Speaking of CwF+RtB, got anything interesting in the works? I know my Insider badge will expire soon and while I don't mind purchasing that alone I was hoping to maybe get something else more substantial.
I have the good old DMCA t-shirt and it still one of my favorite shirts, I love that I get comments on it quite often even from people who I never though kept up on copyright. It has also started more than one great conversation/debate at parties.
The jury, quite reasonably, said that the new software didn't violate anyone's copyright, as reverse engineering similar features to a competitor is not infringement.
Somebody needs to explain this to a few more courts.
And how is it that this piece of legislation was drawn up and put into play only 9 days after 911????!!! How could such legislation be written and passed in a mere 9 day period!!!
Actually this makes me think, How WAS such a legislation drafted so fast? Do you think maybe we had some of these ideas already drawn up and it was just a matter of cobbling them together and rushing them through congress?
Not really, I was just hoping maybe some people would chime in and say "Oh yeah, I tried to buy this book for my Nook but I had to buy the physical version from them instead".
I did browse around on their website for a bit and the only thing I could find you could not get as an ebook were graphic novels/comics/manga but every real text focused book I looked for was sold as a ebook.
Now this brings the question that if you can't seem to get any of their other graphic novels/comics/manga as an ebook why are they throwing such a fit over the DC comics? Was DC the first to offer digital versions and they were pissed at not getting them? Why are other publishers NOT offering ebooks of their comics now that color e-readers are becoming common?
Honestly the more you look into this the more it seems silly all around.
Also somebody should look into if B&N sells other physical copies without digital copies, if they don't then good on them for standing by their principals but if they do then this really just looks stupid and spiteful.
Yes, what B&N did was silly in that it probably hurts them more than it does DC but in choosing not to sell the digital copies to B&N is also only hurting themselves.
It's basically a lose, lose situation for everyone. I highly doubt that DC is going to make more off its deal with Amazon in the long run that by being able to sell to both and they just locked out happy Nook owners from being able to buy digital copies.
I know this is what the law currently says, my point is how can you say this makes sense and is consistent?
Phones nowadays ARE computers and we seem to be going opposite ways in how we are letting them be searched. Home computers are being protected and need a proper warrant to be searched but phones are continually getting less protection.
Then you can go even further with this and ask if they have a right to search my phone can they check my dropbox because I have an app for it oh my phone? What about my FTP? Remote desktop into my home PC and search that too?
As I said, the line between real computers and mobile devices is constantly blurring and we need to get a bit more consistent with how search procedures are applied to them.
The thing is while a cell phone sitting on a seat is in plain sight is all the data on it in plain sight? If you can't even disturb a mouse and turn off a screen saver how can you justify getting past a lockscreen on a smartphone (not even talking about a password protected one, just the normal lockscreen a touchscreen phone uses)?
On the post: A Busy January: Come See Me Speak (Or Come And Party)
Re: Re:
On the post: A Busy January: Come See Me Speak (Or Come And Party)
I have the good old DMCA t-shirt and it still one of my favorite shirts, I love that I get comments on it quite often even from people who I never though kept up on copyright. It has also started more than one great conversation/debate at parties.
On the post: Company Caught Downloading Competitor's Software Just Has To Pay The Fee To Buy One License
Somebody needs to explain this to a few more courts.
On the post: Copyright Tourism: Korean Companies Sue Guy From Australia For Copyright Infringement... In California
One question...
On the post: Who Wants To Own Righthaven.com? Domain Seized, About To Be Auctioned
On the post: RIAA Whines That Google Won't Let It Program Google's Search Algorithm
Re: Let's be reasonable.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3444501/Static/JanewayCoffee.jpg
On the post: DailyDirt: Commercial Space
Re: 2 suppliers for NASA?
On the post: Actually, Jobs In Making Movies Are On The Rise, Not Falling
Re:
On the post: Tweeting Juror Leads To Retrial For Guy Convicted Of Murder
But it should! There should be legislation that enforces this!
On the post: DOJ: Secret Interpretation Of PATRIOT Act Just Like Grand Jury Subpoena If You Ignore 'Factual Context'
Re:
Actually this makes me think, How WAS such a legislation drafted so fast? Do you think maybe we had some of these ideas already drawn up and it was just a matter of cobbling them together and rushing them through congress?
On the post: ABC Affiliates Blocked From Interviewing Johnny Depp Because He Is Promoting A Film Not Produced By Disney
Re: Re: So much for the news being unbiased
On the post: And Of Course: Study Shows That Getting Rid Of DRM Reduces 'Piracy'
Re: Also in the article...
On the post: Barnes & Noble Doesn't Get Digital DC Comics, Throws Hissy Fit
Re: Re: Re:
I did browse around on their website for a bit and the only thing I could find you could not get as an ebook were graphic novels/comics/manga but every real text focused book I looked for was sold as a ebook.
Now this brings the question that if you can't seem to get any of their other graphic novels/comics/manga as an ebook why are they throwing such a fit over the DC comics? Was DC the first to offer digital versions and they were pissed at not getting them? Why are other publishers NOT offering ebooks of their comics now that color e-readers are becoming common?
Honestly the more you look into this the more it seems silly all around.
On the post: Barnes & Noble Doesn't Get Digital DC Comics, Throws Hissy Fit
Re:
On the post: Barnes & Noble Doesn't Get Digital DC Comics, Throws Hissy Fit
Yes, what B&N did was silly in that it probably hurts them more than it does DC but in choosing not to sell the digital copies to B&N is also only hurting themselves.
It's basically a lose, lose situation for everyone. I highly doubt that DC is going to make more off its deal with Amazon in the long run that by being able to sell to both and they just locked out happy Nook owners from being able to buy digital copies.
On the post: Courts: Search A Cell Phone? No Problem. Touch A Mouse? Violate 4th Amendment.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Courts: Search A Cell Phone? No Problem. Touch A Mouse? Violate 4th Amendment.
Re: Re: Re:
Phones nowadays ARE computers and we seem to be going opposite ways in how we are letting them be searched. Home computers are being protected and need a proper warrant to be searched but phones are continually getting less protection.
Then you can go even further with this and ask if they have a right to search my phone can they check my dropbox because I have an app for it oh my phone? What about my FTP? Remote desktop into my home PC and search that too?
As I said, the line between real computers and mobile devices is constantly blurring and we need to get a bit more consistent with how search procedures are applied to them.
On the post: Courts: Search A Cell Phone? No Problem. Touch A Mouse? Violate 4th Amendment.
Re:
On the post: JSTOR Freely Releases Public Domain Papers That Greg Maxwell Already Freed
Re: So...
On the post: Apple Still Seems To Think That Only It Could Possibly Have An Apple Shaped Logo
Next >>