Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 1 Feb 2013 @ 4:10pm
But the Antigua gambling industry is composed of large, international corporations.
Well that may be true, but since the entire GDP of Antigua is about $1.13Billion and this is about the country not the corporations in it I'm struggling to see the relevance...
Except of course for trying to portray a "Oh woe is us.. poor poor us... pleeease don't cost us the few measly pence we earn..." face. Of course then it'd be just as relevant to point out that the WTO, who told them to do it, represent countries worth trillions & trillions... that looks even scarier, no?
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 31 Jan 2013 @ 7:39am
Eh?
She also rejected Samsung's attempt to invalidate some of the patents. On Apple's side, she rejected Apple's request to pump up the award amount for "willful" infringement, claiming that there's no evidence that Samsung's actions were willful, since it showed evidence of why it really believed that there was prior art invalidating Apple's key patents.
Perhaps this is some legalese nuance that I'm not aware of but to me that reads;
"Yeah Samsung made a good stab at showing the patents may well be invalid, but I'm going to ignore that and not explore it any further, because then I might have to do some work here"
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 30 Jan 2013 @ 3:28pm
Ah well...
That might have been an interesting set of comment threads since the topic looked debatable, but I guess I'll never know. I lost the will to live too quickly in the 100 spam repetitions of "It's the law and I know everything about that... oh and Mike's hiding and won't talk to me which proves something, but I forget what"
*sigh*
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 29 Jan 2013 @ 9:40am
Re: Re: Am I missing something?
DVD ripping, the way it is usually done, would not violate the DMCA. Most programs since re-record something as it is playing
DVD's are "encrypted" using CSS or something similar. The encryption is so trivial you don't notice the program you use decrypting it and is of course built into the player firmware. But you're still decrypting it, just in a licensed way (as long as you're only playing it). Record the decrypted stream and you're potentially "bypassing encryption for private gain" are you not?
Yeah that's tenuous, but then the whole argument is tenuous. Bets that wouldn't stop some gung-ho prosecuter trying to nail someone they didn't like with it though...
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 2:19pm
Am I missing something?
Any person who violates section 1201 or 1202 willfully and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain...
Oh, how wonderfully specific and not vague at all...
Alternatively, one can argue that a customer buying a cheaper version of a product, the locked version vs. the unlocked version, and then unlocking it themselves in violation of the DMCA, is denying the provider of revenue which also qualifies.
OK, that's just insane. Given that it's largely claimed by the copyright industries that "locking" things with an irrelevant login screen and then writing "enter 'password' at login prompt" on the box qualifies for DMCA anti-circumvention protection that's a pretty broad brush for such a vicious potential penalty.
Could someone doing a reasonable lawyer impression (therefore preferably not average_joe) explain how the same agument can't be applied to, say, ripping your own DVD to disk? Or, well, almost every other kind copyright infringement going...
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 2:07pm
Re:
Pretty soon (if not already) everybody's going to be guilty of something
That ship sailed long ago. This sort of catch-all language in laws now appears to be the rule rather than the exception.
You are guilty, probably of many things you weren't even aware of. The only battle left is in trying to stop domestic surveillance being ratcheted up to the point where the governments can pick on anyone they choose "legally" because they have the "proof". Sadly that battle's all but lost too.
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 2:01pm
Re: Wow
I am just going to go back to mugging people in the street. A lot less jail time.
Not that I'd recommend them either, but assault, rape, hell even murder also often glean a lesser sentence. Moral of this story is; Do anything you like, just don't try and take money from a major corporation.
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 25 Jan 2013 @ 5:56am
Really?
Universal likewise is free to argue that whatever the alleged shortcomings of its review process might have been, it did not act with the subjective intent required by §512(f).
IANAL so I may well be reading that wrong, but it seems to suggest that it might be a reasonable defense for universal to show that their review process is so crap at spotting fair use that it can't have been deliberate?
That's a real incentive to make sure you have your top people on it, huh? Isn't bought-and-paid-for law so even-handed?
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 23 Jan 2013 @ 2:57pm
Re: Re: Re: The younger generation
because *gasp* they don't give a damn about computers.
Which was fine 20 years ago... maybe even 10. But now computers, networking and data are a fundamental part of life in the western world at least. Saying "I don't give a damn about computers" is like saying saying "I don't need to know how to add up because I have this calculator" was then.
Sure you can live without knowing, but the number of occasions where it's gonna bite you on the arse is way too big to be ignored if you have any sense.
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 21 Jan 2013 @ 8:11am
Re:
Wireless 'N' it is possible to get up to 600Mbps.
True 'N' is 300Mbps or 600Mbps, but I I was trying to avoid the nitty gritty. Don't know what it's like in the US, but AFAIK few corporates, still less academic campuses, have 'N' in wide use as it takes a LOT of access points to cover ground and they want to milk the existing coverage and fill in holes rather than upgrade wholesale. And even though it's faster it's still shared bandwidth, which was the main point I was making. It's still subject to interference and bottlenecks so a 100Mbps wired connection is likely to perform better than a nominally "600"Mbps wireless especially in a potentially dense client area. (Besides, if there's loads of 'N' wireless around the wired connections are prob 1Gb with 10Gb uplinks so the ratios still kinda work... :-) )
There are ethernet devices that don't come with an assigned MAC Address
Yep. Me, I sometimes use a virtual machine with appropriate tools on it for whatever I'm doing rather than install everything on the one machine. Run one up and hey, look I'm presenting a new MAC...
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 21 Jan 2013 @ 5:41am
Re: Re: DHCP - the real criminal
he decided the problem was that he was attempting to download too much via WIFI (evidently they had limits to volume on their WIFI network).
An excellent analysis, but one small thing missed out for those that don't habla network:
It's perfectly reasonable to conclude that there's a wi-fi block limit but not a wired one since wi-fi is shared bandwidth on the local network and wired isn't.
A standard 56Mbps wireless connection splits that bandwidth between all clients connected to that access point - i.e. if one person is doing a major download there's a good chance the other (potentially 20-ish) clients are running like a dog while it's going on as one person can easily eat a good percentage of the shared amount (think 1/2 decent download speed for internet = 5Mbps = 10% of bandwidth, 1/2 decent download speed for local network = oh say 20Mbps = almost 50% bandwidth).
On the other hand a standard 100Mbps wired connection can give that full speed to each client and is limited only by the shared uplink to the rest of the network (usually 1Gbps or better) so at least 10 clients on the same switch have to be totally caning their connection simultaneously to create the same problem.
Ergo, reasonable to troubleshoot and conclude it's a wirelsss only issue.
On the post: The Many Motivations Of Movie Piracy (Notably Absent: 'I Want Everything For Free')
Oh yeah?
On the post: Copyright Insanity: School Policy Requires Students Hand Over Copyright On All Work
Re: Doesn't go far enuf
On the post: Copyright Alliance Invents New History (And New Meanings For 'Big' And 'Little') To Condemn Antigua
Except of course for trying to portray a "Oh woe is us.. poor poor us... pleeease don't cost us the few measly pence we earn..." face. Of course then it'd be just as relevant to point out that the WTO, who told them to do it, represent countries worth trillions & trillions... that looks even scarier, no?
On the post: On To The Appeal... As Judge Basically Keeps Everything As Is In Apple/Samsung Patent Dispute
Eh?
"Yeah Samsung made a good stab at showing the patents may well be invalid, but I'm going to ignore that and not explore it any further, because then I might have to do some work here"
On the post: NZ Copyright Tribunal: Accusations Are Presumed Infringement, Despite Denials
Ah well...
*sigh*
On the post: How Unlocking Your Phone May Now Be A Crime: $500,000 Fines And 5 Years In Prison For First Offense
Re: Re: Am I missing something?
Yeah that's tenuous, but then the whole argument is tenuous. Bets that wouldn't stop some gung-ho prosecuter trying to nail someone they didn't like with it though...
On the post: How Unlocking Your Phone May Now Be A Crime: $500,000 Fines And 5 Years In Prison For First Offense
Am I missing something?
Could someone doing a reasonable lawyer impression (therefore preferably not average_joe) explain how the same agument can't be applied to, say, ripping your own DVD to disk? Or, well, almost every other kind copyright infringement going...
On the post: How Unlocking Your Phone May Now Be A Crime: $500,000 Fines And 5 Years In Prison For First Offense
Re:
You are guilty, probably of many things you weren't even aware of. The only battle left is in trying to stop domestic surveillance being ratcheted up to the point where the governments can pick on anyone they choose "legally" because they have the "proof". Sadly that battle's all but lost too.
On the post: How Unlocking Your Phone May Now Be A Crime: $500,000 Fines And 5 Years In Prison For First Offense
Re: Wow
On the post: The International Olympic Committee Has Already Staked A Trademark Claim On The Number '2014'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Happy new year
On the post: Aaron Swartz Unlikely To Face Jail Or Conviction... Until Feds Decided To 'Send A Message'
Re: Re: Re: Re: land of the free home of the brave
On the post: Aaron Swartz Unlikely To Face Jail Or Conviction... Until Feds Decided To 'Send A Message'
Re: Re: land of the free home of the brave
On the post: Cyber War: A One-Sided Battle Against A Trumped Up Enemy
Re:
On the post: Court Says Trial Needed To Determine If Universal Music Violated DMCA With Dancing Baby Takedown
Re: Re: Really?
On the post: Secondhand MP3 Dealer Redigi Expanding Into Europe... And Tangling With A Whole New Set Of IP Laws
Re: Re: Re:
/dodgy spanish accent
On the post: Court Says Trial Needed To Determine If Universal Music Violated DMCA With Dancing Baby Takedown
Re: Re:
On the post: Court Says Trial Needed To Determine If Universal Music Violated DMCA With Dancing Baby Takedown
Really?
That's a real incentive to make sure you have your top people on it, huh? Isn't bought-and-paid-for law so even-handed?
On the post: The War On Computing: What Happens When Authorities Don't Understand Technology
Re: Re: Re: The younger generation
Sure you can live without knowing, but the number of occasions where it's gonna bite you on the arse is way too big to be ignored if you have any sense.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re:
Yep. Me, I sometimes use a virtual machine with appropriate tools on it for whatever I'm doing rather than install everything on the one machine. Run one up and hey, look I'm presenting a new MAC...
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: DHCP - the real criminal
It's perfectly reasonable to conclude that there's a wi-fi block limit but not a wired one since wi-fi is shared bandwidth on the local network and wired isn't.
A standard 56Mbps wireless connection splits that bandwidth between all clients connected to that access point - i.e. if one person is doing a major download there's a good chance the other (potentially 20-ish) clients are running like a dog while it's going on as one person can easily eat a good percentage of the shared amount (think 1/2 decent download speed for internet = 5Mbps = 10% of bandwidth, 1/2 decent download speed for local network = oh say 20Mbps = almost 50% bandwidth).
On the other hand a standard 100Mbps wired connection can give that full speed to each client and is limited only by the shared uplink to the rest of the network (usually 1Gbps or better) so at least 10 clients on the same switch have to be totally caning their connection simultaneously to create the same problem.
Ergo, reasonable to troubleshoot and conclude it's a wirelsss only issue.
Next >>