Someone can distribute copyrighted work without a right to do so. That's called copyright infringement, not theft. There is a tremendous difference between infringement and theft so it's important to call it by it's correct terminology.
A "right" is a creation of humans and we agree(or are forced to) to abide by the rights granted to others by whatever entity we chose to recognize. I don't know if your from the US, but here we have different laws regarding intellectual rights. It is an ongoing struggle to reach that definition as intellectual property is about ideas, not physical goods. This quote from Thomas Jefferson sums it up:
If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
Laws are different regarding intellectual property due to philosophy along the lines of that quote. I hope you can see how important that is. I'm not advocating an absence of copyright or IP protections. That would be silly for me because that's a big chunk of my income. I oppose current copyright reforms by groups like RIAA not because I don't care about an authors right to profit. In fact it is just the opposite because if RIAA got their proposed reforms passed, it would simply be a benefit to corporate entities. They could process legal cases in much greater volume and a higher success rate. This will lead to more power in the hands of the business elite who IMO don't need any more. That's the reason sites like this exist:
If you want to help the author buy their works, don't contribute to a system designed make the suits more money. The current system already provides recourse for violations and it's more than adequate if used properly.
Another angle is the gross over-valuing of of IP (even if something is way over-valued that doesn't make infringement okay). For example, if you take the price of distributing movies today versus 30 years ago, modern distribution channels are far more efficient. It costs just a fraction of what it did in the past to get the goods to the consumer, yet if a person from the current generation wants to get the same amount of content as the previous they would need to spend a larger percentage of their income to maintain the level. This is because of the parasitical suits who need to get their cut of every transaction. Its sort of like how an HMO works, doctors get screwed in pay http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/22/business/22doctors.html?_r=1 and patients get poor service and nasty surprises like "You're not covered for that".
Is a new blueray seriously worth $30-40? How many of these infringers would pay $10 if they could download it immediately? The business model is flawed, and they want this legislation so they can force the old ways on the consumer instead of adapting to where the market is today. The price is artificially high to support the lawyers and other types who add no value to the product. Don't make them happy by calling it theft.
Please note that there is a difference here between simply distribution and legal distribution. You seem to be equating the two.
Please note that there is a difference here between simply copyright infringement and theft. Copyright infringement is distributing works without a license. That is the discussion here, not the legality of distribution.
Not if for their personal use, no, but if they're redistributing it then it is theft.
No it's not. Considering the mountain of legal precedent and statues to contrary it's difficult to understand your need to say a falsehood again and again and again.
But are you aware that people download stuff off of bittorrent and other places? Or do you think that isn't unlawful duplication and distribution (i.e., theft of the the author's right to be the sole source for distribution)?
I certainly think it's morally wrong at some level, and illegal in the sense of copyright infringement. My point and the basic intent behind our laws is that distribution licensing is the is the right of the copyright holder and none other. Other parties guilty of copyright infringement does not change that fact. The right only belongs the holder and therefore even if illegal distribution did occur it's illegal because the owner didn't license it.
(i.e., theft of the the author's right to be the sole source for distribution)?
Since we're in the land of redundancy, special consideration should be given to the text in bold.
That right is not compromised in any scenario or argument you have presented.
If someone is guilty of illegal distribution, it's because they did so without the consent of the copyright holder who is the sole owner of that right(and remains so even in an infringement case).
Copyright law grants that right to the author and deems a violation of it as copyright infringement. Are you going to use the law in one breath and disregard it in the next?
Either you're grasping at straws to maintain a flawed argument or I should contact some people about selling syndication rights.
B no longer controls production and distribution.
No amount of repeating that will actually make it true. Once any copyrighted material is released to the public it's could be reproduced digital media or otherwise. The ability of a consumer to reproduce a work is not theft no matter how you spin it. The author still has sole possession of the copyright and is the only one who can license it's use. I've yet to see someone selling pirated dvd's out of their trunk or a renting one from blockbuster.
Wrong, B still has sole right to produce/license copies. Infringing on a copyright doesn't mean you become the copyright holder. The infringer wouldn't be able to sell his copies through normal distribution channels.
Definition of Irony - Promoting FUD around Big Pharma and vaccines while using smallpox as an example.
There's a lot of problems with Big Pharma, FDA, and healthcare for sure, but seriously you need to come up with better examples. Smallpox vaccination history speaks loudly and clearly in favor of vaccinations.
I don't really care about any split. I simply want open standards to be adhered to, especially in government projects. Then we're all on the same playing field and the split is determined by choice, and not a defacto government subsidized monopoly.
Even as recently as the seventies, maybe the eighties, it was thought for a planet to support life, it had to be in the 'habitable zone' of a planet. I believe the Drake equation even requires this; one of the factors, as I recall, is 'number of planets within the habitable zone.' Basically, this involves liquid water, and, basically, Earth-normal temperature and the like.
The Drake equation *requires* no such thing at least with the insinuations you make. Ne is the variable you're referring to and it represents the number of planets per star that are capable of sustaining life. There is a great deal of debate over that value hence your example is invalidated. The equation is a set of assumptions that are clearly related as such. It is a tool for estimation, not a dogmatic limit on the progress of future knowledge.
The tone of your post *We don't know everything* fails to give credit some very intelligent people who work with things like the Drake equation that actually have taken in account our limited understanding.
It's disappointing you had such poor instructors in your education, but that's no reason to assume it was the same for everyone. It's only in the business and religious world where "what we know is what there is to know" has limited my opportunities. My scientific instructors were very open minded and many areas are constantly gaining knowledge including your biological example.
One would think if the sys admin's who opted in reporting this issue and provided technical details to law enforcement would know whether it was actually malicious.
If you were caught using a blink or marquee tag, then you owe your teacher a debt of gratitude.
I got a hearing front of the superintendent for ctrl-C'n out of a batch login prompt, and playing a $5 star trek diskette from a magazine type distribution. They threatened expulsion, but settled for a string of Saturday detentions. I'm glad that happened in the mid 90's, cause who knows the string of felonies you'd be hit with now on it.
Since your comment is even more vaporous that TFA, perhaps you might enlighten us with what cause he has, perceived or real, to hang on to a grudge. The firing itself?
The funny part about the part you find funny is the article "implied"(stated) his access was limited and therefore was only able to piece together the extent of the program over time and some other undisclosed means. A little far fetched?...maybe but certainly no more than your own. If you have real information you can share then do so, otherwise do us a favor and keep your unfounded personal attacks to yourself.
I don't condone what this what person did. The way he treated others around him and the apparent arrogance he had to impose his wants with disregard for anyone else's well being is cause for punishment. It's equally scary to see a person claim they've walked a mile in every troubled person's shoes. Sure, we've all had tough times, especially in childhood. Does that give me the moral high ground to pass judgment on every person that's infringed on the rights of others? I don't actually see much difference between this guy's arrogance and your own. Perhaps there is one in behavior...
As an owner of both consoles, MGS4 is the only ps3 that even rivals the good 360 games in terms of graphics. It is no where close to blowing 360 games out the water. However, at the ps3 doesn't lock up nearly as much and kicks ass at folding.
You might actually try to educate yourself. I know it's fun to be the ignornant tough guy type, but look what's its done for our president. You don't want to viewed like that, or do you?
Yeah, governor's are just tripping over themselves to pardon people in this position. A sex offender getting pardoned whatever the circumstances is extremely rare.
Right, you imply that me and many others who have been effected by this are liars or whiners or the electronic equivalent of a hypochondriac, yet you're the one who took the high road. Give me a break.
You must know some lucky people since all the 360 owners I know first hand have experienced some of these each of these issues, although not the extent I have.
I think you're implying all of us are simply careless right? I have also owned a 360 for a long time. I think I got mine around 6 months or so after release. Then a few months into it, red ring of death. This was before MS announced their 3 yr warranty on the problem. Approx. 2 wks later I had a rpl console. This one lasted for awhile, then when after it was outside of the warranty it started eating discs. It would make a terrible grinding sound my ps3 fanboi brother loved to imitate and would startle my gf into almost hysteria. I sent that one in for repair on my own dime, and received another rpl console. This one lasted only a couple of months, then started giving me a green screen soon after POST. Luckily I was still in the limited warranty and that one was rpl'd. So now I'm on my forth console. Not one. Not two. Not three. FOUR
I live in apt in the basement(chosen because I like cool temperatures). Consoles have always sat on the floor in a horizontal position next to my 65" HDTV. My place is clean, cool, and I don't smoke or drink so there aren't large gatherings at my place.
I've dealt with optical media since CD's became the standard and do a variety of CD and DVD authoring. tccat is one my most used commands. You would be hard pressed to find a scratch on my DVD or ps3 blueray/games collection.
Can you please fucking explain the frequent and vicious circular scratches on my Xbox 360 games asshole? Can you tell me why my 360 regularly experiences catastrophic failure when none of my other similar equipment does? I bet MS just extended that warranty for shit's and giggles right?
I don't move mine and my discs are scratched. Assassins Creed is unplayable, Others lock up more frequently on scratched discs. Basically the only time my 360 has moved is when it was sent in for service three separate times(meaning I'm on my 4th console). After all the documented problems with the 360 units, why are you still willing to give it the benefit of the doubt?
My ps3 discs are virtually flawless and it receives nearly as much use as the 360. Perhaps even more since I watch all my DVD's/videos on the ps3 due it upscaling better since I have an HDMI for it.
All that being said, I think 360's are better for gaming and the ps3 is better all around unit, but the recent 360 updates narrowed the gap.
Slashdot Mirror
Bullshit, it's not even remotely close in the opposite direction.
M$ - $50 bil http://www.microsoft.com/msft/earnings/FY07/earn_rel_q4_07.mspx
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:hee_LWB259IJ:adage.com/images/random/mediafamilytree07.pdf+paramount+pictures+%22net+revenue%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a
Someone can distribute copyrighted work without a right to do so. That's called copyright infringement, not theft. There is a tremendous difference between infringement and theft so it's important to call it by it's correct terminology.
A "right" is a creation of humans and we agree(or are forced to) to abide by the rights granted to others by whatever entity we chose to recognize. I don't know if your from the US, but here we have different laws regarding intellectual rights. It is an ongoing struggle to reach that definition as intellectual property is about ideas, not physical goods. This quote from Thomas Jefferson sums it up:
If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
Laws are different regarding intellectual property due to philosophy along the lines of that quote. I hope you can see how important that is. I'm not advocating an absence of copyright or IP protections. That would be silly for me because that's a big chunk of my income. I oppose current copyright reforms by groups like RIAA not because I don't care about an authors right to profit. In fact it is just the opposite because if RIAA got their proposed reforms passed, it would simply be a benefit to corporate entities. They could process legal cases in much greater volume and a higher success rate. This will lead to more power in the hands of the business elite who IMO don't need any more. That's the reason sites like this exist:
http://www.savenetradio.org/
If you want to help the author buy their works, don't contribute to a system designed make the suits more money. The current system already provides recourse for violations and it's more than adequate if used properly.
Another angle is the gross over-valuing of of IP (even if something is way over-valued that doesn't make infringement okay). For example, if you take the price of distributing movies today versus 30 years ago, modern distribution channels are far more efficient. It costs just a fraction of what it did in the past to get the goods to the consumer, yet if a person from the current generation wants to get the same amount of content as the previous they would need to spend a larger percentage of their income to maintain the level. This is because of the parasitical suits who need to get their cut of every transaction. Its sort of like how an HMO works, doctors get screwed in pay http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/22/business/22doctors.html?_r=1 and patients get poor service and nasty surprises like "You're not covered for that".
Is a new blueray seriously worth $30-40? How many of these infringers would pay $10 if they could download it immediately? The business model is flawed, and they want this legislation so they can force the old ways on the consumer instead of adapting to where the market is today. The price is artificially high to support the lawyers and other types who add no value to the product. Don't make them happy by calling it theft.
Please note that there is a difference here between simply distribution and legal distribution. You seem to be equating the two.
Please note that there is a difference here between simply copyright infringement and theft. Copyright infringement is distributing works without a license. That is the discussion here, not the legality of distribution.
Not if for their personal use, no, but if they're redistributing it then it is theft.
No it's not. Considering the mountain of legal precedent and statues to contrary it's difficult to understand your need to say a falsehood again and again and again.
But are you aware that people download stuff off of bittorrent and other places? Or do you think that isn't unlawful duplication and distribution (i.e., theft of the the author's right to be the sole source for distribution)?
I certainly think it's morally wrong at some level, and illegal in the sense of copyright infringement. My point and the basic intent behind our laws is that distribution licensing is the is the right of the copyright holder and none other. Other parties guilty of copyright infringement does not change that fact. The right only belongs the holder and therefore even if illegal distribution did occur it's illegal because the owner didn't license it.
(i.e., theft of the the author's right to be the sole source for distribution)?
Since we're in the land of redundancy, special consideration should be given to the text in bold.
That right is not compromised in any scenario or argument you have presented.
If someone is guilty of illegal distribution, it's because they did so without the consent of the copyright holder who is the sole owner of that right(and remains so even in an infringement case).
Copyright law grants that right to the author and deems a violation of it as copyright infringement. Are you going to use the law in one breath and disregard it in the next?
Either you're grasping at straws to maintain a flawed argument or I should contact some people about selling syndication rights.
B no longer controls production and distribution.
No amount of repeating that will actually make it true. Once any copyrighted material is released to the public it's could be reproduced digital media or otherwise. The ability of a consumer to reproduce a work is not theft no matter how you spin it. The author still has sole possession of the copyright and is the only one who can license it's use. I've yet to see someone selling pirated dvd's out of their trunk or a renting one from blockbuster.
Wrong, B still has sole right to produce/license copies. Infringing on a copyright doesn't mean you become the copyright holder. The infringer wouldn't be able to sell his copies through normal distribution channels.
Definition of Irony - Promoting FUD around Big Pharma and vaccines while using smallpox as an example.
There's a lot of problems with Big Pharma, FDA, and healthcare for sure, but seriously you need to come up with better examples. Smallpox vaccination history speaks loudly and clearly in favor of vaccinations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
$tevey hearts Micro$oft ;)
I don't really care about any split. I simply want open standards to be adhered to, especially in government projects. Then we're all on the same playing field and the split is determined by choice, and not a defacto government subsidized monopoly.
1. Identify greatest long term threat to my industry
2. Conduct "Research" on threat and publish to increase FUD.
3. Sell products to "fix" FUD issues.
4. Profit!
Subject: No ?????????
Filter error: Your subject looks too much like ascii art.
You saw him repressing me, didn't you?
You have to Cancel or Allow on every site...?
I do realize that it learns what you tell it learn, but it's big internet out there.
I suppose it's fairly good if you don't visit a large number of sites, but if you do RTFA consistently it's a real PITA.
What is this "females" of which you speak?
Even as recently as the seventies, maybe the eighties, it was thought for a planet to support life, it had to be in the 'habitable zone' of a planet. I believe the Drake equation even requires this; one of the factors, as I recall, is 'number of planets within the habitable zone.' Basically, this involves liquid water, and, basically, Earth-normal temperature and the like.
The Drake equation *requires* no such thing at least with the insinuations you make. Ne is the variable you're referring to and it represents the number of planets per star that are capable of sustaining life. There is a great deal of debate over that value hence your example is invalidated. The equation is a set of assumptions that are clearly related as such. It is a tool for estimation, not a dogmatic limit on the progress of future knowledge.
The tone of your post *We don't know everything* fails to give credit some very intelligent people who work with things like the Drake equation that actually have taken in account our limited understanding.
It's disappointing you had such poor instructors in your education, but that's no reason to assume it was the same for everyone. It's only in the business and religious world where "what we know is what there is to know" has limited my opportunities. My scientific instructors were very open minded and many areas are constantly gaining knowledge including your biological example.
It turns out that other people have supposed that before.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/origins/drake.html
One would think if the sys admin's who opted in reporting this issue and provided technical details to law enforcement would know whether it was actually malicious.
If you were caught using a blink or marquee tag, then you owe your teacher a debt of gratitude.
I got a hearing front of the superintendent for ctrl-C'n out of a batch login prompt, and playing a $5 star trek diskette from a magazine type distribution. They threatened expulsion, but settled for a string of Saturday detentions. I'm glad that happened in the mid 90's, cause who knows the string of felonies you'd be hit with now on it.
Also make sure to use a lot of snake oil for lube.
Since your comment is even more vaporous that TFA, perhaps you might enlighten us with what cause he has, perceived or real, to hang on to a grudge. The firing itself?
The funny part about the part you find funny is the article "implied"(stated) his access was limited and therefore was only able to piece together the extent of the program over time and some other undisclosed means. A little far fetched?...maybe but certainly no more than your own. If you have real information you can share then do so, otherwise do us a favor and keep your unfounded personal attacks to yourself.
You do realise that OpenBSD is very small in comparison to the main desktop OS distributor - thats why OpenBSD only uses resources wisely.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base_are_belong_to_us
I don't condone what this what person did. The way he treated others around him and the apparent arrogance he had to impose his wants with disregard for anyone else's well being is cause for punishment. It's equally scary to see a person claim they've walked a mile in every troubled person's shoes. Sure, we've all had tough times, especially in childhood. Does that give me the moral high ground to pass judgment on every person that's infringed on the rights of others? I don't actually see much difference between this guy's arrogance and your own. Perhaps there is one in behavior...
As an owner of both consoles, MGS4 is the only ps3 that even rivals the good 360 games in terms of graphics. It is no where close to blowing 360 games out the water. However, at the ps3 doesn't lock up nearly as much and kicks ass at folding.
You might actually try to educate yourself. I know it's fun to be the ignornant tough guy type, but look what's its done for our president. You don't want to viewed like that, or do you?
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/060516_predator_panic.html
Yeah, governor's are just tripping over themselves to pardon people in this position. A sex offender getting pardoned whatever the circumstances is extremely rare.
Right, you imply that me and many others who have been effected by this are liars or whiners or the electronic equivalent of a hypochondriac, yet you're the one who took the high road. Give me a break.
You must know some lucky people since all the 360 owners I know first hand have experienced some of these each of these issues, although not the extent I have.
I think you're implying all of us are simply careless right? I have also owned a 360 for a long time. I think I got mine around 6 months or so after release. Then a few months into it, red ring of death. This was before MS announced their 3 yr warranty on the problem. Approx. 2 wks later I had a rpl console. This one lasted for awhile, then when after it was outside of the warranty it started eating discs. It would make a terrible grinding sound my ps3 fanboi brother loved to imitate and would startle my gf into almost hysteria. I sent that one in for repair on my own dime, and received another rpl console. This one lasted only a couple of months, then started giving me a green screen soon after POST. Luckily I was still in the limited warranty and that one was rpl'd. So now I'm on my forth console. Not one. Not two. Not three. FOUR
I live in apt in the basement(chosen because I like cool temperatures). Consoles have always sat on the floor in a horizontal position next to my 65" HDTV. My place is clean, cool, and I don't smoke or drink so there aren't large gatherings at my place.
I've dealt with optical media since CD's became the standard and do a variety of CD and DVD authoring. tccat is one my most used commands. You would be hard pressed to find a scratch on my DVD or ps3 blueray/games collection.
Can you please fucking explain the frequent and vicious circular scratches on my Xbox 360 games asshole? Can you tell me why my 360 regularly experiences catastrophic failure when none of my other similar equipment does? I bet MS just extended that warranty for shit's and giggles right?
I don't move mine and my discs are scratched. Assassins Creed is unplayable, Others lock up more frequently on scratched discs. Basically the only time my 360 has moved is when it was sent in for service three separate times(meaning I'm on my 4th console). After all the documented problems with the 360 units, why are you still willing to give it the benefit of the doubt?
My ps3 discs are virtually flawless and it receives nearly as much use as the 360. Perhaps even more since I watch all my DVD's/videos on the ps3 due it upscaling better since I have an HDMI for it.
All that being said, I think 360's are better for gaming and the ps3 is better all around unit, but the recent 360 updates narrowed the gap.