The 6th Amendment (due to the 14th Amendment) only applies to those who are US citizens and/or living on US soil (thus, foreigners who come to visit or those who crossed the border illegally are covered, but those who live in foreign countries are not.)
Not saying it is right, just that this is the way it is.
I still have mine. Haven't turned it back on since I shut it down in 1995, but it should still be usable. I continually resist the urge to turn it on just to walk down memory lane.
The only problem is that there wasn't much security on the BBS since the phone lines were run by AT&T and was point-to-point (hence, NSA already could get them,) and there was little, if any, encryption used on the connection.
This is exactly the kind of behavior that finally, earlier this year, made me tell AT&T to go fuck themselves.
They are probably hearing that a lot now, likely why they are fighting with T-Mobile by giving customers ~$400 to switch back ($200 for the smartphone, and $200 to come back.) They may win a few back, but I'll never deal with AT&T again, no matter how much they pay me. If AT&T buys out T-Mobile, I'll become a hermit.
You wrongly noted that people often do not care about the quality of videos being produced.
How so? Actually, I sarcastically said exactly the opposite. But only because it is part of a sub-genre of amateur videos. Usually done without big budgets, a lack of high-quality FMV cameras and post-processing and editing which make up a majority of the Hollywood produced videos. People don't really care about the "quality" of the cat video, but care more about the completely unscripted and entirely natural actors.
I love cat videos and apparently so do my coworkers (if our network statistics are taken into consideration.) They usually have minimal "quality", but they have the quality we care about. Many people like substance over sparkle.
Who are you to judge the quality of cat videos over Hollywood films?
I don't. I am not a professional. I know very little about framing shots, or steadying the camera, or proper lighting and/or sound. That is my brother's field of study, and he does a pretty good job at it (so I am told,) and can critique others on stuff like that. However, until we see awards ceremonies for cat videos, I suspect they will remain on the lower end of the quality scale in the eyes of the professionals.
Isn't the real measuring stick for quality the number of people that liked something?
That is one measure of quality, though I don't think very many professionals would agree. It certainly is a measure of popularity, but not necessarily quality.
As Lunney notes, filesharing is a "natural experiment in radically reduced copyright protection," and offers us the chance to explore whether that results in reduced creative output too, as maximalists like to claim.
Maximalists' like to claim their are working to the benefit of the artist, but *every* action they champion helps the incumbent industry. But the maximalists' will now claim that even if there is more quantity despite lower copyright protection, there is far less quality (because only Hollywood knows how to properly take Transformers 23 and turn it into an international blockbuster.) And quality is very important to a society that likes viewing the 15th million cat video on YouTube (guilty!)
If increased quality is their new goal, then they are going to have to deal with Michael Bay and the other producers/directors that consider rehashing the same special effects blockbusters and remaking the same story over and over again. (Not that I am against rehashing...I love the Sci-Fi version of Dune as much as I love the 1985 version, and rehashing can be done very effectively.)
It isn't about the creativity of an artist, it is, and always has been, about control of something that cannot be naturally controlled (human creativity.) They would view less musical hits (that they control 100% of) as far more important than more musical hits (that they control significantly less than 100% of.)
If he'd instead stepped down from public office, he would have retained the ability to control things from the shadows and no-one would have known or been able to do anything about it.
How do you know that hasn't happened? Both parties seem to be doing exactly the same thing it is almost like they are both being controlled by something else. [/tinfoilcap]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @ "Walt Disney Corpse still has its fangs into Mickey Mouse and keeps sucking."
Yeah, cuz he's a... y'know, an animated animal. Yeah that's it. That's the ticket.
Both animated animals came from the same person. Disney made Oswald the Lucky Rabbit which was owned by Universal because they paid him to make Oswald the Lucky Rabbit. When the deal fell through, he made Mickey Mouse, which looked very similar to Oswald the Lucky Rabbit.
And of course here at the Techdirt Zoo, that means "Disney stole Micky Mouse" (sic).
A statement that I never made. Talk about idiot. If you are going to respond, at least respond to the right person.
Also, the Government can't *get* copyrights on its works, but it *can* have copyright rights transferred to it.
Only if the original author doesn't work for the government. A government employee, during the course of their duties, cannot claim copyright and therefore have no grounds to assign the copyright to the government or anyone else. The only way this works is if a contractor generated the document, claimed copyright, and then assigned the copyright to the government.
Senator who lied to Congress calls to exonerate director who lied to Congress...and penalize the senators who seek the truth. News at 11...
I could also point to the old joke..."How can you tell a Senator is lying? His mouth is moving," but there are some senators out there that actually are honest. Not many.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @ "Walt Disney Corpse still has its fangs into Mickey Mouse and keeps sucking."
"Disney stole Micky Mouse, your argument is invalid." Who are you talking about? Walt Disney? He's quite dead. Or Walt Disney Corpse? When Mickey Mouse was created, it was created with the laws and the understanding that its early works would, after a specified and limited time, eventually pass into the Public Domain. That was the deal between creators and the public for granting copyright protection. That was the business model that Walt Disney operated from.
Disney didn't actually steal Mickey Mouse, but instead created Mickey Mouse as a drop-in replacement of Oswald the Lucky Rabbit, which was an earlier cartoon created by Disney studio for Universal Studios. Disney asked Universal for more money, but they countered by cutting the budget and stole most of Disney's staff out from under him to continue making the Oswald series. Angry about the terms of his contract, he refused the deal and completed the terms of his original contract, but then searched for a replacement character which became Mickey Mouse. Mickey Mouse was Disney's creation, but the character is very similar to Oswald the Lucky Rabbit, created by Disney but owned by Universal Studios.
Be very careful about ignoring tickets anywhere outside of LA county though...
Best advice ever: "Get a lawyer who specializes in Traffic Court." Most of them are relatively cheap (~$100 total) and they are very familiar with the system. Check with friends for recommendations, and a lot of these lawyers have good advice on websites on how to proceed. The good ones will review the evidence first before taking the case (and can offer you advice if you decide to fight it by yourself.)
On the negative side probation doesn't tax the system very much and so there maybe a lot of incentive for government to impose excessive probation periods to encourage people who don't believe in certain laws to just pay the fine anyways (since the government isn't bearing a huge burden and the rewards against those that will just pay the fines exceed the minor burdens that the government incurs against those that serve probation).
Tell that to a probation officer. I suspect if infractions resulted in fine or probation, and most folks took probation, probation workers would quickly grind the system to a halt and demand shorter probations and/or less restrictions on probationers.
Don't pay the fine and you'll end up in jail. Actually, you can request jail time from the judge in lieu of payment anyway, but it likely won't be a single day in jail. Usually it is quite a bit longer. And you usually don't have a choice of serving your time on your day off.
And might I suggest, if there is one place in the world you don't want to go, it is jail (prison is worse, but jail can be a very eye-opening experience.) I've been there quite a few times as a guest, and I'd never want to be a resident.
A much better solution would be probation. Not a perfect solution, but far better than the slammer.
Idiots like that guy are what cause people to suggest red light cameras in the first place.
If the cameras caught everything after 1 second, very few tickets would have been generated and the folks like this would have gotten their due. The problem was that nearly 80% of the tickets generated were for folks who went through the light 1 second after it turned red, and 38% of them were before 0.25 seconds (note, it usually takes the red light about 0.1-0.2 seconds to reach full brightness.)
Then again, if they only caught a few violators, the cameras wouldn't be worth it.
True, iTunes is quite simply awful. The Windows version, anyway.
The Mac version isn't much better, and could be far worse once you realize that you just spent $1500 more on a machine that will be obsolete and no longer supported in 6 months.
Of course, that was before I realized that Debian/Mint runs awesome on a 6 year old MacBook Pro. Faster than MacOS X (that isn't able to run the latest MacOS X software.)
iTunes songs are DRM-free, you DL them and they're yours.
There was a long time in which they weren't.
And iTunes videos are still DRM'd. I still haven't been able to figure out how to play the Nerdist episodes I purchased on iTunes on a Linux box, but then again I haven't been trying recently. I was able to watch them on a Windoze virtual machine once.
Re: Re: SO, take away corporate privileges; de-corporatize the world.
Simple solution to copyright - make copyright non-transferable.
Even better solution, scrap copyright altogether.
At the very least, if they want to treat it like property, they have to pay property tax on it like everyone else, at the tune of 1% of the value per year and then use the money generated solely for funding new works and/or managing the public domain through libraries.
If they like leaving money at the table every time they don't get their way, good for them. And they wonder why they are losing at the game of Capitalism.
On the post: Judge In No Fly List Trial Won't Let Plaintiff Or Her Lawyers See The Evidence
Re:
The 6th Amendment (due to the 14th Amendment) only applies to those who are US citizens and/or living on US soil (thus, foreigners who come to visit or those who crossed the border illegally are covered, but those who live in foreign countries are not.)
Not saying it is right, just that this is the way it is.
On the post: AT&T's 'Sponsored Data' Program An Admission That Data Caps Have Nothing To Do With Congestion
Re: Re: Re:
Huh?
AT&T is offering a buy-back program to T-Mobile customers. I don't think the government will allow anyone to actually buy T-Mobile, due to the anti-trust issues. Certainly not Sprint.
On the post: Wireless Mesh Networks, The NSA, And Re-building The Internet
Re:
I still have mine. Haven't turned it back on since I shut it down in 1995, but it should still be usable. I continually resist the urge to turn it on just to walk down memory lane.
The only problem is that there wasn't much security on the BBS since the phone lines were run by AT&T and was point-to-point (hence, NSA already could get them,) and there was little, if any, encryption used on the connection.
On the post: AT&T's 'Sponsored Data' Program An Admission That Data Caps Have Nothing To Do With Congestion
Re:
They are probably hearing that a lot now, likely why they are fighting with T-Mobile by giving customers ~$400 to switch back ($200 for the smartphone, and $200 to come back.) They may win a few back, but I'll never deal with AT&T again, no matter how much they pay me. If AT&T buys out T-Mobile, I'll become a hermit.
On the post: Study: File Sharing Leads To More, Not Fewer, Musical Hits Being Written
Re: Re: Maximalist's agenda...
How so? Actually, I sarcastically said exactly the opposite. But only because it is part of a sub-genre of amateur videos. Usually done without big budgets, a lack of high-quality FMV cameras and post-processing and editing which make up a majority of the Hollywood produced videos. People don't really care about the "quality" of the cat video, but care more about the completely unscripted and entirely natural actors.
I love cat videos and apparently so do my coworkers (if our network statistics are taken into consideration.) They usually have minimal "quality", but they have the quality we care about. Many people like substance over sparkle.
Who are you to judge the quality of cat videos over Hollywood films?
I don't. I am not a professional. I know very little about framing shots, or steadying the camera, or proper lighting and/or sound. That is my brother's field of study, and he does a pretty good job at it (so I am told,) and can critique others on stuff like that. However, until we see awards ceremonies for cat videos, I suspect they will remain on the lower end of the quality scale in the eyes of the professionals.
Isn't the real measuring stick for quality the number of people that liked something?
That is one measure of quality, though I don't think very many professionals would agree. It certainly is a measure of popularity, but not necessarily quality.
On the post: Study: File Sharing Leads To More, Not Fewer, Musical Hits Being Written
Maximalist's agenda...
Maximalists' like to claim their are working to the benefit of the artist, but *every* action they champion helps the incumbent industry. But the maximalists' will now claim that even if there is more quantity despite lower copyright protection, there is far less quality (because only Hollywood knows how to properly take Transformers 23 and turn it into an international blockbuster.) And quality is very important to a society that likes viewing the 15th million cat video on YouTube (guilty!)
If increased quality is their new goal, then they are going to have to deal with Michael Bay and the other producers/directors that consider rehashing the same special effects blockbusters and remaking the same story over and over again. (Not that I am against rehashing...I love the Sci-Fi version of Dune as much as I love the 1985 version, and rehashing can be done very effectively.)
It isn't about the creativity of an artist, it is, and always has been, about control of something that cannot be naturally controlled (human creativity.) They would view less musical hits (that they control 100% of) as far more important than more musical hits (that they control significantly less than 100% of.)
On the post: 'Most Transparent' Administration Once Again Irritates A Federal Judge By Refusing To Cough Up A Requested Document
Re: Re: Re:
How do you know that hasn't happened? Both parties seem to be doing exactly the same thing it is almost like they are both being controlled by something else. [/tinfoilcap]
On the post: NZ Customs Refuses To Answer Questions After Revelations Of Illegal Orders To Give FBI Info On Kim Dotcom For 'Brownie Points'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @ "Walt Disney Corpse still has its fangs into Mickey Mouse and keeps sucking."
Both animated animals came from the same person. Disney made Oswald the Lucky Rabbit which was owned by Universal because they paid him to make Oswald the Lucky Rabbit. When the deal fell through, he made Mickey Mouse, which looked very similar to Oswald the Lucky Rabbit.
And of course here at the Techdirt Zoo, that means "Disney stole Micky Mouse" (sic).
A statement that I never made. Talk about idiot. If you are going to respond, at least respond to the right person.
On the post: FBI Agent Tries To Register Copyright On Top Secret Interrogation Manual... Making It Available To Anyone
Re: Re: Re: What if...
Only if the original author doesn't work for the government. A government employee, during the course of their duties, cannot claim copyright and therefore have no grounds to assign the copyright to the government or anyone else. The only way this works is if a contractor generated the document, claimed copyright, and then assigned the copyright to the government.
On the post: Rep. Peter King Says It's A Disgrace To Call Out James Clapper For Lying To Congress
Top stories for 11 o'clock news
I could also point to the old joke..."How can you tell a Senator is lying? His mouth is moving," but there are some senators out there that actually are honest. Not many.
On the post: NZ Customs Refuses To Answer Questions After Revelations Of Illegal Orders To Give FBI Info On Kim Dotcom For 'Brownie Points'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @ "Walt Disney Corpse still has its fangs into Mickey Mouse and keeps sucking."
Disney didn't actually steal Mickey Mouse, but instead created Mickey Mouse as a drop-in replacement of Oswald the Lucky Rabbit, which was an earlier cartoon created by Disney studio for Universal Studios. Disney asked Universal for more money, but they countered by cutting the budget and stole most of Disney's staff out from under him to continue making the Oswald series. Angry about the terms of his contract, he refused the deal and completed the terms of his original contract, but then searched for a replacement character which became Mickey Mouse. Mickey Mouse was Disney's creation, but the character is very similar to Oswald the Lucky Rabbit, created by Disney but owned by Universal Studios.
On the post: Red Light Cameras On The Decline, As Everyone Realizes They Don't Make Roads Safer, They Just Make Money
Re: California tickets - many can be ignored
Oh, there are a lot more reasons than those. HighwayRobbery.net.
Be very careful about ignoring tickets anywhere outside of LA county though...
Best advice ever: "Get a lawyer who specializes in Traffic Court." Most of them are relatively cheap (~$100 total) and they are very familiar with the system. Check with friends for recommendations, and a lot of these lawyers have good advice on websites on how to proceed. The good ones will review the evidence first before taking the case (and can offer you advice if you decide to fight it by yourself.)
On the post: Red Light Cameras On The Decline, As Everyone Realizes They Don't Make Roads Safer, They Just Make Money
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Tell that to a probation officer. I suspect if infractions resulted in fine or probation, and most folks took probation, probation workers would quickly grind the system to a halt and demand shorter probations and/or less restrictions on probationers.
On the post: Red Light Cameras On The Decline, As Everyone Realizes They Don't Make Roads Safer, They Just Make Money
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Don't pay the fine and you'll end up in jail. Actually, you can request jail time from the judge in lieu of payment anyway, but it likely won't be a single day in jail. Usually it is quite a bit longer. And you usually don't have a choice of serving your time on your day off.
And might I suggest, if there is one place in the world you don't want to go, it is jail (prison is worse, but jail can be a very eye-opening experience.) I've been there quite a few times as a guest, and I'd never want to be a resident.
A much better solution would be probation. Not a perfect solution, but far better than the slammer.
On the post: Red Light Cameras On The Decline, As Everyone Realizes They Don't Make Roads Safer, They Just Make Money
Re: Re: Go The Aussies!
If the cameras caught everything after 1 second, very few tickets would have been generated and the folks like this would have gotten their due. The problem was that nearly 80% of the tickets generated were for folks who went through the light 1 second after it turned red, and 38% of them were before 0.25 seconds (note, it usually takes the red light about 0.1-0.2 seconds to reach full brightness.)
Then again, if they only caught a few violators, the cameras wouldn't be worth it.
On the post: Upset About Beyonce Going Digital, Target Refuses To Stock New Album
Re: Re: Re:
The Mac version isn't much better, and could be far worse once you realize that you just spent $1500 more on a machine that will be obsolete and no longer supported in 6 months.
Of course, that was before I realized that Debian/Mint runs awesome on a 6 year old MacBook Pro. Faster than MacOS X (that isn't able to run the latest MacOS X software.)
On the post: Upset About Beyonce Going Digital, Target Refuses To Stock New Album
Re: Re:
There was a long time in which they weren't.
And iTunes videos are still DRM'd. I still haven't been able to figure out how to play the Nerdist episodes I purchased on iTunes on a Linux box, but then again I haven't been trying recently. I was able to watch them on a Windoze virtual machine once.
On the post: Hidden Within The TPP: The RIAA's Secret Plan To Screw Musicians Out Of Their Rights
Re: Re: SO, take away corporate privileges; de-corporatize the world.
Even better solution, scrap copyright altogether.
At the very least, if they want to treat it like property, they have to pay property tax on it like everyone else, at the tune of 1% of the value per year and then use the money generated solely for funding new works and/or managing the public domain through libraries.
On the post: Hidden Within The TPP: The RIAA's Secret Plan To Screw Musicians Out Of Their Rights
Re: Re: Is anyone surprised by this?
Good point.
On the post: Upset About Beyonce Going Digital, Target Refuses To Stock New Album
Good for them
Next >>