I was just wondering whether or not there was a legal course of action for the website. Be a chance to use industry tactics against them, see how they like being on the other side of the fence for a change.
And do you really think I care if the fix for the app is to update the app to use a new API? The alternative is to not fix and leave the exploit open.
Not something that I want as a customer. Even though at the moment it appears to only be affecting the developers, what’s to say that there isn't something in there that allows the device to be exploited?
And as a developer myself, I would definitely want to change an app with the problem, especially if this was my main source of revenue.
Greece needs something to stabilize their finances, so they should just reclaim the Olympics. Call it a copyright extension, I mean Disney does it all of the time, so why not an extension of a few thousand years?
As I read this, the thing that stood out most was not that the MPAA was up to their typical tricks, but was in fact
they send out spokesperson Kate Bedingfield -- who just recently joined the MPAA from the White House
It got me to thinking. Maybe what we need is for any high-level Federal position (elected officials, cabinet-level appointees, agency heads, and any other Federally appointed individuals) to sign what amounts to a non-compete contract, that states they will not be allowed to work for or take money from any industry for 5 years after leaving their government position. I mean the industry does it all the time, and when you hold one of those high-level positions you are essentially working for the people of the United States and all industries would technically fall under competition.
Not realistic but still a good thought in my opinion.
Now, if the publishers of these other items want to put into their terms of sale that no one will resale their product for more than retail, then yes, it would be the same and Mike would then be hypocritical, but then again, that is the very thing that the publishers are trying to fight, isn't it?
I think you ask the wrong question. I believe most people already know this. But enforcement will continue until the laws change. And it’s very profitable and easy for the entertainment industry to buy themselves the laws. Certainly much cheaper than paying the actual artists since the number of people they have to payoff is small when compared to the number of artist they ‘employ’.
you can be a graduate of an electrical/engineering school, but they never taught you how to "splice" a wire, should we dump the engineering school because of that???
No, but being an engineer doesn't mean you are necessarily going to be splicing wires (in fact I would be concerned if that is the majority of your job).
If on the other hand you went to electricians school (or apprenticed as one) and they taught you nothing about splicing, then your certification should revoked and you should sue them since they did not teach you what you went to school for.
If you’re going to make analogies at least make is sensible. This is about someone having to spend a lot of money and 2 years and learn nothing about what she will be doing. If its just a safety and health concerns, then make her take a class on the safety and health hazards specific to braiding hair. Once she passes she gets a license that says she can braid hair and charge for it.
Maybe the people should require congress pass a law that states something to the effect that all agreements (trade or executive) impose a mandatory 3 month waiting period from the time that the entire text is publicly released, until the it can be voted on (or signed if its executive).
It may not stop stuff but at least it would stop the total secrecy that some group operate with at the moment.
If there is anything in the world that is analogous to the digital world it is money.
When you go to a bank and deposit money, you may be handing over a physical object but that is not what you depositing. You adding a number to a piece of paper (or a digital equivalent now days) that says you have this money value available for you to get when you want it. When you withdrawal, the bank doesn't go find 'your' money, they give you an equivalent amount, or in essence a copy.
So even if the courts want the physical (i.e. servers) from Mega, why should they not have to offer a copy somewhere that legit data can be accessed. Although I will say that the copy should only allow content that is not directly involved with the case to be read. No writing should be allowed.
For those that say that the DOJ shouldn't have to pay for that, I think you are wrong. Should the DOJ win they will be allowed to keep at least some of (maybe all of) the assets they seized form Mega, so that should be used to pay of cost of setting up access for the bystanders who did nothing wrong. If the DOJ loses, then that means they should not have been able to seize the assets in the first place and it’s a form of a penalty on the DOJ that comes from their own budget (and hopefully this will cause them to think a little more before acting). And for those that say the seized money should go to the companies that the infringed content came from, I say tough, they should have fought their own battles against infringement. Once the government becomes involved (exercising powers that normal companies can't, like seizing all assets before a trial) then they forfeit the money they may have been able to collect. Otherwise they are just using the DOJ as a free legal service and making everyone pay plus getting paid. And we know how all you out there just hate freetards.
On the post: Legit Ebook Lending Site Taken Down By An Angry Twitmob Of Writers [UPDATED]
Re: DMCA notices?
On the post: Apple Plays Cat And Mouse With In-App Purchase Hacker
Re:
Not something that I want as a customer. Even though at the moment it appears to only be affecting the developers, what’s to say that there isn't something in there that allows the device to be exploited?
And as a developer myself, I would definitely want to change an app with the problem, especially if this was my main source of revenue.
On the post: US Olympic Committee Forces 30 Year Old Philidelphia Gyro Restaraunt To Change Its Name
My sad attempt at trolling...
On the post: MPAA Points To Its Roster Of Crappy Online Services And Asks What We're Complaining About
they send out spokesperson Kate Bedingfield -- who just recently joined the MPAA from the White House
It got me to thinking. Maybe what we need is for any high-level Federal position (elected officials, cabinet-level appointees, agency heads, and any other Federally appointed individuals) to sign what amounts to a non-compete contract, that states they will not be allowed to work for or take money from any industry for 5 years after leaving their government position. I mean the industry does it all the time, and when you hold one of those high-level positions you are essentially working for the people of the United States and all industries would technically fall under competition.
Not realistic but still a good thought in my opinion.
On the post: Louis CK's Direct Tour Sales: Over $6 Million In 1 Week, Scalping Drops From 25% To Below 1%
Re: Have to agree...and I disagree
Now, if the publishers of these other items want to put into their terms of sale that no one will resale their product for more than retail, then yes, it would be the same and Mike would then be hypocritical, but then again, that is the very thing that the publishers are trying to fight, isn't it?
On the post: Judge Slams Universal Music For Trying To 'Bamboozle' Court & Producers Over Eminem Royalties
Re:
On the post: Why You Can't Braid Someone's Hair In Utah For Money Without First Paying $16k
Re:
No, but being an engineer doesn't mean you are necessarily going to be splicing wires (in fact I would be concerned if that is the majority of your job).
If on the other hand you went to electricians school (or apprenticed as one) and they taught you nothing about splicing, then your certification should revoked and you should sue them since they did not teach you what you went to school for.
If you’re going to make analogies at least make is sensible. This is about someone having to spend a lot of money and 2 years and learn nothing about what she will be doing. If its just a safety and health concerns, then make her take a class on the safety and health hazards specific to braiding hair. Once she passes she gets a license that says she can braid hair and charge for it.
On the post: Rep. Jackie Speier Puts Forth Bill To Extend TSA To Mass Transit
Re: Osama Bin Laden dead for a year
On the post: USTR Gives MPAA Full Online Access To TPP Text, But Still Won't Share With Senate Staffers
It may not stop stuff but at least it would stop the total secrecy that some group operate with at the moment.
On the post: Former Federal Judge Calls US Prosecution Of Megaupload 'Really Outrageous'
Re:
If there is anything in the world that is analogous to the digital world it is money.
When you go to a bank and deposit money, you may be handing over a physical object but that is not what you depositing. You adding a number to a piece of paper (or a digital equivalent now days) that says you have this money value available for you to get when you want it. When you withdrawal, the bank doesn't go find 'your' money, they give you an equivalent amount, or in essence a copy.
So even if the courts want the physical (i.e. servers) from Mega, why should they not have to offer a copy somewhere that legit data can be accessed. Although I will say that the copy should only allow content that is not directly involved with the case to be read. No writing should be allowed.
For those that say that the DOJ shouldn't have to pay for that, I think you are wrong. Should the DOJ win they will be allowed to keep at least some of (maybe all of) the assets they seized form Mega, so that should be used to pay of cost of setting up access for the bystanders who did nothing wrong. If the DOJ loses, then that means they should not have been able to seize the assets in the first place and it’s a form of a penalty on the DOJ that comes from their own budget (and hopefully this will cause them to think a little more before acting). And for those that say the seized money should go to the companies that the infringed content came from, I say tough, they should have fought their own battles against infringement. Once the government becomes involved (exercising powers that normal companies can't, like seizing all assets before a trial) then they forfeit the money they may have been able to collect. Otherwise they are just using the DOJ as a free legal service and making everyone pay plus getting paid. And we know how all you out there just hate freetards.
Next >>