didn't violate the so-called "rounded corners" patent that involved a grid of icons
FYI, those are two different patents. The infamous "rounded corners" patent has to do with the physical hardware, it has nothing to do with icons/grids, etc.
Whether your intended use is legitimate or illegitimate has nothing to do with it. If you piss off the copyright cartel, you're guilty. Whether or not you actually broke the law doesn't matter.
1) The footballs for games should be considered the NFL's property and for the game they should be supplied, monitored and checked by the NFL. MLB for example doesn't let the teams play with baseballs that they bring to the game, the NFL should follow suit. No more teams bringing game balls.
That used to be the rule, actually. Guess which team had the rule changed?
If the producer of content has decided not to offer their content in your region, then you have no way to pay them for the content. Whether you access it or not at that point is moot, because the producer of the content has already said that they don't want your money. As owners of the content it's completely up to them who they are interested in accepting payment from.
Incorrect. There is a grand jury who made a decision on terms and evidence dictated by the prosecutor. I think that's the real problem here. A trial, while imperfect, is adversarial and offers the chance to present more evidence and make counter arguments on any terms. The grand jury was limited to what the prosecutor decided to allow.
I'm confused. Are you saying that the grand jury would have been more likely to indict Wilson, if Wilson had been allowed to have a defense attorney?
Going after the tool maker gives them the possibility of a bigger pot of gold at the end. People like this don't care who is actually doing the crime, they care about who has the most money that they can go after.
Don't give them any ideas. Next will be a lawsuit claiming that the primary purpose of the vehicle is to rip copyrighted material and transport it across state lines.
please jump in and sort out whether this is primarily a problem of older hardware not being able to handle newer publications, or of newer hardware becoming unable/unwilling to render older content?
Yes, but now that the information is out there, how many current players have retired early because of it? Only one that I've heard of. Whether or not the NFL deliberately hid information from past players probably wouldn't have made any difference either.
Slashdot Mirror
didn't violate the so-called "rounded corners" patent that involved a grid of icons
FYI, those are two different patents. The infamous "rounded corners" patent has to do with the physical hardware, it has nothing to do with icons/grids, etc.
They're probably referring to Minecraft, which is single threaded.
Whether your intended use is legitimate or illegitimate has nothing to do with it. If you piss off the copyright cartel, you're guilty. Whether or not you actually broke the law doesn't matter.
So is the programmer that writes an ftp server guilty if that server happens to be used for copyright infringement?
That's the theory. Has it ever been enforced?
1) The footballs for games should be considered the NFL's property and for the game they should be supplied, monitored and checked by the NFL. MLB for example doesn't let the teams play with baseballs that they bring to the game, the NFL should follow suit. No more teams bringing game balls.
That used to be the rule, actually. Guess which team had the rule changed?
So no actual proof?
That's already possible. The reason they don't do it is cost.
Is there any proof for that?
Why should I care what color my neighbor wants to paint their house?
I thought there was also some difference in the firmware, IE being tuned with the expectation of running in a RAID.
If the producer of content has decided not to offer their content in your region, then you have no way to pay them for the content. Whether you access it or not at that point is moot, because the producer of the content has already said that they don't want your money. As owners of the content it's completely up to them who they are interested in accepting payment from.
Incorrect. There is a grand jury who made a decision on terms and evidence dictated by the prosecutor. I think that's the real problem here. A trial, while imperfect, is adversarial and offers the chance to present more evidence and make counter arguments on any terms. The grand jury was limited to what the prosecutor decided to allow.
I'm confused. Are you saying that the grand jury would have been more likely to indict Wilson, if Wilson had been allowed to have a defense attorney?
Dinosaurs take a long time to die.
Legal compliance is your responsibility, not your car's.
Going after the tool maker gives them the possibility of a bigger pot of gold at the end. People like this don't care who is actually doing the crime, they care about who has the most money that they can go after.
Don't give them any ideas. Next will be a lawsuit claiming that the primary purpose of the vehicle is to rip copyrighted material and transport it across state lines.
You can't think of another purpose for a car audio system, other than ripping digital content? Really?
Seems broad, all right... and obvious, and like there would be prior art.
Actually, it's a patent for "Square wave with rounded corners machine control", so it's OK.
On what grounds can a poster sue YouTube for not allowing them to post?
Does YouTube honor counter-claims?
According to whose definition of "what is broken" and "is fixed"?
Unfortunately, most voters are idiots.
please jump in and sort out whether this is primarily a problem of older hardware not being able to handle newer publications, or of newer hardware becoming unable/unwilling to render older content?
Both.
Yes, but now that the information is out there, how many current players have retired early because of it? Only one that I've heard of. Whether or not the NFL deliberately hid information from past players probably wouldn't have made any difference either.