Then you can always sue the recording company that produced the gadget that allows storing the analog audio signal as a digital file. All analog-to-digital converter vendors can easily be sued for this feature.
Respectable companies will refuse to implement features that are being misused in the marketplace.
so that you can chase your fantasy of your incompetence being rewarded.
This is actually the brilliance of copyright. Authors are doing their work even when such activity is not being rewarded. Instead of a money reward, authors receive ownership to their respective writings, i.e. a promise that some day he can reap the benefits of the work. The mere promise lets authors do their work, even when the whole world is against them.
It just isn't too profitable to be an author, and the popularity of writing copyrighted works instead of watching tv on a sofa idling and spitting to the ceiling is getting thinner every day and soon authors without compensation has no other choice than pack their backpacks and move to some other country.
Depends on if the Wikipedia editors signed a work for hire or similar type of contract. But of course you knew that...
I don't think he has money to pay salary to 100k people or something... Given that he's been begging for chance in his web page... (sure, noone wants to see jimmy wales face on their wikipedia pages, but I don't think it's still popular enough to pay salaries for everyone who contributed)
We saw an incompetent display of software, where the creator had to explain in here that it was meant to be dynamic rather than a video of 30 year old vintage animation, because the actual site didn't impart that informations.
I think you're focusing slightly wrong area of the software. The technological marvel isn't really the important part. The original requirement that the site fulfills is that the graphics must look nice. There's whole communities focused on getting graphics display look nice on computers. It came as significant disappointment that computers weren't able to display cool graphics like we've seen on movies without significant investment in graphics quality. Basically film technology that can actually do the cool graphics is over 200 years old, and computers with their 30 year lifespan are constantly trying to catch up. But as said, the tech marvel isn't the significant part, when the requirement is that it just needs to look nice.
Wikimedia's (and Blender's) products have minimal copyright
Jimmy Wales didn't write the articles, so he cannot claim copyright on them. So by the law, they're not allowed to raise the copyright level, even if their business would fail because of that.
I'm just pointing out that your rule has a flaw... It doesn't work with everyone on the planet. Now that that's been proven, its questionable if it works for anyone on the planet.
Re: Re: Re: A case could be made that there's prior art that pre
If you want to see an example of failing to understand the market and what presumptive customers want,
Given that you already know what meshpage is, it means my marketing department is getting their yearly bonuses. Web page handles shipping it to your location, so shipping department also get bonuses. Web page layout handles product packaging nicely, so packaging department gets bonuses this year. Some teenagers reviewed the site after bus adverts, so local magazine publish department gets their bonuses..
Seems I've already done all the important activities, and am expecting success any day now.
Re: A case could be made that there's prior art that predates Di
work once, get paid forever"
Problem with what you're thinking is that the actual creative process isn't the only thing these business gurus need to do to get market accept the product. Creative process is what the customer is buying for, but that's not the whole story, you also need to get shelf space in the shop, delivery to multiple locations around the country, shipping, packaging, marketing, reviewing the product in local magazines... tons of different activities that have nothing to do with the creative process. If you only consider copyrighted work to be the creative process, you're forgetting large amount of stuff that authors need to do to get the product successful. Many of the great copyrighted work were never successful because their authors didn't do these (slightly expensive) non-creative activities that will boost the popularity of their work. Still your valuable pennies you pay for the product need to cover the cost of all this extra activity.
You’re not a lawmaker, a judge, a king, or a god—which means you have no power here.
Programmers have different kind of power. The power to control decisions that computers are making. You just need few years of work to gain ability that ordinary people would consider unnatural. This is why I'm building a web site, to let other people see first hand how powerful I have become with software and the millions of transistors that control our lifes. The only information needed is the ability to turn computer source code into provable theorems.
I thought you schitck was demanding that copyright be rewritten to suit you because you failed to get clients?
copyright was already rewritten years ago to please our corporate buddies, we just want you to follow the existing laws. This rebellion that you're displaying with your actions just need to stop.
Are you actually using circles to create illegal copyrghted work? No wonder it gets DMCA'd given that the mickey mouse circles attached to a copyright symbol is clearly violating disney's mickey mouse trademark.
If you want to make a fool out of yourself with mickey mouse ears, you should do it in a way that isn't obvious to everyone who you're cloning...
I'm always writing proofs. It's called curry-howard isomorphism which can map any computer software to math proofs in such way that types in the programming languages are the theorems to be proved, and the software implementations are the actual proofs that prove that certain theorem is true.
as has software that's been producing higher quality results for years than you've ever demonstrated with your software.
I don't care about the other software. As long as my clients do not know that the other software exists, everything is fine in la la land... if they learn about the other software, we can claim our software is easier to use, and then our clents will not explore that option any longer.
You... are aware that mature, effective tech already exists in the hologram space, right?
Yes, I'm a proud owner of looking glass holographic display, and for some odd reason, my software can actually render holographs in that display. (check for 2 looking glass boxes in windows version of builder tool)
So yes, the hardware has been available for a while now.
On the post: Hollywood Is Betting On Filtering Mandates, But Working Copyright Algorithms Simply Don't Exist
Re: riaa
Then you can always sue the recording company that produced the gadget that allows storing the analog audio signal as a digital file. All analog-to-digital converter vendors can easily be sued for this feature.
Respectable companies will refuse to implement features that are being misused in the marketplace.
On the post: Sony Pictures, Defenders Of The Creative Industry, Appears To Be Using Fan Art Without Giving Credit
Re: Re: Re:
This is actually the brilliance of copyright. Authors are doing their work even when such activity is not being rewarded. Instead of a money reward, authors receive ownership to their respective writings, i.e. a promise that some day he can reap the benefits of the work. The mere promise lets authors do their work, even when the whole world is against them.
It just isn't too profitable to be an author, and the popularity of writing copyrighted works instead of watching tv on a sofa idling and spitting to the ceiling is getting thinner every day and soon authors without compensation has no other choice than pack their backpacks and move to some other country.
I.e. it's the modern day equivalent of slavery.
On the post: Apparently Someone Doesn't Want You To Buy Our Copymouse Shirt
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I don't think he has money to pay salary to 100k people or something... Given that he's been begging for chance in his web page... (sure, noone wants to see jimmy wales face on their wikipedia pages, but I don't think it's still popular enough to pay salaries for everyone who contributed)
On the post: Disney Defeats Lawsuit Brought By Company Owning Evel Knievel's Rights Over 'Toy Story 4' Character
Re: Re: Re:
I think you're focusing slightly wrong area of the software. The technological marvel isn't really the important part. The original requirement that the site fulfills is that the graphics must look nice. There's whole communities focused on getting graphics display look nice on computers. It came as significant disappointment that computers weren't able to display cool graphics like we've seen on movies without significant investment in graphics quality. Basically film technology that can actually do the cool graphics is over 200 years old, and computers with their 30 year lifespan are constantly trying to catch up. But as said, the tech marvel isn't the significant part, when the requirement is that it just needs to look nice.
On the post: Apparently Someone Doesn't Want You To Buy Our Copymouse Shirt
Re: Re: Re:
Jimmy Wales didn't write the articles, so he cannot claim copyright on them. So by the law, they're not allowed to raise the copyright level, even if their business would fail because of that.
On the post: Disney Defeats Lawsuit Brought By Company Owning Evel Knievel's Rights Over 'Toy Story 4' Character
Re:
What a pitiful person you are, when you didn't even notice when I tried to kill you.
On the post: Apparently Someone Doesn't Want You To Buy Our Copymouse Shirt
Re:
I'm just pointing out that your rule has a flaw... It doesn't work with everyone on the planet. Now that that's been proven, its questionable if it works for anyone on the planet.
On the post: Apparently Someone Doesn't Want You To Buy Our Copymouse Shirt
Re:
Jimmy Wales proves you wrong...
On the post: Disney Defeats Lawsuit Brought By Company Owning Evel Knievel's Rights Over 'Toy Story 4' Character
Re:
I was thinking you either die for laughter or shame....
On the post: Apparently Someone Doesn't Want You To Buy Our Copymouse Shirt
Re: Re: Re: A case could be made that there's prior art that pre
Given that you already know what meshpage is, it means my marketing department is getting their yearly bonuses. Web page handles shipping it to your location, so shipping department also get bonuses. Web page layout handles product packaging nicely, so packaging department gets bonuses this year. Some teenagers reviewed the site after bus adverts, so local magazine publish department gets their bonuses..
Seems I've already done all the important activities, and am expecting success any day now.
On the post: Apparently Someone Doesn't Want You To Buy Our Copymouse Shirt
Re: A case could be made that there's prior art that predates Di
Problem with what you're thinking is that the actual creative process isn't the only thing these business gurus need to do to get market accept the product. Creative process is what the customer is buying for, but that's not the whole story, you also need to get shelf space in the shop, delivery to multiple locations around the country, shipping, packaging, marketing, reviewing the product in local magazines... tons of different activities that have nothing to do with the creative process. If you only consider copyrighted work to be the creative process, you're forgetting large amount of stuff that authors need to do to get the product successful. Many of the great copyrighted work were never successful because their authors didn't do these (slightly expensive) non-creative activities that will boost the popularity of their work. Still your valuable pennies you pay for the product need to cover the cost of all this extra activity.
On the post: Disney Defeats Lawsuit Brought By Company Owning Evel Knievel's Rights Over 'Toy Story 4' Character
Re:
see this url: https://meshpage.org/view.php
On the post: Disney Defeats Lawsuit Brought By Company Owning Evel Knievel's Rights Over 'Toy Story 4' Character
Re:
Programmers have different kind of power. The power to control decisions that computers are making. You just need few years of work to gain ability that ordinary people would consider unnatural. This is why I'm building a web site, to let other people see first hand how powerful I have become with software and the millions of transistors that control our lifes. The only information needed is the ability to turn computer source code into provable theorems.
On the post: Disney Defeats Lawsuit Brought By Company Owning Evel Knievel's Rights Over 'Toy Story 4' Character
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
copyright was already rewritten years ago to please our corporate buddies, we just want you to follow the existing laws. This rebellion that you're displaying with your actions just need to stop.
On the post: Disney Defeats Lawsuit Brought By Company Owning Evel Knievel's Rights Over 'Toy Story 4' Character
Re:
Trump spends 100 million bucks for the demonstrations, so they better be significantly better than what I can create in my garage...
On the post: Disney Defeats Lawsuit Brought By Company Owning Evel Knievel's Rights Over 'Toy Story 4' Character
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
try this demonstration: https://tpgames.org/marble_cube3.mp4
On the post: Apparently Someone Doesn't Want You To Buy Our Copymouse Shirt
Using crcles illegally?
Are you actually using circles to create illegal copyrghted work? No wonder it gets DMCA'd given that the mickey mouse circles attached to a copyright symbol is clearly violating disney's mickey mouse trademark.
If you want to make a fool out of yourself with mickey mouse ears, you should do it in a way that isn't obvious to everyone who you're cloning...
On the post: Disney Defeats Lawsuit Brought By Company Owning Evel Knievel's Rights Over 'Toy Story 4' Character
Re:
I'm always writing proofs. It's called curry-howard isomorphism which can map any computer software to math proofs in such way that types in the programming languages are the theorems to be proved, and the software implementations are the actual proofs that prove that certain theorem is true.
On the post: Disney Defeats Lawsuit Brought By Company Owning Evel Knievel's Rights Over 'Toy Story 4' Character
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I don't care about the other software. As long as my clients do not know that the other software exists, everything is fine in la la land... if they learn about the other software, we can claim our software is easier to use, and then our clents will not explore that option any longer.
On the post: Disney Defeats Lawsuit Brought By Company Owning Evel Knievel's Rights Over 'Toy Story 4' Character
Re: Re: Re:
Yes, I'm a proud owner of looking glass holographic display, and for some odd reason, my software can actually render holographs in that display. (check for 2 looking glass boxes in windows version of builder tool)
So yes, the hardware has been available for a while now.
Next >>