So, this tiny human's parents are suing a website because the tiny human used it as it was intended to be used? (And the tiny human had to falsify information just to make an account!)
...and they only got there because of record labels.
Yes, in the 90's. The Record Labels' role has changed, whether they like it or not. They are no longer *required* to market a band. Especially if that band wants to keep control of their art.
It must be tough to have all that power and still be powerless to stop the slow, steady decline into being a simple middleman. It reminds me of Flowers for Algernon. Sad.
In regard to your point, while I agree that much of security if based on *feeling secure* instead of actually *being secure* (I'm looking at you, Every-Airport-In-America!) I think that another side of it is that "Security" is a constant, on-going battle. Also, there needs to be a balance of usuablity and convienence when regarding security. Your house would be pretty damn secure if it had no doors or windows, but it wouldn't be a very useful house.
With that in mind, I wouldn't freak out about a flaw discovered in my bank's online site as long as it was quickly patched instead of hushed up-- If I were NavyFCU, I'd look for someone else to build my website, pronto.
What is funny in the end is people will still pay for content. Rather than paying for content up front, they will pay for it at the back door
This, this, this!! Finally, one of you shills get it! This is what everyone has been saying! The content won't get paid for directly, it will be used to sell something else!
I wish I knew your name, so I could go out and have a nice button or trophy made for you; I'm so proud!
Google did a lot of leg work to make a product that it didn't expect to get paid for directly. Someone else thought of a creative way to make money off of it.
This is where many companies today would sue. Google didn't.
I live and work near Boston, MA, and I always see two "types" of red light running. People who run a "just turned" red light, and people who make a right turn on red when it's posted that they are not allowed.
I can't say I've ever seen someone just blow through a red light that hasn't just turned red, but I've seen *a lot* of the two former types..
Cloud computing is a business like any other. Over time some companies that offer it will become known as more trustworthy, and the ones that aren't will go out of business because no one will use them.
Now, his response was sarcastic, sure, but he has a point. Just because it's "not kosher" or "uncool" or "not nice" doesn't mean it's illegal. You said it yourself. (Assuming you're the same AC that originally posted, of course)
even if it is technically public information.
Restating public information shouldn't be a crime. Now, I agree, stating it and then inciting people to hurt that person is a crime. Just posting it would seem like a douchebag move, but it perfectly legal.
So, yes: Just because it's not kosher doesn't make it illegal.
..and real life is that there are many, many, many dvd rippers out there who rip dvds to a totally unencrypted and easily distributable format. The one company that tries to play by the rules gets attacked from the people who made the rules they're trying to follow.
One report I saw had the percentage of 20 year olds with a criminal record was higher than the number with a school diploma.
Without citation or a link, I can easily infer that the laws in the UK are too strict, from that statement.
Downloading is just another lack of respect for property, for rights, and for artists.
When dealing with copyrights, you are not dealing with property-- you are dealing with a government granted monopoly. It is not property. It is not owned. It is *granted* for a limited amount of time.
Of all the injustices in the world, copyright infringement should be *way* down the list of rights we need to concern ourselves about.
If anyone has a lack of respect for artists, it's the record labels that swindle them out of the rights to their art through contracts they don't understand knowing they couldn't afford the lawyer's fees to have it explained to them, giving them a small fraction of the retail sale of their art *after the artist has paid back the loan*, yet the artists never gets the rights to their art back.
On the post: New Lawsuit Against Facebook From People Who Just Don't Like Facebook
Re: Re:
Well, most of you anyway.
So, this tiny human's parents are suing a website because the tiny human used it as it was intended to be used? (And the tiny human had to falsify information just to make an account!)
Oops. Nosebleed. Gotta go.
On the post: Myth Debunking: Fans Just Want Everything For Free
Re: NOT!
*sigh*
It's already happening. It's been happening. It will continue to happen more and more.
On the post: Judge Says Blogger Who Called Model A Skank Should Be Unmasked
Re: Sigh
When someone realized that there are no financial downsides to suing someone.
Change that, and it will go away.
On the post: Judge Says Blogger Who Called Model A Skank Should Be Unmasked
Re:
On the post: Judge Says Blogger Who Called Model A Skank Should Be Unmasked
Re: Well does she appear to be...
On the post: Judge Says Blogger Who Called Model A Skank Should Be Unmasked
Truth shall set you free.
Side question: You can call someone an attention whore, but can you call them an attention skank?
On the post: Radiohead Leaks Its Own Track To BitTorrent; Apparently Still Happy With 'Free'
Re: Re: listen here
Yes, in the 90's. The Record Labels' role has changed, whether they like it or not. They are no longer *required* to market a band. Especially if that band wants to keep control of their art.
It must be tough to have all that power and still be powerless to stop the slow, steady decline into being a simple middleman. It reminds me of Flowers for Algernon. Sad.
On the post: Radiohead Leaks Its Own Track To BitTorrent; Apparently Still Happy With 'Free'
Re:
aka, it wouldn't work for a smaller, unknown band?
Hot damn, I love Masnick's Law. (on the first post, even!)
On the post: Zer01 Fails To Deliver Again; Blames Everyone Else, Dumps Buzzkirk, Threatens Legal Response To Reporters
Just FYI
That should be a Z, not an X.. Wouldn't want to soil the company Xer01's name, now would we? :)
On the post: Reveal Poor Web Security... Have RSA Threaten You With Trademark Infringement
Re: Re: Yay for security
In regard to your point, while I agree that much of security if based on *feeling secure* instead of actually *being secure* (I'm looking at you, Every-Airport-In-America!) I think that another side of it is that "Security" is a constant, on-going battle. Also, there needs to be a balance of usuablity and convienence when regarding security. Your house would be pretty damn secure if it had no doors or windows, but it wouldn't be a very useful house.
With that in mind, I wouldn't freak out about a flaw discovered in my bank's online site as long as it was quickly patched instead of hushed up-- If I were NavyFCU, I'd look for someone else to build my website, pronto.
On the post: EU Gov't Study: People Won't Pay For Content; New Business Models Needed
Re:
This, this, this!! Finally, one of you shills get it! This is what everyone has been saying! The content won't get paid for directly, it will be used to sell something else!
I wish I knew your name, so I could go out and have a nice button or trophy made for you; I'm so proud!
On the post: Reveal Poor Web Security... Have RSA Threaten You With Trademark Infringement
So..
Or.. is that not what trademarks are for these days?
On the post: Artist Paints Worldly Paintings Via Google Street View; Google Cheers Him On
Re: Not quite a valid comparison
Google did a lot of leg work to make a product that it didn't expect to get paid for directly. Someone else thought of a creative way to make money off of it.
This is where many companies today would sue. Google didn't.
Kudos, Google and Mr. Guffey.
On the post: Judge Throws Out Red Light Camera Tickets As Program Declared Illegal And Void
Re: Re: cameras at red lights
I can't say I've ever seen someone just blow through a red light that hasn't just turned red, but I've seen *a lot* of the two former types..
On the post: The Law Isn't Quite Ready For Cloud Computing
Re:
Cloud computing is a business like any other. Over time some companies that offer it will become known as more trustworthy, and the ones that aren't will go out of business because no one will use them.
On the post: The Law Isn't Quite Ready For Cloud Computing
Re:
Oh wait...
On the post: Arrested For Blogging About The Police?
Re:
That, sir or ma'am, *is* racist. ;)
On the post: Arrested For Blogging About The Police?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
even if it is technically public information.
Restating public information shouldn't be a crime. Now, I agree, stating it and then inciting people to hurt that person is a crime. Just posting it would seem like a douchebag move, but it perfectly legal.
So, yes: Just because it's not kosher doesn't make it illegal.
On the post: As Expected, Judge Still Bans Real From Selling RealDVD
Re:
That's not a theoretical debate, it's stupid.
Try to follow along, pal.
On the post: New Study States The Obvious: Kids Download A Lot Of Music
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Without citation or a link, I can easily infer that the laws in the UK are too strict, from that statement.
Downloading is just another lack of respect for property, for rights, and for artists.
When dealing with copyrights, you are not dealing with property-- you are dealing with a government granted monopoly. It is not property. It is not owned. It is *granted* for a limited amount of time.
Of all the injustices in the world, copyright infringement should be *way* down the list of rights we need to concern ourselves about.
If anyone has a lack of respect for artists, it's the record labels that swindle them out of the rights to their art through contracts they don't understand knowing they couldn't afford the lawyer's fees to have it explained to them, giving them a small fraction of the retail sale of their art *after the artist has paid back the loan*, yet the artists never gets the rights to their art back.
Next >>