers, would you sue ford if someone hit you with it and the car stopped functioning?
I've driven at least 350,000 miles. Nobody has ever shot a grenade launcher at my Ford. On any average day, on an average street odds are nobody will. On any day a default XP install will be 0wned if directly connected to the Internet. -Not the same thing- When I can't drive my new car off the lot without extensive security upgrades, we'll talk. XP isn't safe connected to the average Internet connection, my Ford is safe on the average road.
Many 18-year-old first-time voters are so inexperienced and immature that they hardly dare to think independently. What kind of effect does that have on a democracy?
The intended one. i.e. to create easily controlled sheeple. Making sure they are easily controlled through the media is a bonus too.
Slashdot Mirror
Except that by putting it up under a license which would clearly allow exactly the use Virgin made of it, the photographer's representing that he does have the right to grant that license for that use.
Nope. The photographer owns the copyright to the photo. The CC license in this case speaks to the photographers copyright in the photo, not the model's interest in it. The photographer can't control what anyone else does with the photo. The law (in the US) takes that into account and holds the end user responsible for the use the end user puts it to.
A photo like this with a recognizable person can be used for news or editorial purposes without a release, and also for art (the photographer selling fine art prints). A model release is required for advertising use, always. There are many areas in between where a release is not required. Many commercial users require a model release always because they don't want to spend $$$ defending a lawsuit even if they'll win.
In this case, the photographer only has rights if fickr added the CC license or if Virgin violated the CC license. Otherwise, he gave up his rights. Virgin has no case against him unless he indicated that he had a model release for the shot. The model (or guardians) never released the photo, so the model has a claim against anyone using it for most promotional/advertising purposes.
the new term for delayed litigation!
I was preparing to install a new mail server for my employer when the Novell deal happened. I had OpenSuSE ready to install, but switched to CentOS instead. Where could you find figures for folks like me?
made today will be able to run the Microsoft replacement for Vista. Why worry?
Well, when Amazon was starting out there was a continuous flood of Amazon spam in the usenet groups I read. They seemed to be encouraging 'our affiliates are spamming not us' spam. I've never done business with them because of that. The one click patent and the 'geo locate and quote higher prices if we think you'll pay more' e-commerce system cemented that opinion.
A few years back there was momentum in Colorado to tell the Feds to shove it with respect to over reaching its powers over the states. The response to the threat of withholding funds was creative. They planned to pass a law requiring Federal taxes to be collected by the state of Colorado, which would forward what it considered the appropriate amount to the Feds.
We did that at Leasing Associates from roughly 1993 until early 2006 using Datarace (brand) equipment - voice, compressed and full duplex. Certainly voice as a sideband over whatever leased line you've got was very common before 1995. All of the mux manufacturers had equipment to do it. The datarace equipment could route TCP/IP, but the equipment encapsulated each type of traffic and sent it to the other mux via a proprietary protocol to the other mux.
There were ISDN router boxes touted around that time as being able to route voice and data at the same time, using small packets, compression, and QOS to keep the voice from breaking up. The setups I remember were analog->voip->analog though, and were used to tie corporate phone systems.
It sound like this is a patent on existing packet switched voice tech, but specifying which devices the endpoints would be and what the transport protocol would be. Private PC->voip-PC was common, and private analog->voip->analog was common. There were regulatory barriers to doing PC->voip->analog AND tying into the PSTN (public phone system). Privately our 1993 system allow a branch office to press a one button extension on their phone, get a dial tone from the corp. office phone system, and make any call they wanted to. It just wasn't done with TCP/IP because other protocols are much more efficient.
What they really don't want you doing is using skype with your smartphone to make international/long distance (or heck, local) calls without paying for any minutes at all. Why, with a smartphone you could IM without paying $$$ per k for text messaging -- maybe even email photos out of a camera phone without paying Verison a special photo transfer fee. The horror!
Careless Cop Caught Cutting Celerity Cap
What about the copper clappers?? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teT1GvGd5Rc/
Virtualization might help by allowing compartmentalization. Restrict the VM to only data that the 'win98 only' software requires, and the other data is safer on the winXP side. If most of the sensitive data can be shielded from win98 this way, it would be a large win.
Of course, if the win98 apps require access to all of the important data this won't help.
Do any VMs allow granular per process access to host system data? If so, data access from the VM to Host could be restricted to the approved apps.
How about "Don't cross the" bridge?
"closed for repairs" bridge...
"Troll" bridge!
Many new apps won't run as a normal user because of file permissions. The problems is that XP does not tell you which file/feature/registry item caused the question.
I want a permissions profiler! A virtual machine to run a program in that tracks all of the security object requirements, provides a report, and a group with the exact required permissions for the program. The report should highlight system level requirements to point out any system 'normal admin' rights required to run the software.
Run program in wrapper, check report, assign user to generated group -- no un-needed permissions granted.
Floppies: Cheap, convenient, and sufficient for most people.
Zip files, 120MB floppy (whatever it was called): Expensive, more reliable, more storage, more features, etc., FAILURE.
CDR - Cheap, bigger than zip, no click of death, records audio CDs = kiss of death for the zip drive
USB keychain drives are slowly nailing the coffin lid on floppy drives.
Now the darknets will be the new 'sleeper cells', won't they?
Say you get sued for DOWNLOADING, not uploading, 5 $GENERIC songs. Could you not simply go out and buy the CDs that those songs are on (cash purchase at used record store) and claim fair use?
Nope. The mp3 is a different 'work' even if derived from the same CD you own. Under the current (BS) laws you may make an mp3 yourself if you don't have to bypass content protection. You may not aquire an mp3 somebody else created without infringing.
Anyone know what would happen if he could produce byte identical mp3s to the downloaded ones, and show he legally possesed the mp3s? i.e. You can get a copy of a work you have rights to (CD). You can make an mp3 (format shift). Can you get a copy of that mp3? (legally)
I want my cake. BellSouth is benefiting from the services it's subscribers are accessing over the network. BellSouth uses this access to sell monthly network access subscriptions to my (and everyone else's) content. BellSouth is selling my content. Pay up bitch.
2) I thought 2006 was the year the American public would wake up to the way they're manipulated (can you remember having the same contempt for the french prior to their [justified] opposition to Iraq II?)
Justified? You mean the French Government accepting bribes through the Oil for Food program, and opposing Iraq II so that the bribes would continue and not be discovered?
I don't think manipulated sheeple ever wake up. Sometimes a better manipulator convinces them that they've been manipulated by the existing guy. The new manipulator has their best interests at heart, of course. It is similar for every countries public.
Cheaper? From the music industry?!?! I doubt it. That would lower the perceived value of the new format. The new format will be priced the same or higher. New music will be available with DRM only formats for the first few months. Later, CDs will be the 'legacy' format that can still be bought, but at an increased price to cover the cost of supporting this older technology. Software makers do this all the time. If adoption isn't quick enough, all CDs can be produced with reduced quality to make sure the new format is superior by comparison.
The music industry can freeze you out by not producing CDs, crippling the audio quality, or inflating the price. Lets hope they don't have the will to do it.
Usenet is a discussion forum free of direct corporate control. In the comp.databases.*yourdatabase* group, critical messages don't disappear. Often the folks who wrote key parts of a system will answer technical questions. There are no flash ads, no shockwave, and no popups blocking your view of the content.
Bandwidth is not an issue for a large ISP. Having a local server reduces the need for bandwidth, if your users use the local server. Of course if you don't inform new users anything about the service, much less provide client software or a web client, of course average folks will never find out about it.
This is about control, not cost. Yahoo forums are controlled by Yahoo and generate Yahoo ad revenue. Yahoo posts won't be in Google groups. This is about Yahoo, the other comments are excuses.
Is it wrong to state that if you tie any software to DRM software, it is unlawful under the DMCA to remove it, talk about it, or look at it?
What if I market a program promising detailed astronomical photos. The program actually pops up a goatse.cx picture every five minutes. The cool feature is that the program is unified with DRM functions so that even if you can locate the software past the DRM, you can't remove it without also removing the DRM software.
Wouldn't it be illegal under the DMCA to ever remove or disable this software once it is installed?
Variable pricing isn't 'one button mouse' simple. Apple values simplicity. Apple covets market share for player sales as well as online music sales. Raising the cost of iTunes music would hurt market share and reduce Ipod dominance. I don't think it is much of a mystery why Steve doesn't want to raise iTunes prices.
I've driven at least 350,000 miles. Nobody has ever shot a grenade launcher at my Ford. On any average day, on an average street odds are nobody will. On any day a default XP install will be 0wned if directly connected to the Internet. -Not the same thing- When I can't drive my new car off the lot without extensive security upgrades, we'll talk. XP isn't safe connected to the average Internet connection, my Ford is safe on the average road.
The intended one. i.e. to create easily controlled sheeple. Making sure they are easily controlled through the media is a bonus too.