It's still automatic too, the stamps are mostly for personal use, there are few security checkpoints that need them today. With EU as example, all personal data and travelinfo must be sent to the US preflight so they only need to match the id and add the current tripp to the database. Sure they might not cache what you did ten years ago but the paper and electronic trail of some people are long.
I was ordered to is never a defence. They knew it was illegal and still helped, not just did what they needed but even supplied with more. Both are at fault, why choose one of them?!
Locking out develepors defeats the whole purpose of an operating system. One fixed bug is not locking out develeopers not when it's a piece of software that microsoft gives away for free. Thats right, the fix is not locking out but the bug was one factor of several that makes it hard to get support on the platform. Still they don't give it away free, they charge you for it and makes it impossible to remove. The bug which now is fixed was an example of their practice, similar bugs or features is programmed by Microsoft on purpose or by sloppy programming, I can bet that all of them are not sloppy or Microsoft has bigger problems than competitors.
I'm not saying that complementary software is unnecessary, what I'm saying is that it is wrong to force the consumer and developers to adopt after how Microsoft wants it to be done, through Internet Explorer in this case and not by using competitors. If Microsoft wants to promote Windows as a package, fine by me, but they have to make it possible to replace software, not making it an app thats not used by the OS for what it is chosen to be.
Take that bug that MS recently fixed on Vista as an example, that the OS opened some links in IE even though IE is not the default browser. It is just one of hundreds of similar features that makes other software second instead of first. Why do you need another if the OS does not let you use the software as intended?
What is locking out if it is not removing the possibilities of using software as intended?
It is all in the total cost, you cannot ignore the total price tag for one product. Yes the mints are included in every paying bill, the same as rents, supplies etc. The problem is not MS having their own software but rather that they use their money and software to lock consumers in and developers out.
Mircosoft does a lot of bad things, but giving away software is not one of them.
Oh, so you think that all software that Microsoft is not charging you for is free?, it is not! Every customer that buys Windows is paying for all applications that follow with. By locking their customers in with their built-in software which is mostly in the way they are missuisng their monopoly.
Oh, so thats why my 3 year old DivX-movies, and a lot of new ones, still works on my one year old DVD-player. Thats rapid.. Most DVD-players play DivX version 5 which most movies are encoded in, a lot play version 6 which some are made in. Unless you buy a real budget player without checking the versions, you shouldn't have a problem.
You have a limited choice of buying a computer without an OS. The easiest way is a PC which you build yourself. But then we go to prebuilt systems or laptops. Wow, my choice is very limited. If I want any choosing quality or manufacturing, to 99% they don't offer anything but Windows. Not even without the OS.
I don't know what you buy for computers but certainly not any of the known or big brands. I love Lenovo and their Thinkpads, Ubuntu runs great on them, but the MS tax is a joke!
You can rationalize all you want but the bottom line is that you took, without paying, what was valuable - the IP - even if you didn't take the physical disk it was on. My argument still stands, you do not profit from using their IP and they did not loose anything. It might impose that the person will not buy the IP or it might pay for it, why pay for a product that you don't know i worth the money, god knows I have done it several times to test products, as a result I'm know only using Linux and never buys any DRM damage files.
If say a company spends millions on a product and only a few is willing to pay for that amount, they are using a bad business model, and that is something every economic knows and how it works on all markets, why not this as well? What is so special about an industry who have made a business model around locking and worth to protect when their precious ways don't work (like trying to ban VHS, DVD, MP3, censure the Internet, ban digital radio stations and so on).
It's called a derivative work then, and infringement then is for the courts to decide. Exactly, but then they have to decide that before you know if it is wrong.
The only reason people like their service is because it enables them to get copyrighted works for free - take away that and their service is no longer valuable. Hence, they are profiting primarily from the pirating of others works. You can't turn it, they might make a profit of it in say the third or fourth line but they are not spreading the works or making them available. They are still not more illegal than Google or your ISP, and they shouldn't cause then you need censorship. There are more files transfered on MSN for gods sake, but still it is Microsoft and they can't be picked on?
And no, they might have been famous for pirated works but it is also a lot of legal material there. If you read a lot of the information files they who put it there even recommends buying it! There are no legal options for me to test if an option is good, there are almost none options even to buy stuff easy or without having damage files.
I've heard from a lot of people primarily using the Internet to see if the movie is OK for the children, a song I might give away as a gift and so on. Don't think the industry is not making a lot of money out of this.
That was not what I said said! I am not saying that it is illegal to have torrents. What I said was you are not allowed to sell a computer to make a profit of the software on the computer at sale because then you are making it commercial.
Further more, making money distributing files containing links is not a crime, web pages is another fenomen where this is applied.
Considering I never said anything about stealing money, your arguement makes no sense. You said taking it and pointing to that it was not with permission which is stealing per definition. If I take something the original is being taken, if I copy something, I haven't taken anything from you, I have copied it.
While the amount of lost sales is debatable and I don't buy the every copy is a lost sale arguement; it's not too hard to understand taht some percentage of those illegally copying IP would buy them if they could not get it for free. So there is a loss to teh owner; the only question is how much. Firstly the MAFIAA is claiming otherwise, that all distributed copies are a loss to them. Secondly I could also argue that it seems perfectly logic that some percentage of those illegally copying IP would buy them because they have found a new favorite artist. That is why you can argue this forth and back, but it seems like all the scientific reports show the latter being more true, while does sponsored by the MAFIAA shows my first argument.
Copyright law grants certain rights to the creator and purchasers of the product; you can resell the physical disk (assuming you don't keep any copys of teh material once you do) but you can't for example, take a song and add it to a video and tehn distribute that without first clearing the rights. No but you can for your own use take a song and add it to a video, then if you alter it to have another meaning then it is not the original work any more. If you do that next argument is how alike are they, and what is it that is the real infringement, similar lyrics, similar instrumentals, or the just the reference?
My premise stands - piratebay only is valuable becasue it enables people to locate and download copyrighted material for free - if they took off all such links their traffic would go to zero so they are profitting from others copyrighted works. Not hosting them in my view does not make them any less moral.
But for the argument sake, would you say Google, Microsoft, Yahoo is also criminals and thieves?
No; although many on/. would disagree, at least about MS. No they are profiting by providing a service which the users appreciate. To be able to locate files through this index easy and fast is their service. Just like Google, MSN Live and Yahoo Search. But hey, they are the good guys since they are big economic companies that brings a big cash flow like the MAFIAA. I wounder how much their traffic would be lowered, or the Internet providers, or the hosting companies, or the hardware makers/resellers and so on...
Can I sell my computer to someone else it it has some ("pirated") software in it?
Can I sell my computer if it has none, only an icon for a preset Bittorrent?
Could Dell do that? It is not legal to make a profit of the software no, but if you only calculate the price on the hardware, the software doesn't count right?
Where is the difference between "commercial" v.s. "private" use? The difference is that if you are making a profit by using software that is used without consent, it is commercial use. But if you only use it for private matters, you don't make any money from it. A tip would be reading some economics and some law so you know what the words being used really mean.
Is TPB commercial entity ("commercial use") as they sell advertisements? No, because nothing that TPB does is illegal, they provide links to users that may or may not distribute copyrighted material, like Google, Microsoft and Yahoo. If it was illegal than roads, Internet, phones, newspapers etc. would also be illegal means of distribution. Why would a hardware store be accountable if a customer kills someone with one of its sold tools?
Your claim is utter bullshit and you know it. Well, if he is stupid, then you are a moron.
If loading "pirated" SW becomes legal you can be certain no company is going to buy anything. This alone would be enough to kill e.g. Microsoft - Dell would just download and copy it w.o. paying a penny. There is a difference between private use and commercial use. Guess in what category companies fold into? If you are to generalize like that I can understand why you have a hard problem understanding the issue at hand.
Since you are Swedish, maybe you should read some Swedish law before saying anything more. After that you can prove why it is wrong, not even the MAFIAA have solved this "complex" equation yet.
Although I would agree that many support the cause of TPB it's not for any political reasons, it's simply because they like things that are free (stealing is another appropriate term). Most people who use TPB does not have free as there primary reason, it's availability. Oh I want to here/watch XXX now/tonight where can I do that, only answer TPB, or do you have any alternative?
Btw, people who pirate are stupid, do you see why? No because it is hard to see through the forest of stupid people who can't argue by using proof, but instead their opinions built on some weird form of control-moral like the MAFIAA.
Not having the money to buy something you want is no excuse for taking it; it's not like not having the latest game is going to cause you to starve to death. Most of the software pirates I've known are really somewhat pathetic - they simply want to amass a large software collection simply to sya they have a large one and never run or use most of the software they've collected. Wait, what, who is stealing money? I don't know which world you live in but here on Earth, there still is no proof of copying of intellectual property equals even a loss of income. What you are saying, stealing money, is way down the ladder.
The arguement that is OK to steal from people you view as rich is exactly what a 411 or other third world scammer would view themselves doing - taking money from someone who has way too much and giving it to someone with much less (themselves). Well if people who scam people in a third world country sees themselfs as Robin Hood is no good comparasment to people who don't steal, scam or hurt but simple helps make available something that cannot be a loss.
First of all, you really don't believe in coipyrights if you feel it is OK for someone to use copyrighted material without the owner's permission. Well it is not all black or white, but what you are saying in black or white is that I'm not allowed to use my legally purchased CD as I wish. Not even copy it to my computer for self use, because the owner of the original product does not want me to, but he has no say in what I do with a product he/she has sold me. It would be a crime to actually sell the product and gain an income of it, because you are making a profit of something that is not yours to sell.
Second, piratebay may not make money by selling the programs, but they're getting money to host the material only becaus ethey have the material - if there were no pirated goods on piratebay no one would be interested in them - so they are profiting from the material. Here too, wtf, how can you respond to an argument when you are incompetent on the subject? The Pirate Bay does not host any copyrighted material at all, period. But they host indexed files which point to users how may or may not have copyrighted files.
But for the argument sake, would you say Google, Microsoft, Yahoo is also criminals and thieves?
Our Galaxy will get a rain of gas from this cloud, then in about 20 to 40 million years, the cloud's core will smash into the Milky Way's plane
Yes but when will we start noticing changes, it says it already reaches the outscrirt of the Milky Way's plane. By looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milky_way we are not that far away as 20 million years.
(above) A mail sent from MPA to the Swedish version of them: "After a raid by Swedish representatives of Antipiratbyrån and police of one of the largest Internet provider. they found 23 TB of pirated material.". More interesting is that noone knows (yet) of what was on the servers, and it is a small Internet provider. By looking at the revisions of the document sent they found that a paragraph was removed, what it said was: "Information from the local goverments implies that the servers also was used to distribute traininginstructions for a terrorgroup called Yellow Brigades". All of this was false information from MPA.
Well it's not about the magnetic strip now is it, its about RFID and no mather how "secure" the government or you say it is, something that is meant to do one thing can often do a thousand other things its not supposed to or gets used as. RFID is proven to be and it will be shown insecure and stupid as it is used today. Though I have to say that to monitor objects (or people) is a real charm with it, but thats only benefit.
I'll probably feel like cattle in a few years where you are told what to do and how to do it and be monitored doing it.highly miniaturized bar codes, too small for the naked eye but, again, visible to readers.
And you missed the point of adding a format that is free to use and _should_ work on al platforms but not a must to use by developers. Other formats are not affected by this and if someone wants to use a properity format they are free to do so. By implementing a format that is free it makes it more viable to use if you want an independent format on all platforms.
Well thats one big concern about OOXML that if it gets to be a standard they can just change it and lock everyone out again, they have only "promised" to not sue those who use the "standard" version. With odf they can however submit the changes they want and if they are sane, why shouldn't they be applied?
Slashdot Mirror
It's still automatic too, the stamps are mostly for personal use, there are few security checkpoints that need them today. With EU as example, all personal data and travelinfo must be sent to the US preflight so they only need to match the id and add the current tripp to the database. Sure they might not cache what you did ten years ago but the paper and electronic trail of some people are long.
I haven't seen parent but I would hint at http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/21/0652248 but for IE8, and it wouldn't be a surprise.
I was ordered to is never a defence. They knew it was illegal and still helped, not just did what they needed but even supplied with more. Both are at fault, why choose one of them?!
I'm not saying that complementary software is unnecessary, what I'm saying is that it is wrong to force the consumer and developers to adopt after how Microsoft wants it to be done, through Internet Explorer in this case and not by using competitors. If Microsoft wants to promote Windows as a package, fine by me, but they have to make it possible to replace software, not making it an app thats not used by the OS for what it is chosen to be.
Take that bug that MS recently fixed on Vista as an example, that the OS opened some links in IE even though IE is not the default browser. It is just one of hundreds of similar features that makes other software second instead of first. Why do you need another if the OS does not let you use the software as intended?
What is locking out if it is not removing the possibilities of using software as intended?
It is all in the total cost, you cannot ignore the total price tag for one product. Yes the mints are included in every paying bill, the same as rents, supplies etc. The problem is not MS having their own software but rather that they use their money and software to lock consumers in and developers out.
Oh, so you think that all software that Microsoft is not charging you for is free?, it is not! Every customer that buys Windows is paying for all applications that follow with. By locking their customers in with their built-in software which is mostly in the way they are missuisng their monopoly.
Oh, so thats why my 3 year old DivX-movies, and a lot of new ones, still works on my one year old DVD-player. Thats rapid.. Most DVD-players play DivX version 5 which most movies are encoded in, a lot play version 6 which some are made in. Unless you buy a real budget player without checking the versions, you shouldn't have a problem.
You mean like any ~$50 regular DVD-player that already does DivX. Why spend 3 times as much on something the person obviously is not interested in?
You have a limited choice of buying a computer without an OS. The easiest way is a PC which you build yourself. But then we go to prebuilt systems or laptops. Wow, my choice is very limited. If I want any choosing quality or manufacturing, to 99% they don't offer anything but Windows. Not even without the OS.
I don't know what you buy for computers but certainly not any of the known or big brands. I love Lenovo and their Thinkpads, Ubuntu runs great on them, but the MS tax is a joke!
Since the RIAA wants to change the pricing for new songs to a higher price, I doubt they will lower the overall price.
If say a company spends millions on a product and only a few is willing to pay for that amount, they are using a bad business model, and that is something every economic knows and how it works on all markets, why not this as well? What is so special about an industry who have made a business model around locking and worth to protect when their precious ways don't work (like trying to ban VHS, DVD, MP3, censure the Internet, ban digital radio stations and so on).
It's called a derivative work then, and infringement then is for the courts to decide. Exactly, but then they have to decide that before you know if it is wrong.
The only reason people like their service is because it enables them to get copyrighted works for free - take away that and their service is no longer valuable. Hence, they are profiting primarily from the pirating of others works. You can't turn it, they might make a profit of it in say the third or fourth line but they are not spreading the works or making them available. They are still not more illegal than Google or your ISP, and they shouldn't cause then you need censorship. There are more files transfered on MSN for gods sake, but still it is Microsoft and they can't be picked on?
And no, they might have been famous for pirated works but it is also a lot of legal material there. If you read a lot of the information files they who put it there even recommends buying it! There are no legal options for me to test if an option is good, there are almost none options even to buy stuff easy or without having damage files.
I've heard from a lot of people primarily using the Internet to see if the movie is OK for the children, a song I might give away as a gift and so on. Don't think the industry is not making a lot of money out of this.
That was not what I said said! I am not saying that it is illegal to have torrents. What I said was you are not allowed to sell a computer to make a profit of the software on the computer at sale because then you are making it commercial.
Further more, making money distributing files containing links is not a crime, web pages is another fenomen where this is applied.
While the amount of lost sales is debatable and I don't buy the every copy is a lost sale arguement; it's not too hard to understand taht some percentage of those illegally copying IP would buy them if they could not get it for free. So there is a loss to teh owner; the only question is how much. Firstly the MAFIAA is claiming otherwise, that all distributed copies are a loss to them. Secondly I could also argue that it seems perfectly logic that some percentage of those illegally copying IP would buy them because they have found a new favorite artist. That is why you can argue this forth and back, but it seems like all the scientific reports show the latter being more true, while does sponsored by the MAFIAA shows my first argument.
Copyright law grants certain rights to the creator and purchasers of the product; you can resell the physical disk (assuming you don't keep any copys of teh material once you do) but you can't for example, take a song and add it to a video and tehn distribute that without first clearing the rights. No but you can for your own use take a song and add it to a video, then if you alter it to have another meaning then it is not the original work any more. If you do that next argument is how alike are they, and what is it that is the real infringement, similar lyrics, similar instrumentals, or the just the reference?
My premise stands - piratebay only is valuable becasue it enables people to locate and download copyrighted material for free - if they took off all such links their traffic would go to zero so they are profitting from others copyrighted works. Not hosting them in my view does not make them any less moral.
But for the argument sake, would you say Google, Microsoft, Yahoo is also criminals and thieves?
No; although many on
Can I sell my computer if it has none, only an icon for a preset Bittorrent?
Could Dell do that? It is not legal to make a profit of the software no, but if you only calculate the price on the hardware, the software doesn't count right?
Where is the difference between "commercial" v.s. "private" use? The difference is that if you are making a profit by using software that is used without consent, it is commercial use. But if you only use it for private matters, you don't make any money from it. A tip would be reading some economics and some law so you know what the words being used really mean.
Is TPB commercial entity ("commercial use") as they sell advertisements? No, because nothing that TPB does is illegal, they provide links to users that may or may not distribute copyrighted material, like Google, Microsoft and Yahoo. If it was illegal than roads, Internet, phones, newspapers etc. would also be illegal means of distribution. Why would a hardware store be accountable if a customer kills someone with one of its sold tools?
If loading "pirated" SW becomes legal you can be certain no company is going to buy anything. This alone would be enough to kill e.g. Microsoft - Dell would just download and copy it w.o. paying a penny. There is a difference between private use and commercial use. Guess in what category companies fold into? If you are to generalize like that I can understand why you have a hard problem understanding the issue at hand.
Although I would agree that many support the cause of TPB it's not for any political reasons, it's simply because they like things that are free (stealing is another appropriate term). Most people who use TPB does not have free as there primary reason, it's availability. Oh I want to here/watch XXX now/tonight where can I do that, only answer TPB, or do you have any alternative?
Btw, people who pirate are stupid, do you see why? No because it is hard to see through the forest of stupid people who can't argue by using proof, but instead their opinions built on some weird form of control-moral like the MAFIAA.
The arguement that is OK to steal from people you view as rich is exactly what a 411 or other third world scammer would view themselves doing - taking money from someone who has way too much and giving it to someone with much less (themselves). Well if people who scam people in a third world country sees themselfs as Robin Hood is no good comparasment to people who don't steal, scam or hurt but simple helps make available something that cannot be a loss.
First of all, you really don't believe in coipyrights if you feel it is OK for someone to use copyrighted material without the owner's permission. Well it is not all black or white, but what you are saying in black or white is that I'm not allowed to use my legally purchased CD as I wish. Not even copy it to my computer for self use, because the owner of the original product does not want me to, but he has no say in what I do with a product he/she has sold me. It would be a crime to actually sell the product and gain an income of it, because you are making a profit of something that is not yours to sell.
Second, piratebay may not make money by selling the programs, but they're getting money to host the material only becaus ethey have the material - if there were no pirated goods on piratebay no one would be interested in them - so they are profiting from the material. Here too, wtf, how can you respond to an argument when you are incompetent on the subject? The Pirate Bay does not host any copyrighted material at all, period. But they host indexed files which point to users how may or may not have copyrighted files.
But for the argument sake, would you say Google, Microsoft, Yahoo is also criminals and thieves?
Yes but when will we start noticing changes, it says it already reaches the outscrirt of the Milky Way's plane. By looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milky_way we are not that far away as 20 million years.
Yeah, all those famous people, damn them! Especially the Rock-artists that use!
I have two examples of when the American media industri have missused the term terrorism:
Music piracy funds terrorism: IFPI
http://techlogg.com/cMusic piracy funds terrorism: IFPIontent/view/230/31/
"Terroristgruppen Gula Brigaderna spred träningsmanualer på piratserver!" (in Swedish, 2005)
http://copyriot.blogspot.com/2005/10/terroristgruppen-gula-brigaderna-spred.html
(above) A mail sent from MPA to the Swedish version of them: "After a raid by Swedish representatives of Antipiratbyrån and police of one of the largest Internet provider. they found 23 TB of pirated material.". More interesting is that noone knows (yet) of what was on the servers, and it is a small Internet provider. By looking at the revisions of the document sent they found that a paragraph was removed, what it said was: "Information from the local goverments implies that the servers also was used to distribute traininginstructions for a terrorgroup called Yellow Brigades". All of this was false information from MPA.
Well it's not about the magnetic strip now is it, its about RFID and no mather how "secure" the government or you say it is, something that is meant to do one thing can often do a thousand other things its not supposed to or gets used as. RFID is proven to be and it will be shown insecure and stupid as it is used today. Though I have to say that to monitor objects (or people) is a real charm with it, but thats only benefit.
I'll probably feel like cattle in a few years where you are told what to do and how to do it and be monitored doing it.highly miniaturized bar codes, too small for the naked eye but, again, visible to readers.
You have reported unlawfull activity, you have not gained any money for doing so or hired someone else.
But then again, I think it is perfectly legal to obtain proof legally if you do it yourself or without profit.
And you missed the point of adding a format that is free to use and _should_ work on al platforms but not a must to use by developers. Other formats are not affected by this and if someone wants to use a properity format they are free to do so. By implementing a format that is free it makes it more viable to use if you want an independent format on all platforms.
Well thats one big concern about OOXML that if it gets to be a standard they can just change it and lock everyone out again, they have only "promised" to not sue those who use the "standard" version. With odf they can however submit the changes they want and if they are sane, why shouldn't they be applied?