Actually, it's called pop music because of the way it sounds, the way it is created, and the way it is marketed. Rock music was popular for a while, but that doesn't make it pop. Plus, there's plenty of unpopular pop music.
Well, looks like this Canuck will stick to some good ol' fashioned torrents. And since my ISP only cares if I download games, I'll continue to download music guilt free and occasionally pay for a band I really like and want to listen to in the car.
Not fiction, but an allegory and analogy designed to explain to early people the history regarding their existence. The fact is, simpler stories on short time scales tended to work well because the human brain has a hard time with large numbers. A day is just long enough for you when your life expectancy is ~30 years.
Warning: html Nazi post following: we have bold, italic, and other html tags for a reason, because, unlike the meme, caps lock is not cruise control for cool.
So obviously I don't know, but this seems a bit anti-competitive. I mean, suing someone because they're competition? Isn't that why monopoly laws and competition bureaus exist? I can't actually see eBay winning this, so they must be doing this for some PR. An at-least-we-tried campaign. Can someone elaborate if this is legit?
But a lot of the diseases that are being vaccinated against have a risk of death. Not just permanent disfigurement when they survive, but a possibility of a complete and total end to life.
But first sale doctrine has been shown to cover things that aren't sold, if they're sent unsolicited through the mail, which these CDs were. If they win this, then it's legal for me to send you a CD (completely unsolicited), with a sticker that says you owe me $5, because it will have shown any label to be binding. Thus, although it's not attacking the "exchange of money for goods" part of first sale, it is attacking first sale doctrine.
Doesn't matter in this case. Universal sent out the CD to Joe Reviewer. Mr. Reviewer never asked for it, and Universal made no attempt to reclaim it, so the compact disk (not the music on it) is now legally Mr. Reviewers. So he sells it to a used record store, where Mr. eBay buys it and resells it on eBay. At no point does copyright enter the issue, nor does being a business matter.
I not only read the ARStech article, but the EFF article and the actual motion by the EFF. Assuming that they're quoting relevant cases (I'm not that much of a sucker for that kind of stuff), Universal is talking out their ass and trying to squash first sale rights.
To summarize, they sent out the CDs unsolicited, which according to the law, makes them gifts. That means it's as if the recipient bought the CD, and hence triggered first sale doctrine. So the eBay reseller is in no way whatsoever violating copyright. Especially since the guy in charge of copyright at Universal admits that he has, in the past, bought promo CDs from record shop.
It's not a copyright issue because no copies were made.
In your example, if they send you the book, the book is yours. You can give it to a friend, sell it to a friend, donate it to a library, burn it, toss it in the ocean, and do just about anything you want with it as if you had purchased it. It's a gift, which means you own it, you do whatever the hell you want with it.
Two things. One,/. has tags, including bold and italics. Use them instead of caps lock. Two, maybe the Splinter Cell game was trying to demonstrate Chaos Theory, not let you play it.
No one. But you can easily claim that, with all the various laws on the books, including laws that haven't been examined in years, that you could breaking laws you don't even know about. Hence, pleading the fifth.
That argument only works in your theoretical world where no one wants privacy. Look up at the beginning of the discussion, say at here, to see the problem with your reasoning.
Your c is merely a subset of his b. That is to say, if you're crap-flooding the net with spam, then you should be taken to court, where they will then order you to cut off your connection (assuming it can be shown that you were in fact spamming). And that's only if it's illegal or against the ToS.
Amusing, yes, but not official. Just an old joke the Canadian pundits threw around a decade ago (when we actually had a Reform party, before they became the Canadian Alliance).
Oh yeah, because dredging through 10 pages of dynamically changing (just look for those "Terms subject to change without warning" clauses) just to get your internet is reasonable.
Slashdot Mirror
Warning: semantics argument to follow.
Actually, it's called pop music because of the way it sounds, the way it is created, and the way it is marketed. Rock music was popular for a while, but that doesn't make it pop. Plus, there's plenty of unpopular pop music.
Well, looks like this Canuck will stick to some good ol' fashioned torrents. And since my ISP only cares if I download games, I'll continue to download music guilt free and occasionally pay for a band I really like and want to listen to in the car.
Just because life is inevitable doesn't mean it's happened elsewhere yet.
Not fiction, but an allegory and analogy designed to explain to early people the history regarding their existence. The fact is, simpler stories on short time scales tended to work well because the human brain has a hard time with large numbers. A day is just long enough for you when your life expectancy is ~30 years.
Warning: html Nazi post following: we have bold, italic, and other html tags for a reason, because, unlike the meme, caps lock is not cruise control for cool.
Your analogy is grasping at straws. Please, leave the butchered car analogy to people who know how to use break tags.
Ahh. That makes much more sense then. Thanks.
So obviously I don't know, but this seems a bit anti-competitive. I mean, suing someone because they're competition? Isn't that why monopoly laws and competition bureaus exist? I can't actually see eBay winning this, so they must be doing this for some PR. An at-least-we-tried campaign. Can someone elaborate if this is legit?
Because they offered store credit, and upon hearing the customer revolt, offered a full refund.
But a lot of the diseases that are being vaccinated against have a risk of death. Not just permanent disfigurement when they survive, but a possibility of a complete and total end to life.
But first sale doctrine has been shown to cover things that aren't sold, if they're sent unsolicited through the mail, which these CDs were. If they win this, then it's legal for me to send you a CD (completely unsolicited), with a sticker that says you owe me $5, because it will have shown any label to be binding. Thus, although it's not attacking the "exchange of money for goods" part of first sale, it is attacking first sale doctrine.
Doesn't matter in this case. Universal sent out the CD to Joe Reviewer. Mr. Reviewer never asked for it, and Universal made no attempt to reclaim it, so the compact disk (not the music on it) is now legally Mr. Reviewers. So he sells it to a used record store, where Mr. eBay buys it and resells it on eBay. At no point does copyright enter the issue, nor does being a business matter.
I not only read the ARStech article, but the EFF article and the actual motion by the EFF. Assuming that they're quoting relevant cases (I'm not that much of a sucker for that kind of stuff), Universal is talking out their ass and trying to squash first sale rights.
To summarize, they sent out the CDs unsolicited, which according to the law, makes them gifts. That means it's as if the recipient bought the CD, and hence triggered first sale doctrine. So the eBay reseller is in no way whatsoever violating copyright. Especially since the guy in charge of copyright at Universal admits that he has, in the past, bought promo CDs from record shop.
It's not a copyright issue because no copies were made.
In your example, if they send you the book, the book is yours. You can give it to a friend, sell it to a friend, donate it to a library, burn it, toss it in the ocean, and do just about anything you want with it as if you had purchased it. It's a gift, which means you own it, you do whatever the hell you want with it.
Two things. One, /. has tags, including bold and italics. Use them instead of caps lock. Two, maybe the Splinter Cell game was trying to demonstrate Chaos Theory, not let you play it.
And one big fat one for you.
Jesus Turing Christ, I damn near crapped my pants.
No one. But you can easily claim that, with all the various laws on the books, including laws that haven't been examined in years, that you could breaking laws you don't even know about. Hence, pleading the fifth.
That argument only works in your theoretical world where no one wants privacy. Look up at the beginning of the discussion, say at here, to see the problem with your reasoning.
But then it would make sense to vote, so as to cancel out the irrational votes of those who would vote.
I do believe he's referencing FPS Doug.
Your c is merely a subset of his b. That is to say, if you're crap-flooding the net with spam, then you should be taken to court, where they will then order you to cut off your connection (assuming it can be shown that you were in fact spamming). And that's only if it's illegal or against the ToS.
Amusing, yes, but not official. Just an old joke the Canadian pundits threw around a decade ago (when we actually had a Reform party, before they became the Canadian Alliance).
Oh yeah, because dredging through 10 pages of dynamically changing (just look for those "Terms subject to change without warning" clauses) just to get your internet is reasonable.
Why in hell would you want to do that? No seriously.