The old model: these guys are lone wolves, isolated from society. Watch out for loners and antisocial people. Be afraid
The new model: these guys are organized and positively chatty with fellow travelers over encrypted communications. They're all around you and can be anyone (especially ethnic and religious minorities). Be afraid.
I don't know if European courts work like in the US with respect to the ability of minors to enter into contracts... but I suspect it's at least as limited. So there's really no way for parents to avoid potential liability, since children couldn't even legally give permission. Worse, since most social media platforms require parental authorization (theoretically at least) that shifts the liability for liability for anything kids post to their parents as well.
I'm waiting for the previously heavily redacted document to leak that features a postscript from senior policymakers requesting that tech companies provide the algorithm to generate a 1980s Kelly LeBrock
As bad as her argument is, I'm stuck at the idea of having an Amazon Echo in the bedroom. What does she do when Amazon helpfully ships a stack of bibles or perhaps copies of the George Burns/John Denver classic 'Oh God!' after a particularly vocal performance in bed?
The intelligence community wants backdoors to encryption not to gather more information but to narrow down the enormous feed they are already taking in. They're essentially admitting defeat in sorting through the haystack and assuming that the smaller amount of encrypted communication would be more manageable and still contain actionable intelligence.
That's their wish- reduce the workload. Kind of petty really considering the widespread harm that enacting even the half-assed proposals currently on the table.
I have no idea how you can write a law regulating links and distinguish that from academic use. French universities are about to lose their biggest measure of prestige.
When does Xerox start sending threatening letters to libraries who figured out this circulating documents using a computer thing decades ago. Certainly, there's a tempting mix of large deep-pocketed companies like EBSCO who make circulation software and defenseless individual libraries who roll their own or depend on open source software. It's a target rich environment.
Here I was thinking that copyright infringement and libel were mutually exclusive. If you feel like someone is using your words precisely and completely enough that it rises to standard of an unauthorized copy, it's hard to make the argument that they are also misrepresenting you in a damaging way.
I wonder how many of these lawyers are going to offer defense services for people and businesses that register with the government as sole sponsors of criminal enterprises. No matter how things shake out on the legalization front, I'm sure the eventual status will be limited in some fashion. Whoever tries to patent a strain that falls outside of the guidelines is suddenly on the hook as the producer of any amount that's found in circulation.
Even if federal enforcement remains lax, who would want to take on the liability of taking ownership of specific strains? If cops in Nebraska test a shipment and find that it is your intellectual property, how much extra legal wrangling is it going to take to maintain that you aren't responsible for trafficking it?
Generally, students in residence halls don't have a choice on their cable provider or package. If the school didn't sign up for HBO, then kids living in the dorm are out of luck (outside of torrenting individual programs of course). If anything, this HBO trying to keep parents as subscribers that might otherwise drop the service when their kids leave for college.
If Ballmer is willing to brave the inevitable lawsuits... non-LA residents who want to see their team through a streaming service would probably pitch a couple bucks even if it's only to watch them play the Clippers. Even better if he can get access to away games. The local subscriber base would naturally make up most of the income but offering worldwide access online enlarges the market considerably.
How can there not be a pile of overly general patents out there that instead of taking a well-known practice and adding "with a computer" it says "using a pill." Of course that ignores the huge number of new drugs that mimic existing drugs with little or no improvement in efficacy and only a slight change in mechanism. Pharma probably doesn't want the concept of prior art anywhere near their business.
I see intellectual property rights as having some parts in common with water rights in the West. Nobody owns the river, but you can own rights to some of the water and that is expressed in terms of amount or time. You can also buy, sell or trade all or part of your water rights, just as you can apportion a copyright or license a patent or trademark.
Unfortunately, they also share problems with abuse of the underlying resource as unproductive uses crowding out productive ones (golf courses are water law's patent trolls).
The LDS Church puts a lot of support behind ancestry.com and they get really serious about genealogical records. If there are records being permanently lost, I suspect the result will resemble a fatwah more than a slap on the wrist
I'm sure there's a way to identify hardware changes without specifically identifying what the hardware is... but I doubt that's happening here. Instead, this looks like EA is making me pay to contribute valuable market research that they can use for leverage against hardware makers. Combine that with the linked payment and other data they collect and there's a pot of saleable consumer information as well.
How are they not offering games for free or paying developers decently with all of this extra revenue they can rake in off their users?
The actions of the entertainment industry are unambiguously bad, but the results seem to be mixed. The MPAA and RIAA act like they're slowly losing a game of whack a mole partly because their opposition to innovation has spurred so many varied efforts to work at the problem from different directions.
If there were a clear, legal path to distributing content that investors could get behind, I feel like we would have long since settled on a standard market with a few big players offering services that were just good enough. Presumably, a competitive market would still spark innovation but if a Pandora or even a Popcorn Time had the investor backing, we'd no doubt see the lobbying clout and the patent knives come out to defend their market position.
It's funny to stupid anticompetitive behavior from one industry foster actual competition and innovation.
Are the theater owners and the MPAA regretting the choice to show previously released movies like Star Wars and the Marvel universe series in the build-up to a sequel? I'm sure all of those dvds out there have thoroughly cannibalized the audience.
In order for these Stingray devices to work, they have to misrepresent the service that you're connected to. Right at the top of my cell phone screen it states what network I'm connected to.
Isn't it a bit weird that companies like T-Mobile and AT&T that are notoriously touchy and overreaching about their trademarks would let something like that go? Sure, bend over backward for law enforcement when they can do it secretly, but bork up their branding?
Of course, there's the possibility that the Stingray might improve cell service by boosting the local signal. It's really just a vastly unconstitutional, privacy invading customer service enhancement.
On the post: Before We Even Know The Details, Politicians Rush To Blame Encryption For Brussels Attacks
Narrative expansion
The new model: these guys are organized and positively chatty with fellow travelers over encrypted communications. They're all around you and can be anyone (especially ethnic and religious minorities). Be afraid.
On the post: French Parents Face Fines, Lawsuits And Prison For Posting Pictures Of Their Own Children Online
Wow
What a mess
On the post: South Korea Embraces Ridiculous Right To Be Forgotten As Well
In other words
On the post: White House Asked Google & Facebook To Change Their Algorithms To Fight ISIS; Both Said No
Weird Science
On the post: Guardian Tech Reporter: Apple Should Help FBI Break Into iPhone Because I Don't Consider Privacy All That Important
I'm stuck
On the post: CIA Head John Brennan Says CIA Failed To Prevent Terrorist Attacks Because Of Encrypted Communications
Admission of defeat
That's their wish- reduce the workload. Kind of petty really considering the widespread harm that enacting even the half-assed proposals currently on the table.
On the post: French Politicians Pushing To Ban Linking To Any Website Without Permission
The war on footnotes
On the post: Stupid Patent Of The Month: Sharing Your Hard Copy Documents, But On A Social Network
And 3...2...1
On the post: Writer Claims Libel, Copyright Infringement When Screencap Of Her Tweet Is Used In An Online Article
Huh...
On the post: FBI Director Says 'Smart People' At Office Supply Companies Can Help Limit Terrorists' Access To Pen And Paper
Comey wishes he could fall back on paper communications
I picture Comey sulking in a corner "You don't see the terrorists having to respond to those meddling kids and their FOIA requests!"
On the post: The Ridiculous Rush To Try To Patent Pot
Hello? DEA? Please target me!
Even if federal enforcement remains lax, who would want to take on the liability of taking ownership of specific strains? If cops in Nebraska test a shipment and find that it is your intellectual property, how much extra legal wrangling is it going to take to maintain that you aren't responsible for trafficking it?
On the post: Cable CEO Is Really Pissed That HBO Hasn't Cracked Down On Streaming Password Sharing
Reaching an unreachable market
On the post: Steve Ballmer Shrugs Off $60 Million TV Offer For Clippers Games, Considers Streaming Instead
Subscription? How about a la carte per game?
On the post: Could A Hedge Fund Manager Trying To Short Stocks Of Pharma Companies With Bad Patents Derail Patent Reform?
Somebody needs to troll pharma
On the post: How To Use 'Intellectual Property' Properly
Intangible property rights
Unfortunately, they also share problems with abuse of the underlying resource as unproductive uses crowding out productive ones (golf courses are water law's patent trolls).
On the post: [Updated] Ancestry.com Employees Caught Throwing Away
Thousands OfRecords They Were Supposed To Be Archiving For The US GovernmentMormon Church
On the post: EA/Origin/Something Locks Benchmarkers Out Of Battlefield Hardline After Too Many GPU Swaps
What the hell?
How are they not offering games for free or paying developers decently with all of this extra revenue they can rake in off their users?
On the post: Bad Copyright Laws Scaring Off Necessary Investment In New Digital Platforms
Though, sometimes investment /= innovation
If there were a clear, legal path to distributing content that investors could get behind, I feel like we would have long since settled on a standard market with a few big players offering services that were just good enough. Presumably, a competitive market would still spark innovation but if a Pandora or even a Popcorn Time had the investor backing, we'd no doubt see the lobbying clout and the patent knives come out to defend their market position.
It's funny to stupid anticompetitive behavior from one industry foster actual competition and innovation.
On the post: Theater Chains Pout, Boycott Netflix's New Movie To Protect Antiquated Release Windows
Are policies on re-releases changing too?
On the post: Washington Law Enforcement Hides Stingray Purchase And Use From Everyone, But It's OK Because They're Fighting Crime
How about trademark infringement?
Isn't it a bit weird that companies like T-Mobile and AT&T that are notoriously touchy and overreaching about their trademarks would let something like that go? Sure, bend over backward for law enforcement when they can do it secretly, but bork up their branding?
Of course, there's the possibility that the Stingray might improve cell service by boosting the local signal. It's really just a vastly unconstitutional, privacy invading customer service enhancement.
Next >>