You could, until this ruling, copyright a software program. Actually, you still can. It's just that before this ruling, companies were trying to copyright a program's functionality, and now they've been smacked down and told they can only copyright its code. A far better situation than in the US, where software patents do protect the way a program works.
I hope you are doing well, I think. I am pretending to be devastated by the loss of Nelson Mandela because it seems like the canny thing to do at the moment, and I hope you join with President Obama in remembering his legacy. He ranks with Mohandes Ghandi, Dr. King and President Kennedy in the struggle for human rights over the past 50 years, whereas I don't even rank with what passed from his bowels. There are larger issues than the ability to steal from people by threatening to expose their porn habits in a public setting... You seem like a much nicer guy than I am. Thanks. FTFY, Paul Duffy.
If this was a 501c3, great, no controversy, awesome...but trying to pull a fast one and say a form of advertising for a target market using a highly-recognizable song (that you can't legally license because of the band's own wishes) isn't going to pass test element #1. Test element #1 has already been passed. Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., dipshit.
In the EU there is some debate as to whether linking a work amounts to communicating that work to the public. Which is ridiculous. Even if linking did realistically constitute 'communication to the public' (which it doesn't), that doesn't stop the original author pulling or moving their work, after which the link dies and I can't be found guilty of a damn thing.
The article talks about Shaun Shane (or whoever he may be) filing false DMCA claims that include the phrase, "I swear, under penalty of perjury, that the information in the notification is accurate, and that I am the copyright owner or am authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed." That's where this prick's risk of being found guilty of perjury comes from, the fact that he's lying on what is, to all intents and purposes, a legal document and knows it.
Do you know how to make a Stradivarius violin? Neither does anyone else. Why? There was no protection for creations in his day so he like everyone else protected their creations by keeping them secret. Yes, I'm absolutely sure that the lack of access to the exact materials Stradivarius used has absolutely bugger all to do with it, given the fact that violins have been made pretty much the same way for centuries. *rolls eyes* Did you know that in order to stop his works from being copied, Shakespeare went so far as to give his actors only their lines for the play in which they were appearing? Of course, I wouldn't blame you if you don't believe me, given the wide availability of copies of 'Hamlet', 'Romeo and Juliet', et al.
The first [patent] is, essentially, for URL shortening. Which is why software patents should be scrapped. Under that system, as I understand it, having the same end result will get you into trouble. For example: my use of HTML coding to create this link back to Techdirt's homepage is technically an infringement of the URL shortening patent, simply because combining the link into the text has the effect of shortening it; i.e., it's the same end result.
I am flabbergasted that at your age you seem not to have learned that trash talk, as in a junior high school locker room, is not calculated to create a positive impression of all you have to offer. Whereas I am flabbergasted that at your age you seem not to have learned that trash talk, as in a junior high school locker room, is based on subjective opinion, not objective fact. I repeat; you are full of shit and unwilling that you are wrong on anything.
Researchers have shown that by re-inserting an intact copy of the [SIGLK2] gene into tomatoes, they could increase the amount of glucose and fructose by up to 40%, while still retaining the uniform color ripening trait. Too bad they weren't actually able to taste them (federal regulations prohibit sampling experimental crops). Okay, so why not announce the research complete so that these fantastically delicious tomatoes can be sold and we can all try them? Oh, wait. No, bad idea. I just received a 'friendly' letter from Monsanto, warning me of the consequences of their IP being infringed as a result of anyone doing that.
If it wasn't for piracy, there wouldn't even be a show called 'Breaking Bad'. Oh, I shouldn't have said that, I'd best fix it for my corporate buttfu- bosses.
Mike Gerrard said: In the UK there don't seem to be any equivalent cases, and the copyright law on the spoken word is a little more hazy. Actually, UK copyright law is pretty clear on the fact that copyright exists from the moment something is fixed into tangible form and if you don't record it in some way, you can't then claim copyright on it. Since you did the former and Bryson failed to do the latter, you are 100% in the right on this. Basically, if it's an unfixed work, it's not copyrighted. If the work is fixed, then the one who is responsible for the fixation is the copyright owner, no one else. That's why record companies are more often copyright owners than the artists who perform the music. I can tell you this as an Autistic auto-didact cognoscente of UK copyright law.
On the post: UK Court Rules That Software Functionality Is Not Subject To Copyright
Re: Re: Can we patent way of teaching?
Actually, you still can. It's just that before this ruling, companies were trying to copyright a program's functionality, and now they've been smacked down and told they can only copyright its code. A far better situation than in the US, where software patents do protect the way a program works.
On the post: Prenda's Paul Duffy Claims To Be 'Too Devastated' By Nelson Mandela's Death To Comment
What he meant
FTFY, Paul Duffy.
On the post: Goldieblox May Be Right About Fair Use, But Wrong About Claiming You Need A License To Link To Its Site
Re: Get in bed with an egomaniac? Pass.
Test element #1 has already been passed. Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., dipshit.
On the post: Goldieblox May Be Right About Fair Use, But Wrong About Claiming You Need A License To Link To Its Site
Re: Linking and Copyright
Which is ridiculous. Even if linking did realistically constitute 'communication to the public' (which it doesn't), that doesn't stop the original author pulling or moving their work, after which the link dies and I can't be found guilty of a damn thing.
On the post: 'Attribution Troll' Issues DMCA Notice To Remove Critical Posts From Techdirt, Boing Boing And Popehat
Re: Re:
On the post: 'Attribution Troll' Issues DMCA Notice To Remove Critical Posts From Techdirt, Boing Boing And Popehat
FTFY, Tim.
On the post: Michael Hayden Claims State Secrecy Is Just Like Personal Privacy
Question
You mean he's saying it shouldn't exist in the interests of National Security?
On the post: IBM Shows How Non-Innovative It Has Become: Threatens To Sue Twitter On Eve Of IPO Over Bogus Patents
Re: more dissembling by Masnick
Yes, I'm absolutely sure that the lack of access to the exact materials Stradivarius used has absolutely bugger all to do with it, given the fact that violins have been made pretty much the same way for centuries. *rolls eyes*
Did you know that in order to stop his works from being copied, Shakespeare went so far as to give his actors only their lines for the play in which they were appearing? Of course, I wouldn't blame you if you don't believe me, given the wide availability of copies of 'Hamlet', 'Romeo and Juliet', et al.
On the post: IBM Shows How Non-Innovative It Has Become: Threatens To Sue Twitter On Eve Of IPO Over Bogus Patents
Re: Possibly a bit over the top.
Which is why software patents should be scrapped. Under that system, as I understand it, having the same end result will get you into trouble. For example: my use of HTML coding to create this link back to Techdirt's homepage is technically an infringement of the URL shortening patent, simply because combining the link into the text has the effect of shortening it; i.e., it's the same end result.
On the post: Price Elasticity Can Work: Dropping Ebook Price To $1 Catapulted Year-Old Book Onto NYT Best Seller List
Re: Re: Re:
So did Safeway. ;D
On the post: Once Again, The RIAA Shows How Easy It Is To Infringe On Copyrights
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Once Again, The RIAA Shows How Easy It Is To Infringe On Copyrights
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Whereas I am flabbergasted that at your age you seem not to have learned that trash talk, as in a junior high school locker room, is based on subjective opinion, not objective fact. I repeat; you are full of shit and unwilling that you are wrong on anything.
On the post: US Court Rules Again That Natural Phenomena Cannot Be Patented, Casting Further Doubt On Gene Patents
Re:
On the post: DailyDirt: Better Tasting Fruits And Vegetables
Re: I have a cunning plan
(Is that okay, Mr. Monsanto?)
On the post: DailyDirt: Better Tasting Fruits And Vegetables
I have a cunning plan
Okay, so why not announce the research complete so that these fantastically delicious tomatoes can be sold and we can all try them? Oh, wait. No, bad idea. I just received a 'friendly' letter from Monsanto, warning me of the consequences of their IP being infringed as a result of anyone doing that.
On the post: GoDaddy's Chief SOPA Supporter Now Running For Arizona Governor Highlighting Her 'Internet' Experience
Ryan Haight Online Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act
On the post: As MPAA Insists TV Piracy Is So Harmful, Breaking Bad Creator Explains How Piracy Helped
To sum up Gilligan's response
On the post: Author Claims Copyright Over Interview He Gave 20 Years Ago
Re: Bill Bryson Interview
Actually, UK copyright law is pretty clear on the fact that copyright exists from the moment something is fixed into tangible form and if you don't record it in some way, you can't then claim copyright on it. Since you did the former and Bryson failed to do the latter, you are 100% in the right on this. Basically, if it's an unfixed work, it's not copyrighted. If the work is fixed, then the one who is responsible for the fixation is the copyright owner, no one else. That's why record companies are more often copyright owners than the artists who perform the music. I can tell you this as an Autistic auto-didact cognoscente of UK copyright law.
On the post: IsoHunt Agrees To Shut Down And 'Pay' $110 Million
Re: Re: Re: @ "Of course, even if IsoHunt did pay that kind of money, how much would go to artists?"
On the post: Apple's Fingerprint ID And How It May Take Away Your 5th Amendment Right To Protect Your Data
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Next >>