Where do you draw the line? What about choose-your-own adventure DVDs??? Are they computer games, thus software??? And what about computer games which tell a story, and even look and feel like a movie... Are they videos???
The differences have become so disfigured that it comes down to applying the same rules for all forms of intellectual property. Everything from painting, to source code...
After all, isn't it our argument that source code is free speech anyway?
Matter that oscillates in unison would have near zero resistance, thus would probably the best superconductor yet. This truly is a giant leap in superconductor research (regardless of it's actual intentions).
1. Why and how is a computer program expressive speech? What does it express? 2600's lawyers are entirely familiar with Touretzky's Gallery, so forget about those. Assume you have some C or perl staring at you, any random block of code in any random print-out. What does it express? Why should that code be protected expression?
A computer program is expressive speech because it's a reflection of the programmer's taste. For example, if you had 5 programmers attempt to create programs to perform the same functionality, you're going to get 5 different programs which do that same thing.
Computer programs in their simplest form are nothing but instructions. Computer programs can be interpreted by computers and people. They are a list of what-to-do.
Going torward's the US Attorney's statement concerning digital works being like a painting in a living room.... then isn't DeCSS just like a piece of paper giving you driving instructions to the house, and telling you what room the painting is in? As far as I know, that's not illegal.
Software represents opinions. Opinions on how the autho thinks things should work, and how he enjoys to do them. My C++ teacher once said, "you can tell a lot about a person from the way they write programs."
2. What examples of fair uses absolutely require access to the work in its most modern, digital, uncorrupted, un-macrovisioned form? The only one that jumped out at me is making a backup copy in case the original is destroyed. But perhaps there are others.
Let's not forget that displaying copyrighted work for means of criticism is fair use. You need access to the uncorrupted format in order to show people what you are criticising. If I'm a movie critic, I don't need the publisher's permission to show a clip of a movie I'm criticising, because it's fair use.
Say, for example, John Doe sells some Nazi merchandise on a website which French users can view. Then John travels to France, where he's arrested for a crime which isn't a crime in the country he "commited" it.
Opens the door to a lot of international mistrust.
The suspects also allegedly set up a fictitious site that mimicked the Web site of PayPal in an attempt to gain access to users' accounts, Schroeder said.
I for one am glad to see the FBI going after real criminals for a change.
Mr. Kasparov, we believe you are infringing upon the common name of a famous chess player. Since common names uniformly usurp trademarks, we're retroactively registering this name, and issuing you this order to cease the use of our trademark pending name. Failure to do so will automatically result in us not caring, and no legal action being taken to cause you to forfeit said trademark (including but not limited to any merchandise, real estate, and liquid assets associated, themselves infringing, or having nothing to do, with the trademark dispure).
Have a nice day.
This CAFC decision is remarkable only because Amazon.com's patent was not discussed as a "business-method patent," an "internet patent," or a "software patent." The CAFC properly treated Amazon.com's patent as it would any other type of United States patent.
I, for once, applaud the Court of Appeals on their very common sense application of the law. But honestly, we're not done yet. This appeal applied ONLY to the injunction. They still have yet to go to trial.
Hopefully, the USPTO will get a clue and consider all patents equal. That will make certain that these types of foundationless patents cease to be issued.
Actually, what you propose is no more possible then the installation of filtering software. And to be honest, if my child were attending your school, you can trust he would be put into private school (I believe in public schools, but would not have my child attend one run by a control freak).
You see, we tried the approach of blocking everything except "requested" websites at my job. The problem, is that there are TOO many websites, and you can't name all of them off the top of your head. You see, the whole message, the WHOLE POINT, is not that kids need some sort of magical protection from unsuitable content, they need knowledge and guidance so they can understand why something is inappropriate.
We're not saying that children need unfettered access to the internet. We're simply saying that it is a parent's responsibility to teach morals. It is no more a teacher's right to tell a child which websites are appropriate, as it is for them to teach that multi-racial marriage is wrong. A teacher provides guidance that the parents are unable to (ie. showing them how to find the area of a cone, etc.). They're not babysitters (of course), and they're definetely not parental substitutes.
The immediate result of AOL and Time Warner merging into one company, being the first time that an entertainment and telecommunications company have come together, was a vast termination of employees.
I really wonder first of all, how much a merger could have EVER happened in our country. The washington post ran an article a while back dicusssing how Micheal Powell (FCC commissioner) had an influence on the direction the merger was heading. Seeing that his father (Colin Powell), sits on the AOL board.
My question is, being an established expert, do you believe that the merger between AOL and Time Warner is a rare fluke of our system, or is this something that we're going to be seeing again shortly.
The Ships Log, sent down almost daily from the ISS crew, will no longer be available on the web due to legal concerns with the freedom of information act.
"concerns with the freedom of information act". What kind of bullcrap is this? How can you use the FOIA to block information?
They better have a good reason behind this. Whether it be for the crew's safety, or whatnot. I can see the concern if the logs include confidential information, but even in that case you can censor it.
Not as far fetched as you may think. If Billy Blanks can patent something as stupid as Tae Bo, and then utterly squeeze more money than it's worth out of the people who buy it, then what would stop some porn guy from patenting a new "position"?
Of course, a lot of the standard stuff would fall under prior art... but how many times have people gotten around prior art by adding something stupid?
The great thing about Napster is that the end user can try before they buy the music. That means I can be 100% sure that I'm buying quality music.
But now they want you to subscribe to a service where you can download any of their songs for a flat fee? So what happens when I actually LIKE the song and want to buy the CD? Will I get a coupon so that I only pay for the cost of the CD (I've already paid for the song).
Here is my prediction. Napster will "sell out" to the industry. Suddenly, all of their users will get a message or something telling them they must now pay a fee. The users will simply switch to gnutella, or something else. And guess what? The recording industry will have won,... they will have shut down Napster.
Here's what Napster should do. When someone sends them a lawsuit, they need to reply with a firm middle finger. Because Napster has done nothing wrong, has broken no law, and should not be bullied into these agreements.
Personally, I'd be willing to donate some money to keep Napster going, but I will not subscribe to a "service".
Is Mr. Hatch representing Utah residents? I mean honestly, there are a lot of conservative people who are afraid of the internet in Utah. But I think the important thing that we need to emphasize is that even the PEOPLE can have opinions which undermine our basic rights. That's why I love living in a republic. En mass, people are dumb, and make dumb decisions,... but with a republic, we get a lot more common sense thrown into the mix.
Here is what I'm doing. I'm writing my congressman, and telling him what I think about Mr. Hatch's agenda. And that I would appreciate being represented on this issue.
Although the last cylinders were manufactured in 1929, the year Edison's company closed, the band They Might Be Giants went to the Edison National Historic Site in New Jersey to record "I Can Hear You," a track of their 1996 album Factory Showroom, on wax cylinder.
Just because Microsoft is claiming "copyright" protection on their announcements, does not mean they're trade secrets!!! You can publish copyrighted material under fair use laws, AND get away with it!
I mean, you can publish copyrighted material and include a review of it, and that would be fair use.
I really think SecurityFocus needs to talk to their lawyers about this. I'm sure they'll find that it's completely legal.
As for Microsoft, they deserve everything coming to them.
If anyone wants to know how bad this can get, have a read of Road to Tycho over at the GNU website.
It talks about how reading books that someone else owns would be illegal.
Of course, if the school ever found out that he had given Lissa his own password, it would be curtains for both of them as students, regardless of what she had used it for. School policy was that any interference with their means of monitoring students' computer use was grounds for disciplinary action. It didn't matter whether you did anything harmful--the offense was making it hard for the administrators to check on you. They assumed this meant you were doing something else forbidden, and they did not need to know what it was.
Boy, I'm sure glad there is some good sense in this world. We're finally getting politicians to understand the blatently dangerous consequences of patenting software. What's next? The United States? Ye gods, I hope so.
And let's not go off and start up about this only effecting EU. Because you have to understand the international treaties are two-way streets. I mean, America isn't the only place where if a law is enacted, other countries follow. EU has a lot of influence, and this is definetely good news, even in America.
I would have liked to see them extend this wisdom to bio patents, but unfortunately they decided not to discuss that.
According to 2600, despite having a great deal of videotape, the prosecution used none of it, and convicted McGuckin entirely on the testimony of one police detective.
*cough* For starters, the prosecution does not convict people. That's the court's/jury's job.
And just because this guy is with 2600, does not mean he's in the right. Every American has a right to peaceable assemble. They don't, however, have a right to block intersections, and so forth.
And fwiw, $1 million bond is hardly unheard of. Seeing that... it doesn't mention the other 3 charges that were dropped were,... and whether the bond would be lower if paid in cash (which is usually the case).
Also, seeing that he DID make bail, it obviously wasn't an impossible hardship.
This has happened before?
on
eLection '04
·
· Score: 3
Oh yeah, receive passwords by snail mail? Are we not forgetting the problems with the ICANN elections?
Honestly, we need to keep the physical booths around for quite a while longer. Perhaps absentee balots can have an option of being web-based,... but let's not go too far.
Also, there is the issue of election laws. Specifically, the "no campaigning within 100 feet of the polls". So if this is all web-based, can we outlaw door-to-door campaigning?
They're very good ideas, but let's be honest. Convenience is not a primary issue with elections.
Slashdot Mirror
Where do you draw the line? What about choose-your-own adventure DVDs??? Are they computer games, thus software??? And what about computer games which tell a story, and even look and feel like a movie... Are they videos???
The differences have become so disfigured that it comes down to applying the same rules for all forms of intellectual property. Everything from painting, to source code...
After all, isn't it our argument that source code is free speech anyway?
Matter that oscillates in unison would have near zero resistance, thus would probably the best superconductor yet. This truly is a giant leap in superconductor research (regardless of it's actual intentions).
that such business techniques were unprofitable, and would eventually crumble?
1. Why and how is a computer program expressive speech? What does it express? 2600's lawyers are entirely familiar with Touretzky's Gallery, so forget about those. Assume you have some C or perl staring at you, any random block of code in any random print-out. What does it express? Why should that code be protected expression? A computer program is expressive speech because it's a reflection of the programmer's taste. For example, if you had 5 programmers attempt to create programs to perform the same functionality, you're going to get 5 different programs which do that same thing. Computer programs in their simplest form are nothing but instructions. Computer programs can be interpreted by computers and people. They are a list of what-to-do. Going torward's the US Attorney's statement concerning digital works being like a painting in a living room.... then isn't DeCSS just like a piece of paper giving you driving instructions to the house, and telling you what room the painting is in? As far as I know, that's not illegal. Software represents opinions. Opinions on how the autho thinks things should work, and how he enjoys to do them. My C++ teacher once said, "you can tell a lot about a person from the way they write programs." 2. What examples of fair uses absolutely require access to the work in its most modern, digital, uncorrupted, un-macrovisioned form? The only one that jumped out at me is making a backup copy in case the original is destroyed. But perhaps there are others. Let's not forget that displaying copyrighted work for means of criticism is fair use. You need access to the uncorrupted format in order to show people what you are criticising. If I'm a movie critic, I don't need the publisher's permission to show a clip of a movie I'm criticising, because it's fair use.
So what happens when this is reversed?
Say, for example, John Doe sells some Nazi merchandise on a website which French users can view. Then John travels to France, where he's arrested for a crime which isn't a crime in the country he "commited" it.
Opens the door to a lot of international mistrust.
I for one am glad to see the FBI going after real criminals for a change.
Mr. Kasparov, we believe you are infringing upon the common name of a famous chess player. Since common names uniformly usurp trademarks, we're retroactively registering this name, and issuing you this order to cease the use of our trademark pending name. Failure to do so will automatically result in us not caring, and no legal action being taken to cause you to forfeit said trademark (including but not limited to any merchandise, real estate, and liquid assets associated, themselves infringing, or having nothing to do, with the trademark dispure). Have a nice day.
This CAFC decision is remarkable only because Amazon.com's patent was not discussed as a "business-method patent," an "internet patent," or a "software patent." The CAFC properly treated Amazon.com's patent as it would any other type of United States patent.
I, for once, applaud the Court of Appeals on their very common sense application of the law. But honestly, we're not done yet. This appeal applied ONLY to the injunction. They still have yet to go to trial.
Hopefully, the USPTO will get a clue and consider all patents equal. That will make certain that these types of foundationless patents cease to be issued.
Actually, what you propose is no more possible then the installation of filtering software. And to be honest, if my child were attending your school, you can trust he would be put into private school (I believe in public schools, but would not have my child attend one run by a control freak). You see, we tried the approach of blocking everything except "requested" websites at my job. The problem, is that there are TOO many websites, and you can't name all of them off the top of your head. You see, the whole message, the WHOLE POINT, is not that kids need some sort of magical protection from unsuitable content, they need knowledge and guidance so they can understand why something is inappropriate. We're not saying that children need unfettered access to the internet. We're simply saying that it is a parent's responsibility to teach morals. It is no more a teacher's right to tell a child which websites are appropriate, as it is for them to teach that multi-racial marriage is wrong. A teacher provides guidance that the parents are unable to (ie. showing them how to find the area of a cone, etc.). They're not babysitters (of course), and they're definetely not parental substitutes.
You obviously are a fan of Korn (the band). What other groups do you listen to?
The immediate result of AOL and Time Warner merging into one company, being the first time that an entertainment and telecommunications company have come together, was a vast termination of employees.
I really wonder first of all, how much a merger could have EVER happened in our country. The washington post ran an article a while back dicusssing how Micheal Powell (FCC commissioner) had an influence on the direction the merger was heading. Seeing that his father (Colin Powell), sits on the AOL board.
My question is, being an established expert, do you believe that the merger between AOL and Time Warner is a rare fluke of our system, or is this something that we're going to be seeing again shortly.
The Ships Log, sent down almost daily from the ISS crew, will no longer be available on the web due to legal concerns with the freedom of information act.
"concerns with the freedom of information act". What kind of bullcrap is this? How can you use the FOIA to block information?
They better have a good reason behind this. Whether it be for the crew's safety, or whatnot. I can see the concern if the logs include confidential information, but even in that case you can censor it.
Not as far fetched as you may think. If Billy Blanks can patent something as stupid as Tae Bo, and then utterly squeeze more money than it's worth out of the people who buy it, then what would stop some porn guy from patenting a new "position"?
Of course, a lot of the standard stuff would fall under prior art... but how many times have people gotten around prior art by adding something stupid?
Hemos, if you post something and have to ask if it matters,... then does it belong on a website which states "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters?"
The great thing about Napster is that the end user can try before they buy the music. That means I can be 100% sure that I'm buying quality music.
But now they want you to subscribe to a service where you can download any of their songs for a flat fee? So what happens when I actually LIKE the song and want to buy the CD? Will I get a coupon so that I only pay for the cost of the CD (I've already paid for the song).
Here is my prediction. Napster will "sell out" to the industry. Suddenly, all of their users will get a message or something telling them they must now pay a fee. The users will simply switch to gnutella, or something else. And guess what? The recording industry will have won,... they will have shut down Napster.
Here's what Napster should do. When someone sends them a lawsuit, they need to reply with a firm middle finger. Because Napster has done nothing wrong, has broken no law, and should not be bullied into these agreements.
Personally, I'd be willing to donate some money to keep Napster going, but I will not subscribe to a "service".
Is Mr. Hatch representing Utah residents? I mean honestly, there are a lot of conservative people who are afraid of the internet in Utah. But I think the important thing that we need to emphasize is that even the PEOPLE can have opinions which undermine our basic rights. That's why I love living in a republic. En mass, people are dumb, and make dumb decisions,... but with a republic, we get a lot more common sense thrown into the mix. Here is what I'm doing. I'm writing my congressman, and telling him what I think about Mr. Hatch's agenda. And that I would appreciate being represented on this issue.
Does anyone else find this as cool as I do?
Just because Microsoft is claiming "copyright" protection on their announcements, does not mean they're trade secrets!!! You can publish copyrighted material under fair use laws, AND get away with it!
I mean, you can publish copyrighted material and include a review of it, and that would be fair use.
I really think SecurityFocus needs to talk to their lawyers about this. I'm sure they'll find that it's completely legal.
As for Microsoft, they deserve everything coming to them.
If anyone wants to know how bad this can get, have a read of Road to Tycho over at the GNU website.
It talks about how reading books that someone else owns would be illegal.
Of course, if the school ever found out that he had given Lissa his own password, it would be curtains for both of them as students, regardless of what she had used it for. School policy was that any interference with their means of monitoring students' computer use was grounds for disciplinary action. It didn't matter whether you did anything harmful--the offense was making it hard for the administrators to check on you. They assumed this meant you were doing something else forbidden, and they did not need to know what it was.
Boy, I'm sure glad there is some good sense in this world. We're finally getting politicians to understand the blatently dangerous consequences of patenting software. What's next? The United States? Ye gods, I hope so.
And let's not go off and start up about this only effecting EU. Because you have to understand the international treaties are two-way streets. I mean, America isn't the only place where if a law is enacted, other countries follow. EU has a lot of influence, and this is definetely good news, even in America.
I would have liked to see them extend this wisdom to bio patents, but unfortunately they decided not to discuss that.
Are these real?
Since his daughter was born in the United States, can this be a valid reason to grant Torvald's citizenship?
Which DOS? MS-DOS does not run in 386 protected mode. Plus, you don't get the networking, and other high-tech stuff associated with an advanced OS.
According to 2600, despite having a great deal of videotape, the prosecution used none of it, and convicted McGuckin entirely on the testimony of one police detective.
*cough* For starters, the prosecution does not convict people. That's the court's/jury's job.
And just because this guy is with 2600, does not mean he's in the right. Every American has a right to peaceable assemble. They don't, however, have a right to block intersections, and so forth.
And fwiw, $1 million bond is hardly unheard of. Seeing that... it doesn't mention the other 3 charges that were dropped were,... and whether the bond would be lower if paid in cash (which is usually the case).
Also, seeing that he DID make bail, it obviously wasn't an impossible hardship.
Oh yeah, receive passwords by snail mail? Are we not forgetting the problems with the ICANN elections?
Honestly, we need to keep the physical booths around for quite a while longer. Perhaps absentee balots can have an option of being web-based,... but let's not go too far.
Also, there is the issue of election laws. Specifically, the "no campaigning within 100 feet of the polls". So if this is all web-based, can we outlaw door-to-door campaigning?
They're very good ideas, but let's be honest. Convenience is not a primary issue with elections.