What do you mean by "pload all files pretty much as you go " For backup purposes? Or for a way for others to see them?
For backup, use something like crashplan. It should trickle it up when it can.
For others to see them, it'll depend on the service you use.
The reasoning is that the created content is a derivative of the software,
I'm not a big fan of GPL, v2 or v3 (or v1). But this is so not true.
The software is a tool. You can'y convince anyone, that the final result is a derivative of the tool.
While users can "benefit" from the GPL, they can't break the GPL. Only people who redistribute the software with changes. This tends to be companies. In music cases, no companies are involved. And the end users are actually doing the dirty work.
People use the guys photo without his permission, and he is a dick for requesting they stop? Wow... I know people want their free content, but come on...
I believe the guy WAS selling the picture. He contact the people using the picture and said "pay up or stop using it" If he couldn't contact the people he issued a DMCA. Not his fault Daddy took down the entire site.
Yes you are right, the story doesn't make sense. And the summary doesn't help. The story:
Jay Lee, a photographer, took a picture. Discovered many people were using it. Issued DMCA notices
Candice, was using the picture to promote a business. Go Daddy received DMCA and took down all 14 of Candice's sites. She freaked.
That was basically the original story.
PetaPixel reported on the issue, included a screenshot of Candice's use of Jay's photo.
Remember I said Candice flipped? So apparently she issued SIX DMCAs to GoDaddy because she claims PetaPixel's screenshot of her site is copyright infringement (when in reality it is fair use)
If after a year, nothing will change, copyright wouldn't end for like 3 or 4 more decades.
But if you ended copyright completely, high quality, big budget productions would cease. Sure a lot of small budget stuff would still be made. But why spend ANY money, when you can get it for free, legally.
How will the content creators make money? Advertising?
Obviously if attaining legal content were utterly convenient and totally free, no one would bother pirating.
Well yeah, if you can get it for free, there would be no reason to pirate. Except...
OTA TV is free, but people still "pirate" it, so they can get it without the ads. OTA is free because of the ads. Take away the ads, how will the content owners make money? Of course there is something that is easy to obtain and is free... Youtube user generated content... And yet I like the higher quality content for some strange reason
I'm listening to Pandora right now. So streaming my music is fine. But for movies, I agree. I don't want to stream them, I don't want to "rent" them. I want to purchase it. So I can watch it more than once (although I probably never will, not much of a repeat watcher) But it is hard to justify $20 for a movie or $35 for a disc.
Of course I don't pirate, I just do without.
I don't understand this argument of "I have to work all my life, so everyone else should as well."
Maybe instead of slaving away on whatever you do, come up with some that 10 million people like. If you can convince each of them to give you $1 you don't have to work again. People pay to go see an athlete or actor. Why shouldn't the actor deserve some of that revenue?
You are crazy. Avengers gross a gazillion dollars on opening weekend. If I was the main actor I'd be pretty pissed off if I only made $80K.
Those multimillion dollar actors DRAW people to the theater... Shouldn't they make more money?
I decided I wanted to purchase some movies online. To watch on the plane. I found out that for the most part movies are $15, $20 if you want the HD version (not sure why that matters, I guess the extra G of disk space is expensive?) Ok, so maybe I'll just get some older movies. MIB 2 was cheaper... But pretty much everything else was $15/$20. Even the movies made eons ago.
So I turned to PirateBay? No, I'm going to pick up MIB 2, and maybe one or two others. But more likely I'll just find another free ebook from the classics.
If they don't sell the product you want, and the price you want, that doesn't entitle you to just TAKE it.
So JMS is stodgy because his business model doesn't mesh with what you think his business model should be? He is stodgy because he wants to make money on the product he created and help produce?
I'm assuming that rather than pay the $12 for a movie ticket, you went and scrounged up a pirated copy of Avengers? Instead of going to the concert, you copied a friends bootleg?
Do you actually pay for anything? Or do just take it all, because you feel entitled to it?
Mark Twain wrote books to tell stories. It is about the story, not the paper it is printed on.
And paper books can have spelling and grammar and typesetting issues too
Slashdot Mirror
Good thing they clarified, cause I was wondering why a fast food chain was leaking my privacy.
I wouldn't say she was the most famous pilot ever. But she was trying a round the world flight.
Dropbox will work just fine. Except you only get 2G free. And its like $10 a month for more space. 2G isn't a lot of pictures.
What do you mean by "pload all files pretty much as you go " For backup purposes? Or for a way for others to see them?
For backup, use something like crashplan. It should trickle it up when it can.
For others to see them, it'll depend on the service you use.
Out of curiosity, If APIs cannot be copyrighted, does this mean they cannot also be covered by the GPL?
Correct. The GPL is only enforceable because of copyright. If the API isn't copyrightable, you don't have to listen to someone's else copy right.
The reasoning is that the created content is a derivative of the software,
I'm not a big fan of GPL, v2 or v3 (or v1). But this is so not true. The software is a tool. You can'y convince anyone, that the final result is a derivative of the tool.
While users can "benefit" from the GPL, they can't break the GPL. Only people who redistribute the software with changes. This tends to be companies. In music cases, no companies are involved. And the end users are actually doing the dirty work.
People use the guys photo without his permission, and he is a dick for requesting they stop? Wow... I know people want their free content, but come on...
I believe the guy WAS selling the picture. He contact the people using the picture and said "pay up or stop using it" If he couldn't contact the people he issued a DMCA. Not his fault Daddy took down the entire site.
Did you read the original story? How she threatened to sue the owner of a photo that sent a DMCA? This is just a followup story.
GoDaddy IS Petapixel's registrar.
Where she owns the photo or not, the screen shot of her website, which includes the original photo, is definitely a case of fair use.
The bigger question should be - how do we make life a living hell for this woman?
See if she is infringing on any other copyrights?
Yes you are right, the story doesn't make sense. And the summary doesn't help. The story:
Jay Lee, a photographer, took a picture. Discovered many people were using it. Issued DMCA notices
Candice, was using the picture to promote a business. Go Daddy received DMCA and took down all 14 of Candice's sites. She freaked.
That was basically the original story.
PetaPixel reported on the issue, included a screenshot of Candice's use of Jay's photo.
Remember I said Candice flipped? So apparently she issued SIX DMCAs to GoDaddy because she claims PetaPixel's screenshot of her site is copyright infringement (when in reality it is fair use)
If after a year, nothing will change, copyright wouldn't end for like 3 or 4 more decades.
But if you ended copyright completely, high quality, big budget productions would cease. Sure a lot of small budget stuff would still be made. But why spend ANY money, when you can get it for free, legally.
How will the content creators make money? Advertising?
Obviously if attaining legal content were utterly convenient and totally free, no one would bother pirating.
Well yeah, if you can get it for free, there would be no reason to pirate. Except...
OTA TV is free, but people still "pirate" it, so they can get it without the ads. OTA is free because of the ads. Take away the ads, how will the content owners make money? Of course there is something that is easy to obtain and is free... Youtube user generated content... And yet I like the higher quality content for some strange reason
I'm listening to Pandora right now. So streaming my music is fine. But for movies, I agree. I don't want to stream them, I don't want to "rent" them. I want to purchase it. So I can watch it more than once (although I probably never will, not much of a repeat watcher) But it is hard to justify $20 for a movie or $35 for a disc.
Of course I don't pirate, I just do without.
Black markets form when there exists a market that is not being serviced through legal channels.
It is REALLY hard to compete with $0
I don't understand this argument of "I have to work all my life, so everyone else should as well."
Maybe instead of slaving away on whatever you do, come up with some that 10 million people like. If you can convince each of them to give you $1 you don't have to work again. People pay to go see an athlete or actor. Why shouldn't the actor deserve some of that revenue?
You are crazy. Avengers gross a gazillion dollars on opening weekend. If I was the main actor I'd be pretty pissed off if I only made $80K.
Those multimillion dollar actors DRAW people to the theater... Shouldn't they make more money?
I decided I wanted to purchase some movies online. To watch on the plane. I found out that for the most part movies are $15, $20 if you want the HD version (not sure why that matters, I guess the extra G of disk space is expensive?) Ok, so maybe I'll just get some older movies. MIB 2 was cheaper... But pretty much everything else was $15/$20. Even the movies made eons ago. So I turned to PirateBay? No, I'm going to pick up MIB 2, and maybe one or two others. But more likely I'll just find another free ebook from the classics.
If they don't sell the product you want, and the price you want, that doesn't entitle you to just TAKE it.
So JMS is stodgy because his business model doesn't mesh with what you think his business model should be? He is stodgy because he wants to make money on the product he created and help produce? I'm assuming that rather than pay the $12 for a movie ticket, you went and scrounged up a pirated copy of Avengers? Instead of going to the concert, you copied a friends bootleg? Do you actually pay for anything? Or do just take it all, because you feel entitled to it?
WHY CAN'T I WRITE IT AS LUA?
Mark Twain wrote books to tell stories. It is about the story, not the paper it is printed on. And paper books can have spelling and grammar and typesetting issues too
Who the fuck is Jebus?