I don't see a particular problem with government-mandated safety regulations.
What about a jury-mandated safety regulation where no one was grandfathered in? The government never said saws have to have this feature, yet a company is now being fined (sued) for not having it.
Three-fingered shop instructors everywhere are about to become very, very rich.
I don't see a problem with using the term sideways, it works for me.
What I meant was that although the linked post was about what you discussed, Mike's post was about quoting something vague like "she lies" and the way people try to use the legal system to shut down free speech.
And look, you hijacked the thread, little miss sideways.
You made a reasonable and seemingly well-thought post that I agree with completely, and then at the very end you throw an irrelevant and unprovoked attack on Mike that has no basis on reality. I don't see anywhere where Mike says that suggests the answer is to go against the Newspaper's wishes. Are we reading the same article?
Allow me to distill it, since I'm not sure you bothered to read it.
Aggregators link to newspaper. Newspaper require a license to link, attempts to charge aggregators. Aggregators refuse to pay and claim that linking with a blurb is perfectly reasonable. Courts agree with Aggregators. Now newspapers use robots.txt to block aggregators.
Mike surmises that this is a bad idea, not only does it make no business sense when your business is based solely on how many people read your news, but it is bound to come back and bite the newspapers in the ass when they attempt to link elsewhere.
Please, *please* point out where your final sentence fits in.
On an off-topic side note: You come off as a complete douche when you attack Mike. (Mikee? Really?) Do your children read what you write here, and how do you think they'd respond? Would you be proud for them to read it?
The problem is that newspapers will soon be non-existent; the number of print copies is plummeting, the online pay model won't work, and ad revenue is drying up quickly.
I'm not sure I see the problem. In unrelated news, radio shows were rendered obsolete by the television.
Pretty soon this won't be a problem, as corporeal newspapers disappear, and are replaced by bloggers who fact check even less than current reporters.
When was the last time your local paper reprinted a paper correcting their mistakes? Never, for me, anyway. How many times does Techdirt correct their mistakes? Every time.
I'll take crowd-sourced fact checking to what newspapers give me now, any day of the week, thank you very much.
iTunes sold me a song. Or did they sell me a copy of a song?
Do I have right of first sale on a copy of a song?
Now, iTunes didn't actually *give* me anything when I bought the song, they just told my computer how to arrange my hard drive in such a way that my media player could use those instructions to make sound. So, I can't claim to only be allowed First Sale on the original copy (ha!), because the "original copy", if it exists anywhere, is still on iTune's sever.
Furthermore, if someone tells me how to make something and I tell someone else how to make it, have I done something illegal? If someone's computer tells my computer how to make something and my computer tells another computer, have I done something illegal?
If the government has a law (say, I dunno, copyrights) that does not allow me to share information I was given with whom ever I choose, are they in violation of my rights to Free Speech?
I'm confused. Do you *really* not want remote access to your car, or do you not want *someone else* to have remote access to your car.
I only ask, because I *do* want the ability to control my car from a remote location. (We'll ignore the fact that I have no real use for this feature.) I think it would be cool. :)
I concur, but by the letter of the law, any access to a system with a password that you aren't authorized to access is lumped under "hacking". It doesn't seem to take into account how access was gained.
But, now he can tell his friend(s) he's going to jail for being a hacker-- that's some good geek street cred right there. :)
Speaking of popular videos (or not?) am I the only one that doesn't understand why UB40's video for 'Red, Red Wine' is a bunch of white people drinking beer?
They are just trying to keep themselves in business by making you mail everything to them.
Pay attention newspapers. Make all correspondences between you and your readers be only by paying for ad space to take out an ad with what you want to say. Problem solved¡
You would think Verizon would be *all over* VOIP, or maybe I don't understand how it works.
You know all those (millions and millions) of AT&T commercials that play up the fact that you can talk and surf at the same time? If Verizon treated voice as Data, wouldn't I be able to surf and talk at the same time?
On the post: Ad Age Explains How Copyright Is The Buggy Whip Of The Digital Age
Re:
If you want more money, do more work.
If you don't do more work, you don't get more money.
Reusing old footage requires no work from *anyone* involved in said footage, yet they deserve more money?
Logic fail.
On the post: Tool Maker Loses Lawsuit For Not Violating Another Company's Patents
Re:
What about a jury-mandated safety regulation where no one was grandfathered in? The government never said saws have to have this feature, yet a company is now being fined (sued) for not having it.
Three-fingered shop instructors everywhere are about to become very, very rich.
On the post: Reporting On Someone Claiming An Opponent 'Lies' In A Heated Debate Is Not Libel
Re: Re: Re:
What I meant was that although the linked post was about what you discussed, Mike's post was about quoting something vague like "she lies" and the way people try to use the legal system to shut down free speech.
And look, you hijacked the thread, little miss sideways.
On the post: Apparently The Word 'Piracy' No Longer Sufficiently Derogatory For Entertainment Industry
my vote
On the post: Apparently The Word 'Piracy' No Longer Sufficiently Derogatory For Entertainment Industry
Re:
On the post: UK's Times Online Starts Blocking Aggregators Hours After Aggregators Win Copyright Tribunal Ruling Against Newspapers
Re: Laws of unintended consequences
You made a reasonable and seemingly well-thought post that I agree with completely, and then at the very end you throw an irrelevant and unprovoked attack on Mike that has no basis on reality. I don't see anywhere where Mike says that suggests the answer is to go against the Newspaper's wishes. Are we reading the same article?
Allow me to distill it, since I'm not sure you bothered to read it.
Aggregators link to newspaper. Newspaper require a license to link, attempts to charge aggregators. Aggregators refuse to pay and claim that linking with a blurb is perfectly reasonable. Courts agree with Aggregators. Now newspapers use robots.txt to block aggregators.
Mike surmises that this is a bad idea, not only does it make no business sense when your business is based solely on how many people read your news, but it is bound to come back and bite the newspapers in the ass when they attempt to link elsewhere.
Please, *please* point out where your final sentence fits in.
On an off-topic side note: You come off as a complete douche when you attack Mike. (Mikee? Really?) Do your children read what you write here, and how do you think they'd respond? Would you be proud for them to read it?
On the post: UK's Times Online Starts Blocking Aggregators Hours After Aggregators Win Copyright Tribunal Ruling Against Newspapers
Re:
I'm not sure I see the problem. In unrelated news, radio shows were rendered obsolete by the television.
Pretty soon this won't be a problem, as corporeal newspapers disappear, and are replaced by bloggers who fact check even less than current reporters.
When was the last time your local paper reprinted a paper correcting their mistakes? Never, for me, anyway. How many times does Techdirt correct their mistakes? Every time.
I'll take crowd-sourced fact checking to what newspapers give me now, any day of the week, thank you very much.
On the post: Reporting On Someone Claiming An Opponent 'Lies' In A Heated Debate Is Not Libel
Re:
So.. yeah. :)
On the post: Peeling The Layers Off 'Piracy'
Words, words, words.
Do I have right of first sale on a copy of a song?
Now, iTunes didn't actually *give* me anything when I bought the song, they just told my computer how to arrange my hard drive in such a way that my media player could use those instructions to make sound. So, I can't claim to only be allowed First Sale on the original copy (ha!), because the "original copy", if it exists anywhere, is still on iTune's sever.
Furthermore, if someone tells me how to make something and I tell someone else how to make it, have I done something illegal? If someone's computer tells my computer how to make something and my computer tells another computer, have I done something illegal?
If the government has a law (say, I dunno, copyrights) that does not allow me to share information I was given with whom ever I choose, are they in violation of my rights to Free Speech?
This is too confusing, I think.
On the post: Peeling The Layers Off 'Piracy'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Copying and lending are different.
On the post: Peeling The Layers Off 'Piracy'
Re:
On the post: Peeling The Layers Off 'Piracy'
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Disgruntled Ex-Auto Dealer Employee Hacks Computer System To Disable Over 100 Cars
Re: Just another reason why
I only ask, because I *do* want the ability to control my car from a remote location. (We'll ignore the fact that I have no real use for this feature.) I think it would be cool. :)
On the post: Disgruntled Ex-Auto Dealer Employee Hacks Computer System To Disable Over 100 Cars
Re: Hack? Don't think so
But, now he can tell his friend(s) he's going to jail for being a hacker-- that's some good geek street cred right there. :)
On the post: Eddy Grant Accuses Gorillaz Of Copying After Gorillaz Manager Threatens People For Copying...
Re: Silliness
What? I'm in a sharing mood, okay?
On the post: Eddy Grant Accuses Gorillaz Of Copying After Gorillaz Manager Threatens People For Copying...
Re: Re:
so confused.
On the post: Want To Link To Royal Mail? You Better Not Be In A Hurry
Props.
Pay attention newspapers. Make all correspondences between you and your readers be only by paying for ad space to take out an ad with what you want to say. Problem solved¡
On the post: James Murdoch Is Very, Very Confused About Copyright Infringement (And So Is His Dad, Rupert)
Death and Taxes
On the post: Skype Deliberately Crippling Functionality of iPhone and WinMo and Verizon Apps?
What I don't get
You know all those (millions and millions) of AT&T commercials that play up the fact that you can talk and surf at the same time? If Verizon treated voice as Data, wouldn't I be able to surf and talk at the same time?
Maybe I'm missing something.
On the post: Since Three Strikes Went Into Effect, Unauthorized File Trading Has Increased In France
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Tell me, what did stop you from shooting up heroin at high school?
Next >>