Not quite, there is an increase in penalty when it becomes grand theft. But in general it's based upon the value of the goods, and generally speaking they aren't letting the person who was robbed determine the value. It's typically a standard appraisal if a known value isn't already possessed.
That's generally not the case. People who steal cars generally sell the parts or they do their drug run and return it. In either case there'd be money under that philosophy.
But considering the fact that larceny is criminal and copyright infringement is civil, I don't think that's an appropriate comparison.
That's not true. The reason for the firewall at the computer level is that unless you've set up your network specifically to do it, all the computers are by default able to see each other. Meaning that while it might be tough for an attacker to get past that firewall, as soon as any of the computers on the network gets haxxored, all the other ones are vulnerable.
Yeah, I'm not sure what their product is like lately, but when I got my laptop in 2003, it came with Pc-Cillin. Immediately upon first boot right after freshly installing the OEM disk image, it would lock up the system taking up all the resources. I could uninstall it, but the process was a pain with that much bloat.
I can't imagine why they'd be having trouble getting more customers.
That was what I was expecting. Pay a fee and get Hulu plus some other stuff that they couldn't afford to give you for free. But taking away things makes it a much worse deal.
I think you're correct. The problem is that while the cost might increase the selection or minimize the amount of ads, you don't see that. All you see is the cost and the ads. The consumer can be forgiven for assuming that this is another one of those cases where somebody is taking an extra cut at the consumer's expense.
Depends how you do it. It's oddly ironic how now when it hurts MS they don't think reverse engineering is such a good idea. Especially since they made most of their money based upon IBM clones.
Additionally, I like how they're claiming that this has something to do with product tampering.
Why would there be? Flash is a plug in and it's mostly up to Adobe to make sure that there's a plug in available. I'm sure there will be soon enough, but I'm betting that Adobe will wait until the betas get a bit more finalized.
Flying is a right. One of the rights we're supposed to have in the US is the ability to freely travel the country. This isn't any more constitutional than it would be to have two roads to a destination. One that's quite long and the other which takes a quarter the time. But the shorter one runs close to some government buildings so they stop every third car for an invasive search complete with feeling up the balls.
What concerns me is that the analogy isn't really that much of a stretch, seeing as the TSA apparently feels entitled to cup every ball in the joint.
It's not optional, or at least not for long. As soon as the devices are in all the airports, it'll be "assaulted with radiation so some perv can view you naked" or "let somebody fondle your bollocks." This is straight up sexual abuse on a scale that not even the Catholic Church has been able to manage.
It's a sad state of affairs when the Republicans can gridlock congress intentionally, then get rewarded for it the next election by morons that are doing it because politics in D.C. has gotten too partisan. With Sen., McConnell openly stating that he's going to intentionally gridlock the Senate so that a Republican candidate has a better shot at the 2012 Presidential elections, you really have to wonder about these guys' patriotism.
It's a really neat trick to refuse to engage in bipartisan politics then attack the guy that went way out of his way to work with you. Then have the voters reward you with more seats.
I was harassed for a number of years by the US Navy when my high school handed over my contact information to the government without my permission or even being required to tell me they had done it. They're not required to disclose that they can't continue contacting you without permission and they're not required to adhere to any sort of ethical standard when it comes to making promises either. Deep within the contract they want you to sign is a "military convenience" clause which pretty much indicates that any promises the recruiter made in terms of what or where you're going to serve are only valid so far as the military feels like consenting.
That's probably because in most if not all jurisdictions it's viewed as reasonable to require an attorney to read the T&C before doing anything. In that mythical world, we also all have sports cars and can bed any super model we wish.
Seriously, there's something really, really wrong that people are expected to have to hire an attorney in order to know what it is that they're agreeing or not agreeing to.
Um, you do realize that as computers get more and more powerful and having more and more memory that video and music files are going to get big, right? Right now that 2TB disk handles only like 40 Blu Rays, right? I mean that's not really that unreasonable to expect hard disks of the future to be able to handle.
No, copyright only applies to expression, not the idea. The creative work involved with the recipe isn't in the telling. You're supposed to right down procedurally what you're doing.
If it includes enough other stuff to be subject to copyright, it's not really a recipe any more. Plus you'd be able to strip that stuff out and redistribute the recipe without worry. Which isn't something that you'd normally expect to be able to do with copyright texts.
Well, first you have to get a baby. Then kick it up a notch. But to really do it right, you've got to put a bun in the oven at 98 degrees for about 9 months or so.
To be fair, we weren't so opposed to the RIAA before they started framing people and using falsified evidence to extort large sums of money out of people.
Additionally, there is no internal inconsistency in the stances we've got. While some are calling for full abolition of IP, the more common complaint is that it's prone to abuse and the rewards are grossly out of line with the actual harm done leaving some organizations like the RIAA to use it instead of normal business tactics.
There was an article involved which they reprinted without permission. Recipes frequently have secret ingredients because you can't copyright them and you likely can't qualify it for a patent either.
That's also why in some jurisdictions the plaintiff is required to prove their damages in order to collect them.
Statutory damages are just bad, they do serve their place in cases where a fair value can't be reasonably determined. But really if you're going to ask for statutory damages you should be required to demonstrate that there is no way of getting a more accurate estimate.
When a large number of people are more concerned with the welfare of billionaires than the people living on the street, there's little that can be done, and no system of government has ever found a solution to it.
Admittedly in most parts of the world, the lower classes aren't nearly as ignorant of their own self interest as in America.
I'm just waiting for them to try and sue several dozen different people for allegedly distributing the same copy of a song. Given the way that bittorrent works, it's only a matter of time before they figure out how to scam the courts into considering one file several dozen acts of infringement.
No, at least in the US, they have to prove to the preponderance of the evidence that the individual did in fact do whatever it is they were alleged to have done. If you can't prove it to that extent they don't have to pay. And frequently they can then come after you for court costs.
Additionally, in a civil trial you do indeed get a jury of your peers. And it can be a serious pain in the ass. You don't get the same number you would in a criminal trial, but you do get jurors. I remember the trial I was seated for, it took them several hundred potential jurors just to get the 10 they needed.
Additionally, the term innocence doesn't apply to civil trials.
Slashdot Mirror
Not quite, there is an increase in penalty when it becomes grand theft. But in general it's based upon the value of the goods, and generally speaking they aren't letting the person who was robbed determine the value. It's typically a standard appraisal if a known value isn't already possessed.
That's generally not the case. People who steal cars generally sell the parts or they do their drug run and return it. In either case there'd be money under that philosophy.
But considering the fact that larceny is criminal and copyright infringement is civil, I don't think that's an appropriate comparison.
Artificial? It's not an artificial market unless they're funding the people that write malware.
That's not true. The reason for the firewall at the computer level is that unless you've set up your network specifically to do it, all the computers are by default able to see each other. Meaning that while it might be tough for an attacker to get past that firewall, as soon as any of the computers on the network gets haxxored, all the other ones are vulnerable.
Yeah, I'm not sure what their product is like lately, but when I got my laptop in 2003, it came with Pc-Cillin. Immediately upon first boot right after freshly installing the OEM disk image, it would lock up the system taking up all the resources. I could uninstall it, but the process was a pain with that much bloat.
I can't imagine why they'd be having trouble getting more customers.
That was what I was expecting. Pay a fee and get Hulu plus some other stuff that they couldn't afford to give you for free. But taking away things makes it a much worse deal.
I think you're correct. The problem is that while the cost might increase the selection or minimize the amount of ads, you don't see that. All you see is the cost and the ads. The consumer can be forgiven for assuming that this is another one of those cases where somebody is taking an extra cut at the consumer's expense.
Depends how you do it. It's oddly ironic how now when it hurts MS they don't think reverse engineering is such a good idea. Especially since they made most of their money based upon IBM clones.
Additionally, I like how they're claiming that this has something to do with product tampering.
Why would there be? Flash is a plug in and it's mostly up to Adobe to make sure that there's a plug in available. I'm sure there will be soon enough, but I'm betting that Adobe will wait until the betas get a bit more finalized.
Flying is a right. One of the rights we're supposed to have in the US is the ability to freely travel the country. This isn't any more constitutional than it would be to have two roads to a destination. One that's quite long and the other which takes a quarter the time. But the shorter one runs close to some government buildings so they stop every third car for an invasive search complete with feeling up the balls.
What concerns me is that the analogy isn't really that much of a stretch, seeing as the TSA apparently feels entitled to cup every ball in the joint.
And we are amused and disgusted by the stupidity of the people who are willing to let themselves be sexually abused in order to fly on a plane.
It's not optional, or at least not for long. As soon as the devices are in all the airports, it'll be "assaulted with radiation so some perv can view you naked" or "let somebody fondle your bollocks." This is straight up sexual abuse on a scale that not even the Catholic Church has been able to manage.
It's a sad state of affairs when the Republicans can gridlock congress intentionally, then get rewarded for it the next election by morons that are doing it because politics in D.C. has gotten too partisan. With Sen., McConnell openly stating that he's going to intentionally gridlock the Senate so that a Republican candidate has a better shot at the 2012 Presidential elections, you really have to wonder about these guys' patriotism.
It's a really neat trick to refuse to engage in bipartisan politics then attack the guy that went way out of his way to work with you. Then have the voters reward you with more seats.
I was harassed for a number of years by the US Navy when my high school handed over my contact information to the government without my permission or even being required to tell me they had done it. They're not required to disclose that they can't continue contacting you without permission and they're not required to adhere to any sort of ethical standard when it comes to making promises either. Deep within the contract they want you to sign is a "military convenience" clause which pretty much indicates that any promises the recruiter made in terms of what or where you're going to serve are only valid so far as the military feels like consenting.
That's probably because in most if not all jurisdictions it's viewed as reasonable to require an attorney to read the T&C before doing anything. In that mythical world, we also all have sports cars and can bed any super model we wish.
Seriously, there's something really, really wrong that people are expected to have to hire an attorney in order to know what it is that they're agreeing or not agreeing to.
Really? I would've thought it would be FUIA.
Um, you do realize that as computers get more and more powerful and having more and more memory that video and music files are going to get big, right? Right now that 2TB disk handles only like 40 Blu Rays, right? I mean that's not really that unreasonable to expect hard disks of the future to be able to handle.
No, copyright only applies to expression, not the idea. The creative work involved with the recipe isn't in the telling. You're supposed to right down procedurally what you're doing.
If it includes enough other stuff to be subject to copyright, it's not really a recipe any more. Plus you'd be able to strip that stuff out and redistribute the recipe without worry. Which isn't something that you'd normally expect to be able to do with copyright texts.
Well, first you have to get a baby. Then kick it up a notch. But to really do it right, you've got to put a bun in the oven at 98 degrees for about 9 months or so.
To be fair, we weren't so opposed to the RIAA before they started framing people and using falsified evidence to extort large sums of money out of people.
Additionally, there is no internal inconsistency in the stances we've got. While some are calling for full abolition of IP, the more common complaint is that it's prone to abuse and the rewards are grossly out of line with the actual harm done leaving some organizations like the RIAA to use it instead of normal business tactics.
There was an article involved which they reprinted without permission. Recipes frequently have secret ingredients because you can't copyright them and you likely can't qualify it for a patent either.
That's also why in some jurisdictions the plaintiff is required to prove their damages in order to collect them.
Statutory damages are just bad, they do serve their place in cases where a fair value can't be reasonably determined. But really if you're going to ask for statutory damages you should be required to demonstrate that there is no way of getting a more accurate estimate.
When a large number of people are more concerned with the welfare of billionaires than the people living on the street, there's little that can be done, and no system of government has ever found a solution to it.
Admittedly in most parts of the world, the lower classes aren't nearly as ignorant of their own self interest as in America.
I'm just waiting for them to try and sue several dozen different people for allegedly distributing the same copy of a song. Given the way that bittorrent works, it's only a matter of time before they figure out how to scam the courts into considering one file several dozen acts of infringement.
No, at least in the US, they have to prove to the preponderance of the evidence that the individual did in fact do whatever it is they were alleged to have done. If you can't prove it to that extent they don't have to pay. And frequently they can then come after you for court costs.
Additionally, in a civil trial you do indeed get a jury of your peers. And it can be a serious pain in the ass. You don't get the same number you would in a criminal trial, but you do get jurors. I remember the trial I was seated for, it took them several hundred potential jurors just to get the 10 they needed.
Additionally, the term innocence doesn't apply to civil trials.