I'm sure people will go find a legitimate stream now...
I'm sure everyone that would've used these sites will now find a legitimate stream. Of course that assumes such a thing even exists.
Most likely they'll just find someplace else to watch the ads/superbowl.
Especially since many of the users are likely not even inside the US and can't even legally get access to the event if they wanted to fork over gobs of cash.
Shoved through my ass. Both my Senators are Republican and both voted for this to be passed. I knew one of them would vote for it, I was just hoping DeMint would have some balls and stand with Rand Paul and others against it.
Re: Re: Apple doesn't need to win to come out ahead.
as a droid user you can still get the appstore, and most people i know have it including me. They have 1 paid app for free everyday which has been very much worth it to me. http://twitter.com/#!/amazonappstore
Other than that it's not much different then the Google Market.
you have obviously never used an Android phone have you.
This effects absolutely no one. Google Market still works the same.
Amazon Appstore works just fine and is still called appstore until a court tells them otherwise. In fact I downloaded the free app of the day just a few hours ago. Even if they do have to change what it's called they'll just update their app and everything will continue working as before.
This hurts effectively hurts no consumers, and does nothing for apple except to make them look petty and wrong.
Re: Google can suppress Foundem for "low quality", but they can't suppress blatant piracy sites for illegal activity?
yes, because link farms are the exact same thing as a site full of downloads.
As has been pointed out again and again google has no way of knowing what is authorized and what isn't that isn't there job.
This is clearly shown in the Viacom vs Youtube case. Many of the videos complained about where actually uploaded by Viacom employees. So how is google supposed to know which videos/files are legit and which aren't when even the copyright owners get confused.
This isn't even close to a real threat. You do realize that pretty much every movie is released online before it even hits theaters let alone 2 months later. Many of them are even dvd quality or better from advanced screeners. Nobody is going to cam a movie 2 months after it hits theaters.
Yep, guess after 4 years off AT&T I'll be switching over to comcast. I didn't do it before because even though they have faster throughput, they have a 250GB cap. Now there is no reason for me not to switch, higher speeds and a higher cap.
If you have a license you never paid for that sounds like copyright infringement to me.
That's like downloading a few movies and putting them on a list to actually pay for at some point in the future and just never getting around to it and hoping everyone forgets. In the meantime I'm not just watching the movies I'm putting them out there and selling them.
lol, you better have a lot more than that to actually keep data from leaving.
Are any of these "secure" servers on a network?
Are any of the other machines on the same network capable of having a usb drive mounted? If so anyone with basic knowledge could get data off of your servers and pull it down to the other computer and then put it on a usb drive.
this and the summary stated:
the GAO dismissed Google's protest saying that since Google does not have a GSA schedule contract (i.e., what you need to sell to the gov't), it was "not an interested party."
Google isn't even eligible to bid without a GSA schedule contract so it doesn't matter. If they want to play the game they have to get the pieces to even compete.
It would be like me not registering to vote and showing up tomorrow then complaining that they won't let me vote.
Learn the law and learn to spell you moron:
1st amendment absolutely applies only to the government:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
It says nothing about me making a rule at my business that says you can't say "red" and if you do I can throw you out. If you don't like it you don't have to do business with me. Part of your decision to do business with me should be whether or not you agree to the terms I set forward for the business. If you don't like them don't go there.