The DMCA does outline the procedure for takedown notices. It is as follows:
The Rightsholder believes that something has been put up which is infringing their copyright. They issue a takedown notice to the site.
The person who posted the item is allowed to file a response notice, affirming that the item in question falls under Fair Use, or other legal uses of the content.
The site will then restore the posted item.
At this point, the validity of the takedown is in question, and the Rightsholder is not allowed to issue another takedown for the same item. Rather, it has now become a question for the courts to decide.
As long as a site follows this procedure, they are not open to a suit themselves, this is what's known as the "Safe Harbor" provision.
US Style Takedown Notices have been more or less a disaster here. Just look into any of the cases of abuse of the takedown system. There's the video of the little kid dancing to the Prince song in the background. The point of the video was the little kid, and nobody who wants to hear the Prince song is going to go to that video just to hear it. And yet, it received a DMCA takedown notice.
There's Michael Savage, who made several anti-Islamic comments on his radio show. The Council for American-Islamic relations posted these on its website, along with commentary. This falls under Fair Use. That didn't stop Michael Savage from trying to file a takedown notice and suing them.
There's also several cases where a takedown notice was issued, and the person who put up the video responded, saying it fell under Fair Use, or the takedown notice was issued in error. At this point, the law says that the video should be put back up, and if the rightsholder still isn't convinced, they are to file suit. Instead, the rightsholders will just issue another takedown notice. So yes, the DMCA takedown system is deeply flawed
Again, they're drafts. The content is probably the same, there's just a few typos or miswordings in them. This way they can track who leaked which copy. When the treaty is finalized, they'll have a singular version.
Look at their budget, and the funding handed down from Congress. A lot of their funding comes with strings attached, saying they have to use it for X, where X is usually some educational program in a Congressperson's district. Not saying education programs are bad, but NASA isn't always in control of its budget.
Apple shut down the clone program because most of the clones were shitty computers. Jobs wanted to control the quality of the product, and he couldn't do that with the clones.
The main difference is that the GPL actually has the clause in it that says you don't need to agree to the GPL in order to use the software. Just about every closed source app has a clause that says you MUST agree to the license before you can use the software.
They already got burned once by trying to get a private enterprise to provide them service. I'm guessing that Verizon would require the same exclusivity deals for the fiber they laid that TDS would have. Now, the city owns the fiber, and can allow anyone to use it.
True, but at least the government water is available to all. Given the choice between water I need to filter, and no water, I'll gladly buy some filters.
Not all carriers do this. When I was on Alltel, I had a Moto 810e, and Bluetooth file transfer worked just fine. Of course, now they've been bought by Verizon, and I've heard they've gotten more evil.
Agreed. I love T-Mobile where I live now, but whenever I go home, I have zero signal before I even cross the state line.:( Good thing I have Google Voice, so I can pick up a cheapie burner phone, put its number on my account, and continue as normal.
I think Boeing did just that. They didn't move their actual operations, but the moved their "headquarters" to Chicago. I have no idea if their top people moved as well; if they didn't, I would call the legitimacy of the move into question.
True, I can choose which state to live in. However, I can't (or it would be pretty difficult, and bad if I got caught) decide to live in California, while claiming that I make all my money in South Dakota, where there is no income tax
From what I've heard, using M$ comes from the days when they were Micro-Soft, and they needed an abbreviation with a hyphen in it. Combine an S with a hyphen, and you get a $. Hence, Micro-Soft became M$.
True, they have the ability to choose which state's laws fit them best. The problem the article is stating is that MS is trying to choose different states for different aspects of the business, when they should be picking one state for all of it. They're trying to have Washington's lax tech labor laws and Nevada's lax tax laws. The article is arguing that it shouldn't be like a Chinese menu, where you get to pick one from Column A, one from Column B.
Slashdot Mirror
The DMCA does outline the procedure for takedown notices. It is as follows:
At this point, the validity of the takedown is in question, and the Rightsholder is not allowed to issue another takedown for the same item. Rather, it has now become a question for the courts to decide.
As long as a site follows this procedure, they are not open to a suit themselves, this is what's known as the "Safe Harbor" provision.
US Style Takedown Notices have been more or less a disaster here. Just look into any of the cases of abuse of the takedown system. There's the video of the little kid dancing to the Prince song in the background. The point of the video was the little kid, and nobody who wants to hear the Prince song is going to go to that video just to hear it. And yet, it received a DMCA takedown notice.
There's Michael Savage, who made several anti-Islamic comments on his radio show. The Council for American-Islamic relations posted these on its website, along with commentary. This falls under Fair Use. That didn't stop Michael Savage from trying to file a takedown notice and suing them.
There's also several cases where a takedown notice was issued, and the person who put up the video responded, saying it fell under Fair Use, or the takedown notice was issued in error. At this point, the law says that the video should be put back up, and if the rightsholder still isn't convinced, they are to file suit. Instead, the rightsholders will just issue another takedown notice. So yes, the DMCA takedown system is deeply flawed
Again, they're drafts. The content is probably the same, there's just a few typos or miswordings in them. This way they can track who leaked which copy. When the treaty is finalized, they'll have a singular version.
The Senate still does have to ratify the treaty. So its about as much Republic as any other law that gets passed.
If this is true (and I'm not saying its not), then why hasn't the document been translated and posted for all to view yet?
You mean the victory in a state against a governor who people hated so much they would have voted for just about anybody with a pulse against him?
The media loved Palin too.
Slashdot user Q: CmdrTaco's penis is sooooo small.
Look at their budget, and the funding handed down from Congress. A lot of their funding comes with strings attached, saying they have to use it for X, where X is usually some educational program in a Congressperson's district. Not saying education programs are bad, but NASA isn't always in control of its budget.
Apple shut down the clone program because most of the clones were shitty computers. Jobs wanted to control the quality of the product, and he couldn't do that with the clones.
The main difference is that the GPL actually has the clause in it that says you don't need to agree to the GPL in order to use the software. Just about every closed source app has a clause that says you MUST agree to the license before you can use the software.
I don't think Apple needs to look at Microsoft to see how to make massive profits. They're doing incredibly well with their corner of the market.
"When transaction costs are low, there are no barriers to entry, and property rights exist and are enforced, then the free market is efficient".
So not in the real world, then.
They already got burned once by trying to get a private enterprise to provide them service. I'm guessing that Verizon would require the same exclusivity deals for the fiber they laid that TDS would have. Now, the city owns the fiber, and can allow anyone to use it.
True, but at least the government water is available to all. Given the choice between water I need to filter, and no water, I'll gladly buy some filters.
I'm similar, and I've rooted my Android and such, but you have to realize that people like us are in the minority. We're not most customers.
Not all carriers do this. When I was on Alltel, I had a Moto 810e, and Bluetooth file transfer worked just fine. Of course, now they've been bought by Verizon, and I've heard they've gotten more evil.
Agreed. I love T-Mobile where I live now, but whenever I go home, I have zero signal before I even cross the state line. :( Good thing I have Google Voice, so I can pick up a cheapie burner phone, put its number on my account, and continue as normal.
Nokia has some badass phones running Symbian. Too bad they hardly market them here in the States, and no carrier wants to carry them.
I think Boeing did just that. They didn't move their actual operations, but the moved their "headquarters" to Chicago. I have no idea if their top people moved as well; if they didn't, I would call the legitimacy of the move into question.
True, I can choose which state to live in. However, I can't (or it would be pretty difficult, and bad if I got caught) decide to live in California, while claiming that I make all my money in South Dakota, where there is no income tax
From what I've heard, using M$ comes from the days when they were Micro-Soft, and they needed an abbreviation with a hyphen in it. Combine an S with a hyphen, and you get a $. Hence, Micro-Soft became M$.
"Cashpocalypse" I like that. Mind if I borrow it?
True, they have the ability to choose which state's laws fit them best. The problem the article is stating is that MS is trying to choose different states for different aspects of the business, when they should be picking one state for all of it. They're trying to have Washington's lax tech labor laws and Nevada's lax tax laws. The article is arguing that it shouldn't be like a Chinese menu, where you get to pick one from Column A, one from Column B.
That's not the Constitution; you're thinking of the Declaration of Independence, which was more or less a declaration of War against Britain.