Obviously, Peanuts has a wholesome "family" quality: no cursing, very little controversy, essentially no "adult" matters. I can see why the owners might not like to see their characters cussing up a storm and discussing very adult matters... YES, yes, even if they could possibly make a buck off of it, I can still see them having a problem with it.
Having said that, the few strips I read were great, I would definitely like to read more. But again, I can understand why the owners would take umbrage at it.
Yeah, I'm going to liar on that too. Anytime these people say "that's not the intent of this law," then that is exactly the intent of the law. They know exactly how broad and sweeping it is and how easily it could be abused. They are COUNTING on it.
"""But by far the most important interpretation of what the law means is the official interpretation used by the U.S. government and this interpretation is - stunningly -classified."""
I'm actually rather shocked that they are allowed to even talk about the fact that the interpretation is secret. I would think that would also be a secret. Perhaps there should be a new classification along with Secret and Top Secret: Recursive Secret.
You are confusing the operating system (Android) with the actual device. If I purchase an AT&T device, you can be quite sure that they have put blocks in place to prevent me from rooting/sideloading/etc, and by most legal interpretations of the DMCA's anti-circumvention clauses those actions become illegal (but not for iPhones, they've been given a free pass). Think about the printer ink fiasco: add a chip to an ink cartridge and all of a sudden the second party ink sellers can't sell cartridges because they are not allowed to reverse engineer the "protection" put in place on the cartridge. Just one of the many foolish (and almost certainly unintended) consequences of the DMCA.
In my opinion, it actually *is* a pretty good excuse. If they have to promise not to allow rooted phones access to that service in order to get the entertainment industry to come on board, I absolutely don't blame them. Furthermore, it's a completely ridiculous rule anyway, since by nature of being rooted, the device does not have to "admit" to being rooted, but can easily respond back as a regular unrooted device.
Rest assured, if any rooted user even wants this service (which I doubt), it will be available to them in less than a week after rollout.
"""You think rooting is illegal in some way? It isn't."""
Actually, technically speaking, rooting an Android device could very well run afoul of the DMCA anti-reverse-engineering clauses. However, since iPhone jailbreaking has been granted a DMCA exception, I consider that to also cover Android devices. A clever (or very loud) lawyer would probably try to make the argument that the iPhone exception does not cover Android devices, much as they say it does not cover rooting gaming consoles.
"""to their credit the PS3 went uncracked the longest out of any game system, so the DRM wasn't really flawed and they did fix what geohot did pretty fast"""
1. Not to Sony's credit because no one who knew what they were doing was really trying.
2. Yes, the PS3 went "uncracked the longest", see #1.
3. The DRM was very very very flawed. Sorry, I'm not going to give a link, but the hackers' who worked on the real crack (after Geohot) have put out a lengthy explanation.
4. They did not "fix" what Geohot did at all.
Easy answer to that. As soon as a cop goes on duty, his camera starts recording, full time. They will require extra training to not look down while they pee.
I chuckled too, but seriously, who here with an ounce of sense (sorry Joe) doesn't believe that is exactly what will happen the day after PROTIP or one of its clones is passed? I need to jot down TD's IP address...
"""So we shouldn't have a law because some overzealous law enforcement agent might go too far with it? Couldn't you say that about any law?"""
Yes! YES! Finally, he gets it. Any law can (and in many many cases, will) be stretched and abused by law enforcement to fit situations it was never "meant" to address. This is why all new laws should be carefully scrutinized and worded very extremely concisely (that means not vague and nebulous). ACTA and Son of ACTA are both worded very poorly with incredible amounts of legal ambiguity and frankly I can't see how they would not instantly get challenged as unconstitutional. And no, I won't give examples, read them for yourself and if you can't see the spots that basically say "if we say it's bad we can make it disappear" then you just don't want to see.
On the post: So The FBI Can Just Take A Copy Of All Instapaper User Data With No Recourse?
Re: Re:
On the post: Peanuts Rights Holder Shuts Down Peanutweeter, Pisses Off Fans For No Reason At All
Re: Re: Re:
I kind-of agree with you.
Obviously, Peanuts has a wholesome "family" quality: no cursing, very little controversy, essentially no "adult" matters. I can see why the owners might not like to see their characters cussing up a storm and discussing very adult matters... YES, yes, even if they could possibly make a buck off of it, I can still see them having a problem with it.
Having said that, the few strips I read were great, I would definitely like to read more. But again, I can understand why the owners would take umbrage at it.
On the post: People Realizing New Anti-Streaming Criminal Copyright Bill Could Mean Jail Time For Lip Synchers
Re:
On the post: Apple Says That You Can't Give Away A 'Free' iPad Or iPhone In A Contest
Re: While supplies last!
On the post: Apple Says That You Can't Give Away A 'Free' iPad Or iPhone In A Contest
Re: I've been waiting for them to do this.
Trademark claim nullified.
On the post: Talking About Why The PROTECT IP Act Is Bad News...
Re: Bizarre
On the post: Senators Reveal That Feds Have Secretly Reinterpreted The PATRIOT Act
Shhh... the secret is a secret
I'm actually rather shocked that they are allowed to even talk about the fact that the interpretation is secret. I would think that would also be a secret. Perhaps there should be a new classification along with Secret and Top Secret: Recursive Secret.
On the post: UK Injunction Process Revised To Better Fit The Realities Of Internet Communication
Re: Re: Re: I'm bored of the crappy comedy posts now
On the post: Please Help Us Figure Out How Much The Public Has 'Lost' Due To Overprotective Anti-Copy Laws
Re:
On the post: Google Won't Let You Rent Movies If You Root Your Device
Re: Re: Re: Rooting
On the post: The Only Eight Senators Who Think Extending The Patriot Act Deserves More Discussion
Re: Wyden?
On the post: Google Won't Let You Rent Movies If You Root Your Device
Re: Re:
In my opinion, it actually *is* a pretty good excuse. If they have to promise not to allow rooted phones access to that service in order to get the entertainment industry to come on board, I absolutely don't blame them. Furthermore, it's a completely ridiculous rule anyway, since by nature of being rooted, the device does not have to "admit" to being rooted, but can easily respond back as a regular unrooted device.
Rest assured, if any rooted user even wants this service (which I doubt), it will be available to them in less than a week after rollout.
On the post: Google Won't Let You Rent Movies If You Root Your Device
Re: Rooting
Actually, technically speaking, rooting an Android device could very well run afoul of the DMCA anti-reverse-engineering clauses. However, since iPhone jailbreaking has been granted a DMCA exception, I consider that to also cover Android devices. A clever (or very loud) lawyer would probably try to make the argument that the iPhone exception does not cover Android devices, much as they say it does not cover rooting gaming consoles.
On the post: Well, That Was Fast: Sony's New PSN System? Hacked!
Re: Re: Company-wide pattern?
1. Not to Sony's credit because no one who knew what they were doing was really trying.
2. Yes, the PS3 went "uncracked the longest", see #1.
3. The DRM was very very very flawed. Sorry, I'm not going to give a link, but the hackers' who worked on the real crack (after Geohot) have put out a lengthy explanation.
4. They did not "fix" what Geohot did at all.
On the post: Philly Police Harass, Threaten To Shoot Man Legally Carrying Gun; Then Charge Him With Disorderly Conduct For Recording Them
Re:
On the post: Police Claim That Allowing People To Film Them In Public Creates 'Chilling Effects'
Re: Re: How to Find Balance
On the post: Techdirt Files FOIA Requests Concerning ICE 'Anti-Piracy' Videos
Re:
On the post: Techdirt Files FOIA Requests Concerning ICE 'Anti-Piracy' Videos
Re: I filed three Freedom of Information requests
On the post: The PROTECT IP Act Is About The Old Media Industry Going To War With The Internet
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: The PROTECT IP Act Is About The Old Media Industry Going To War With The Internet
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes! YES! Finally, he gets it. Any law can (and in many many cases, will) be stretched and abused by law enforcement to fit situations it was never "meant" to address. This is why all new laws should be carefully scrutinized and worded very extremely concisely (that means not vague and nebulous). ACTA and Son of ACTA are both worded very poorly with incredible amounts of legal ambiguity and frankly I can't see how they would not instantly get challenged as unconstitutional. And no, I won't give examples, read them for yourself and if you can't see the spots that basically say "if we say it's bad we can make it disappear" then you just don't want to see.
Next >>