I'll say, from my experience, comments are most certainly not the main driver of traffic (stories with the most comments do NOT correlate well to stories with the most traffic)
That seems counter-intuitive. I suppose most comments are posted when a story is new and most are posted by "the regulars", whereas stories that get a lot of views are older (relatively speaking) stories that get wider exposure (linked to from other websites). I'll bet that stories with the most comments correlate well with traffic for the first two or three hours after a story is posted, but that the correlation decreases over time.
The guy is charged with cutting down trees in his own yard (without getting a "tree cutting permit" from the city). Privacy issues aside, why should the city be allowed to dictate what a property owner can do with their own property (reminds me of DRM)?
Last time I checked, there's a Syracuse in Italy that's been around a lot longer than the one in NY. Maybe you should buy a map that shows more of the world than the U S of A.
I would tend to agree with you on direct linking, but not hotlinking. Direct linking merely provides a pointer to someone else's content. Hotlinking takes someone else's content and places it in a new context, essentially creating a derivative work. Depending on the context of the new work (commentary, parody, etc), it may or may not be protected by fair use, but certainly there is at least the potential for infringement. The fact that no copying took place does not necessarily mean that no infringement occurred (for example, public performance of a work only licensed for private performance does not involve the creation of a new copy).
Effectively yes. If they cut off your service, register again in your wife's name, then your kids, then your dog. Do you really think an ISP is going to say "no I don't want your money"?
You don't trust the government but you do trust a private, for-profit company like Intuit or H&R Block that makes it's money by convincing you that taxes are too complicated to do yourself and has a vested interest in making tax returns as complicated as possible?
Re: Sadly, Silverman appears to have a good point...
I think your experience has more to do with getting older than with technology. To a 30 year old, there hasn't been any good music produced since the 90's. To a 40 year old, there hasn't been any good music produced since the 80's. To a 50 year old, there hasn't been any good music produced since the 70's. etc. etc. People get nostalgic as they age and "Oldies" (I mean "Classic") radio stations can make money appealing to that demographic. Someday your kids will listen to Hanna Montana on the Classic station and talk about how much better music was in the 00's.
http://www.wral.com/news/news_briefs/story/6126208/
Parents charged with "not securing a gun in their home" resulting in the death of child (at the hand of another child). Not the same as being charged with murder, but it's still being held criminally responsible for their failure keep a minor from doing dangerous/illegal things with their property.
In the case of the most expensive disc, which in this case is a Warner Bros. disc, purchased through a 3rd party, those discs were out of stock for far longer than 29 days for most Netflix subscribers.
This is a very interesting statement that no one seems to have commented on. Why do they purchase WB discs from third parties instead of directly? After they do this deal, will WB allow them to buy directly at a reduced price?
Ask Psystar if Apple is no longer aggressively enforcing their IP! They may be a little more selective in choosing their battles these days, but don't think for a minute they wont sue you if they think there's a good chance they can win.
That same blog post, by Lyrissa Lidsky, reasonably points out that the First Amendment should protect legal advertising as long as it's not inherently misleading.
How is that reasonable? By that line of reasoning, the First Amendment should protect cigarette advertising as long as it's not inherently misleading.
In the name of openness, lets put cameras in voting booths and publish how every citizen votes on every proposition and election on a website. After all, freedom-of-the-press trumps privacy and fair-elections right?
Guys, the Journal is a member of AP, which happens to be a co-op. In simple terms, the AP and it's members all have usage agreements in place that allow something like this.
Then why not just use stuff from the story, rather than point out that the story is covered by copyright?
The wording is somewhat odd but that's how they decided to do it. I'm no fan of the AP and they've done some douche-bag things in the past, but in this case you've accused them of something they didn't do Mike. AP is authorized to use content (summarized or verbatim) from the Albuquerque Journal, so there is no hypocrisy in them being upset about unauthorized summarizing of AP stories (even though that unauthorized summarizing is likely fair-use).
But that was a list of companies that were customers. If it was individual customers (which is what we are talking about with right-of-publicity), that would be quite different. For example, would you want to be included on a list of customers in a Viagra ad? How about an ad for Preparation-H? Unless you specifically requested to the contrary at the point of sale then it's fair game, right?
I suspect this will pass (in France and elsewhere) since politicians make the laws and politicians always have something in their past that they want everyone to forget (infidelity, shady business deals, drug use, DUI, etc).
- Photographers may own the copyright on the image, but if the subject is a person, they need to have signed a model release for that image to be published (and yes, a website is publishing).
- Since 1978, copyrights don't have to be registered (but it does help during litigation).
- If you hire a photographer to take your picture, I believe you can have the copyright assigned to you (if the photographer agrees), i.e. a work-for-hire situation.
- If you use a timer, who owns the copyright? Who owns the copyright on pictures snapped by an automated security camera? Who owns the copyright on pictures of mars snapped by a robot?
They shouldn't have chosen such a generic image as their trademark, assuming that they even trademarked it, which isn't at all clear (even Walmart ran into smiley trademark issues).
On the post: Engadget Latest To Try Comment Cooling Off Period; I Can't Figure Out Why
Re: Re: Flamebait
On the post: Engadget Latest To Try Comment Cooling Off Period; I Can't Figure Out Why
Re: Re: Not the whole story
That seems counter-intuitive. I suppose most comments are posted when a story is new and most are posted by "the regulars", whereas stories that get a lot of views are older (relatively speaking) stories that get wider exposure (linked to from other websites). I'll bet that stories with the most comments correlate well with traffic for the first two or three hours after a story is posted, but that the correlation decreases over time.
On the post: Google's Street View Used To Catch Illegal Tree Choppers?
DRM for real estate?
On the post: Students Given Detention Just For Becoming 'Fans' Of A Page Making Fun Of A Teacher
Re: Re:
On the post: Dutch Judges Plagiarize, Potentially Infringe, Blog Post In Decision About Copyright
Re:
On the post: Others Claim To Hold The Trademark On iPad. Is There An App For That?
MadTV
On the post: IFPI Claims That Three Strikes Can Surgically Remove One Family Member From The Internet, But Not The Rest
Re: What if you have three teenagers...
On the post: Andy Warhol Estate Accused Of Defacing Authentic Warhol Artwork To Limit The Market
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Intuit Lobbying The Government To Make It More Difficult To File Your Tax Returns
Re: have to side with Intuit on this one...
On the post: Finding The Long Tail In Music
Re: Sadly, Silverman appears to have a good point...
On the post: German Court Finds Mother Liable For Kid's File Sharing, Despite Her Ban On The Practice
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
On the post: Netflix Exec Claims That Delaying Movie Rentals For A Month Benefits Customers
This is a very interesting statement that no one seems to have commented on. Why do they purchase WB discs from third parties instead of directly? After they do this deal, will WB allow them to buy directly at a reduced price?
On the post: When Declining To Enforce Your Intellectual Property Rights Strengthens Your Market Position
Ask Psystar
On the post: Florida Not A Fan Of The Internet; Potentially Rules Out Lawyer Blogs
First Amendment doesn't protect Advertising
How is that reasonable? By that line of reasoning, the First Amendment should protect cigarette advertising as long as it's not inherently misleading.
On the post: Supreme Court Says No Cameras In The Courtroom
Lets put cameras in voting booths
On the post: AP Summarizes Other Journalists' Article; Isn't That What The AP Says Violates The Law?
Re: Re: Ummm, AP Member...
Then why not just use stuff from the story, rather than point out that the story is covered by copyright?
The wording is somewhat odd but that's how they decided to do it. I'm no fan of the AP and they've done some douche-bag things in the past, but in this case you've accused them of something they didn't do Mike. AP is authorized to use content (summarized or verbatim) from the Albuquerque Journal, so there is no hypocrisy in them being upset about unauthorized summarizing of AP stories (even though that unauthorized summarizing is likely fair-use).
On the post: Is It Legal For A Clothing Company To Show President Obama Wearing Its Jacket?
Re: Customers include..
On the post: France Considers 'Right To Forget' Law, Apparently Not Realizing The Internet Never Forgets
Politicians make laws
On the post: Vanessa Hudgens Claims She Owns Copyright On Nude Photos Of Herself
Misc. points
On the post: Bakery Claims Trademark On Smiley Face Cookies; Sues Competing Cookie Firm
Re:
Next >>