Why should someone be able to produce a product and not pay the licensing fee, when other companies (Xing, etc) have paid the fee? That is what this is all about. Circumventing the system to get what people want without paying for it.
Correct me if I'm wrong: A requirement for use of DeCSS is a DVD player. Such players are granted "keys" by the MPAA or one of its authorized agents. Thus, we can reasonably assume that a DeCSS user is decrypting the copyrighted work legally.
You're wrong. The requirement for use of DeCSS is not a DVD Player, but a DVD drive! Big distinction. If there was DVD player that ran under Linux there would be no need for this. A company that pays the licensing fee can have a key and make a DVD player. But no company has paid this yet, and has the legal rights to have a DVD player under Linux. That's why this code is illegal, it surcumvents the need for a company to pay for a license.
The judge was by no means stating that the use of the DeCSS to run under Linux was illogical or silly because Windows is "a far more widely used operating system". What he was saying is that if it was intended purely for the being able to play DVD's on Linux, then why was it orginally written in VB for the windows platform?
While some might state the "Linux couldn't read the format yet" issue, it still raises a legitamite question, and potential confusion for the judge. If the preception that it runs on 98% of the computers while only providing the intended service for 1% of those computers, how can the "sole purpose" not be in question? That is what the judge is saying.
This makes no sense! You were willing to buy the windows CD when the linux binary was on the CD, but now that's not and you have to download it, you won't pirate it? There was never going to be a seperate CD for linux. Just the bianry.
How is the any different then buying the windows version and installing the linux binary from the unsupported directory? Either way you are buying a Windows version, and getting the linux game
I disagree. While there has been an explosion in the cheap PC market, the prices drops are the reasoning for this. People who would no longer be able to afford a PC, now can get one. And at the same time, top of the line is much cheaper as well, which means that *more* people are buying the best machines because they are no longer unobtainable and non-cost effective. Case in point. Just price out a computer for my mom, and the difference from a 500 PIII (the lowest that they were selling) to a 700 PIII was $250. That is not a big difference at all! (I remember when the difference between a P60 and a P 90 was $1000).
BTW, how do you like that crappy little calculator that does come with windows? I use it all the time, but I sure wish there was an exponential function, etc, etc
ummm.. there is an exponential function, and all kinds of standard functions. Click the View menu and change it to Scientific. Thou shalt see the light!
Let's say that they use the system for two years, and in that two years they average 20 authorizations per hour (which is a very low number -- a more realisitc number would be 1000 per hour, but I'll use 20), so that means there were 350,400 authorizations in that 2 years, which is equal to a cost of.57 cents per authorization.
No, read the article again. The article said that it was the first time a *Microsoft* website had been cracked, as in, a site on *.microsoft.com -andrew
Because in the IRS's eyes the debt was forgiven (and not a mistake), it is perceived as income because it is an expense she did not pay. That 70 grand, it's taxable just like if her employeer had given her a check for $70,000. It's called "Forgiveness of Inedebtedness", and she will get a 1099 from the credit card company, guarantee it because that's the only way the VISA can write it off. She can look forward to paying Appx $30,000 of that in taxes.
Slashdot Mirror
Why should someone be able to produce a product and not pay the licensing fee, when other companies (Xing, etc) have paid the fee? That is what this is all about. Circumventing the system to get what people want without paying for it.
You're wrong. The requirement for use of DeCSS is not a DVD Player, but a DVD drive! Big distinction. If there was DVD player that ran under Linux there would be no need for this. A company that pays the licensing fee can have a key and make a DVD player. But no company has paid this yet, and has the legal rights to have a DVD player under Linux. That's why this code is illegal, it surcumvents the need for a company to pay for a license.
You missed the point.
The judge was by no means stating that the use of the DeCSS to run under Linux was illogical or silly because Windows is "a far more widely used operating system". What he was saying is that if it was intended purely for the being able to play DVD's on Linux, then why was it orginally written in VB for the windows platform?
While some might state the "Linux couldn't read the format yet" issue, it still raises a legitamite question, and potential confusion for the judge. If the preception that it runs on 98% of the computers while only providing the intended service for 1% of those computers, how can the "sole purpose" not be in question? That is what the judge is saying.
Think of it this way.
You have 100 shares at $20 ($2000) before the split and it goes up 10, you know have 100 shares at $30 ($3000).
Or, if it splits
You no have 200 shares at $10 ($2000), and it goes up 10, you know have 200 shares at $20 ($4000).
Big difference! Lower stock prices mean more people can buy, and increases have a higher percentage effect.
I don't think you understand. They are still releasing the linux binary, you just have to download it
Meant to say: now that's not and you have to download it, you *want* pirate it?
This makes no sense! You were willing to buy the windows CD when the linux binary was on the CD, but now that's not and you have to download it, you won't pirate it? There was never going to be a seperate CD for linux. Just the bianry.
How is the any different then buying the windows version and installing the linux binary from the unsupported directory? Either way you are buying a Windows version, and getting the linux game
So, write it!
I disagree. While there has been an explosion in the cheap PC market, the prices drops are the reasoning for this. People who would no longer be able to afford a PC, now can get one. And at the same time, top of the line is much cheaper as well, which means that *more* people are buying the best machines because they are no longer unobtainable and non-cost effective. Case in point. Just price out a computer for my mom, and the difference from a 500 PIII (the lowest that they were selling) to a 700 PIII was $250. That is not a big difference at all! (I remember when the difference between a P60 and a P 90 was $1000).
ummm.. there is an exponential function, and all kinds of standard functions. Click the View menu and change it to Scientific. Thou shalt see the light!
No, it's not $40 per authorization.
.57 cents per authorization.
Let's say that they use the system for two years, and in that two years they average 20 authorizations per hour (which is a very low number -- a more realisitc number would be 1000 per hour, but I'll use 20), so that means there were 350,400 authorizations in that 2 years, which is equal to a cost of
I think that is quite ok.
No, read the article again. The article said that it was the first time a *Microsoft* website had been cracked, as in, a site on *.microsoft.com -andrew
Right on dude! And I was listening to the Clash way before they ever got popular! The same with Green Day!
/.
Why don't you use a product/like something because you actually like it, not what other people think.
First time I have ever heard the cry of "Sellouts" on
Because in the IRS's eyes the debt was forgiven (and not a mistake), it is perceived as income because it is an expense she did not pay. That 70 grand, it's taxable just like if her employeer had given her a check for $70,000. It's called "Forgiveness of Inedebtedness", and she will get a 1099 from the credit card company, guarantee it because that's the only way the VISA can write it off. She can look forward to paying Appx $30,000 of that in taxes.