Don't think of this as "leveling the playing field", think of it as "reversing the trend of vendor lock-in" with increased competition being a side-effect.
The average computer user isn't part of this discussion - this is for governments, not end users. Do the hobbyists and shareware folks cater to governments?
What happens when the storage facility where the software is kept burns down and the company (with the copyrights) has gone out of business? Good luck reading the data!
The point of this whole thing is preventing vendor lock-in, increasing competition is merely a side-effect.
Applications are not allowed to exhibit "prejudicial behavior" prior to the spec being NDA-lessly published by an independent party.
This would've prevented the Windows/DR-DOS FUD and would prevent Microsoft's Kerberos uninteroperability. Come to think of it, I recall some 30-60 day timeframe for documentation prior to execution as part of a Microsoft Antitrust settlement option.
I agree, but the legislative branch makes the laws and, due to the cycle of oligopolies getting more money and investing in legislators that make laws that give the oligopolies more money, there's no possible chance of any of your bullet items being passed. This legislation might have a chance.
Let's try to get 90% of the pie, then work on the other 10%.
First and third items would violate the Berne convention, second and fourth are things that Congress are quite satisfied with.
All you'd need is a "penalty of perjury" statement on the form, along with legislation stating that, if no contrary claims are provided, usurpation goes. Don't even need punitive fees, the lawyers of the actual "owners" will provide enough of a chilling effect against fraudulent claims. As long as a database is publicly available, it should become a self-correcting system.
Just to amplify what the Anonymous Coward said, compilations are derivative works and thus cannot influence the earlier work's publishing date.
Even if the $1 is for a whole album (songs, cover art, et al), that isn't so bad, because that means there's only one party to approach for licensing; if multiple parties don't like being amalgamated then they can wrestle internally.
You're imagining that lobbyists will say both that $1 is too little, and any increase over $1 will be too much?!? (see FAQ items 6 and 12) Hopefully if they do that somebody will see right through it. Maybe you forget that many government programs are money-losing propositions.
With the Series 1, you could theoretically add a dialing prefix that includes a calling card for initial activation. Or, for that matter, a dialing prefix that dials a completely different UUNET phone number - no guarantee on whether a login would be successful, though. Probably applies to Series 2 as well. But then you'd be using a credit card. Series 1's bought before a certain period would continue working after subscription had expired, although they had an odd-looking banner.
Considering that a 100,000 word novel fits in around 300-350 k, you can get around 4 full size text novels on a floppy. That's more than most people will write in a lifetime. That's why I'm questioning the value of compressing files.
What kind of math is this that allows 100,000 words to fit into 350k without compression? This is using really small words?
My suspicion is that you've never tested your theory - Microsoft Word has a lot of overhead if you're doing anything other than plain text (in which case plain ASCII would be adequate).
Slashdot Mirror
(Yes, not exactly what you asked but quite close.)
Don't think of this as "leveling the playing field", think of it as "reversing the trend of vendor lock-in" with increased competition being a side-effect.
Just one question to bring this analogy in line with the discussion: Do you have really old food that you don't know how to eat?
What happens when the storage facility where the software is kept burns down and the company (with the copyrights) has gone out of business? Good luck reading the data!
The point of this whole thing is preventing vendor lock-in, increasing competition is merely a side-effect.
This would've prevented the Windows/DR-DOS FUD and would prevent Microsoft's Kerberos uninteroperability. Come to think of it, I recall some 30-60 day timeframe for documentation prior to execution as part of a Microsoft Antitrust settlement option.
Hmm, many addresses in 10.0.0.0 - something tells me some filters aren't working properly...
http://www.popvssoda.com/
Haven't you seen any of those "cold-filtered" commercials on TV? Filter out the bad stuff, keep the good stuff.
But I'm sure it'll be codified if it isn't already.
Let's try to get 90% of the pie, then work on the other 10%.
First and third items would violate the Berne convention, second and fourth are things that Congress are quite satisfied with.
All you'd need is a "penalty of perjury" statement on the form, along with legislation stating that, if no contrary claims are provided, usurpation goes. Don't even need punitive fees, the lawyers of the actual "owners" will provide enough of a chilling effect against fraudulent claims. As long as a database is publicly available, it should become a self-correcting system.
Even if the $1 is for a whole album (songs, cover art, et al), that isn't so bad, because that means there's only one party to approach for licensing; if multiple parties don't like being amalgamated then they can wrestle internally.
It arguably should be subsidized (we're subsidizing copyright already just from all the extensions) and the Office in charge would have one year from enactment of the Act to establish procedures to collect the fees, minimize the burden of submitting the form, and make the information in the forms publicly available.
While I agree, the first step is getting a foot in the door and liberating 90% of the pie. Then we can work on the remaining 10%.
With the Series 1, you could theoretically add a dialing prefix that includes a calling card for initial activation. Or, for that matter, a dialing prefix that dials a completely different UUNET phone number - no guarantee on whether a login would be successful, though. Probably applies to Series 2 as well. But then you'd be using a credit card. Series 1's bought before a certain period would continue working after subscription had expired, although they had an odd-looking banner.
This "privacy" issue is specifically about anonymous aggregated data, as opposed to personal data.
As an example, knowing that 5% of people in a particular ZIP code leave their curtains open at night might not be immediately useful to a peeping tom.
No, the first June was in 1110.
The 1st June was in 1110.
My suspicion is that you've never tested your theory - Microsoft Word has a lot of overhead if you're doing anything other than plain text (in which case plain ASCII would be adequate).
Right next to your ability to read/paste.
Perhaps bringing photo ID would help - no, not yours, your home's! A big macro view and closeups on the number and street sign.
Not until Thursday night - it's Passover!