Give his level of English, I think it's pretty safe to assume a lot of the "violation" here is his lack of mastery of the language, rather than genuine intent to defraud anyone.
As he is now, he seems to be compliant with the GPL, so I don't think you'll have any luck perusing any sort of legal action against this individual as his actual intent has been made clear.
I think a reply appearance can actually be delayed by some amount of time. I've "missed" similar replies before that simply did not appear before I commented, and I browse at -1.
Of course it's also possible I'm just completely oblivious.
They just don't want kids who likely wont be spending money on them to get them. I think it's pretty retarded personally, but it's not like they're actually carding kids to buy pudding.
What browser auto corrects as you type? I've used every major browser but Opera over the past year or so now and at most I've gotten the red squiggly line. Firefox's spell check has been finicky for me as of late too, opting not to highlight several obvious misspellings. It's also worth noting that as in-browser text editors get more and more advanced, I've noticed a lot of web pages outright breaking the built in spell checking systems, especially the "rich" text editors.
There's also grammar to contend with, which no browser to my knowledge makes an attempt to correct: using "their, they're, or there" in proper context, etc. I've only ever see word processing programs attempt such things.
Unless you're emailing highly sensitive stuff between knowing parties, what is the point, and what happens when your recipient doesn't have a means to decrypt the emails?
It really takes a special kind of paranoia to think you need to encrypt your personal email correspondence.
I've read most of the comments here and it's easy to see how passionate everyone is from both sides of the fence.
Me, personally, do not much like the GPL. I think the BSD license is far more free in my opinion of freedom. I release everything I write with a BSD license for two reasons: the end user has absolutely no restrictions as should be the case, and neither do developers who want to use my code, except for an acknowledgement that they are using it. I don't expect any more than that. If you want to turn something I wrote and integrate it into some big commercial app then by all means, do it. Being affiliated with a big name project is (usually) a good thing. If you want to release your own changes with a similar license? Great! I'm all for that too.
The point here is I want to give everyone the chance to do what they want with my code, not feel like they have to give back. I want them to -want- to give back. I am providing my code for everyone to do with as they please. The next guy down the line should not need to do the same. Everyone is free to take my code and do what the other guy did if they really want that functionality and he hasn't offered it up already.
Except it is true. Netflix considers 480p HD. There is some content that is native 720 in Netflix's streaming catalog, but it is few and far in between, and even fewer in 1080.
Does Burger King photoshop their burgers? I was under the impression they do what everyone else does and hires one of those make-food-that-looks-good-but-is-actually-cardboard-and-toothpicks.
Just because there are limitations on what you can do on your private property doesn't make what Google or UMG did here any less legal. You still need to follow the law on your own property, which is why you aren't allowed to explicitly kick out black people from going there. There's no law that says Google needs to host your crappy music video.
You should be modded troll, or at least flamebait for that drivel.
You are clearly not a developer. You can do all the "proper building and testing" you want and will still encounter bugs unless your app is some simple fart machine.
Fraudulently issuing a DMCA takedown request is illegal, and they've done it twice now over this video. If this video contains nothing that UMG can claim a copyright on, then they have absolutely right to issue a takedown.
Just because you don't like the rappers and Kim has a criminal past doesn't make what is happening to them any less illegal or wrong.
I just went to the webpage of one of the products being criticized here, and the site is entirely open about its ad-supported nature right on the front page. It's literally on the top of the webpage. "PageRage is ad-supported to keep it 100% FREE to our users. Ad-free version available." It is not buried in an "unreadable EULA."
What about movies like Saw? Texas Chainsaw Massacre? Or any wartime movie depicting chemical warfare or movie which someone unleashes some sort of chemical weapon/plague on the population and wipes everyone out? I mean hey, those were people too. And now they've caught a case of zombie because some madman instigating the situation.
Once you start applying real well intentioned laws to pretend situations, where do you draw the line?
This whole idea has to be nothing more than a quick grab for attention to remind everyone that the Red Cross is still out there and accepting donations.
If the Iranian government tried to set up a web site for US citizens to read propaganda from, how long do you think it would stay up?
Until the website is shut down due to lack of interest or funding?
Are you really suggesting that the US government would censor the internet if Iran put up anti-US propaganda and/or ban its citizens from viewing it? Really?
Slashdot Mirror
Give his level of English, I think it's pretty safe to assume a lot of the "violation" here is his lack of mastery of the language, rather than genuine intent to defraud anyone.
As he is now, he seems to be compliant with the GPL, so I don't think you'll have any luck perusing any sort of legal action against this individual as his actual intent has been made clear.
I think a reply appearance can actually be delayed by some amount of time. I've "missed" similar replies before that simply did not appear before I commented, and I browse at -1.
Of course it's also possible I'm just completely oblivious.
I wasn't aware snakes could actually speak at all.
They just don't want kids who likely wont be spending money on them to get them. I think it's pretty retarded personally, but it's not like they're actually carding kids to buy pudding.
What browser auto corrects as you type? I've used every major browser but Opera over the past year or so now and at most I've gotten the red squiggly line. Firefox's spell check has been finicky for me as of late too, opting not to highlight several obvious misspellings. It's also worth noting that as in-browser text editors get more and more advanced, I've noticed a lot of web pages outright breaking the built in spell checking systems, especially the "rich" text editors.
There's also grammar to contend with, which no browser to my knowledge makes an attempt to correct: using "their, they're, or there" in proper context, etc. I've only ever see word processing programs attempt such things.
So you really think he's going to be in prison for one year?
I certainly don't.
Unless you're emailing highly sensitive stuff between knowing parties, what is the point, and what happens when your recipient doesn't have a means to decrypt the emails?
It really takes a special kind of paranoia to think you need to encrypt your personal email correspondence.
You're getting too hung up on the semantics of the word. You don't need to be addicted for it to be considered "abuse".
Some people do.
Then you are too far gone, my friend.
I've read most of the comments here and it's easy to see how passionate everyone is from both sides of the fence.
Me, personally, do not much like the GPL. I think the BSD license is far more free in my opinion of freedom. I release everything I write with a BSD license for two reasons: the end user has absolutely no restrictions as should be the case, and neither do developers who want to use my code, except for an acknowledgement that they are using it. I don't expect any more than that. If you want to turn something I wrote and integrate it into some big commercial app then by all means, do it. Being affiliated with a big name project is (usually) a good thing. If you want to release your own changes with a similar license? Great! I'm all for that too.
The point here is I want to give everyone the chance to do what they want with my code, not feel like they have to give back. I want them to -want- to give back. I am providing my code for everyone to do with as they please. The next guy down the line should not need to do the same. Everyone is free to take my code and do what the other guy did if they really want that functionality and he hasn't offered it up already.
Did you seriously just imply the only time the GPL would cause problems for companies is in acts of evil?
Wow.
Except it is true. Netflix considers 480p HD. There is some content that is native 720 in Netflix's streaming catalog, but it is few and far in between, and even fewer in 1080.
Does Burger King photoshop their burgers? I was under the impression they do what everyone else does and hires one of those make-food-that-looks-good-but-is-actually-cardboard-and-toothpicks.
Netflix -rarely- does anything higher than 480p anyway.
Just because there are limitations on what you can do on your private property doesn't make what Google or UMG did here any less legal. You still need to follow the law on your own property, which is why you aren't allowed to explicitly kick out black people from going there. There's no law that says Google needs to host your crappy music video.
This has to be a troll. I just can't picture it any other way.
You should be modded troll, or at least flamebait for that drivel.
You are clearly not a developer. You can do all the "proper building and testing" you want and will still encounter bugs unless your app is some simple fart machine.
Yes, it is.
Fraudulently issuing a DMCA takedown request is illegal, and they've done it twice now over this video. If this video contains nothing that UMG can claim a copyright on, then they have absolutely right to issue a takedown.
Just because you don't like the rappers and Kim has a criminal past doesn't make what is happening to them any less illegal or wrong.
Hey, it takes a great degree of skill to become a certified duct tape expert.
To be fair, neither does the company this article is talking about. They only inject ads into web pages they "enhance."
I just went to the webpage of one of the products being criticized here, and the site is entirely open about its ad-supported nature right on the front page. It's literally on the top of the webpage. "PageRage is ad-supported to keep it 100% FREE to our users. Ad-free version available." It is not buried in an "unreadable EULA."
What about movies like Saw? Texas Chainsaw Massacre? Or any wartime movie depicting chemical warfare or movie which someone unleashes some sort of chemical weapon/plague on the population and wipes everyone out? I mean hey, those were people too. And now they've caught a case of zombie because some madman instigating the situation.
Once you start applying real well intentioned laws to pretend situations, where do you draw the line?
This whole idea has to be nothing more than a quick grab for attention to remind everyone that the Red Cross is still out there and accepting donations.
If the Iranian government tried to set up a web site for US citizens to read propaganda from, how long do you think it would stay up?
Until the website is shut down due to lack of interest or funding?
Are you really suggesting that the US government would censor the internet if Iran put up anti-US propaganda and/or ban its citizens from viewing it? Really?
It's a mystery how this post was modded up.
Wow. That's +1 Informative if I ever saw it.