If this had happened in Britain EyeSky would have been prosecuted by the CAA for unsafe practices.
To operate a drone in the manner described in the UK you must first obtain an exemption from the CAA - and it is unlikely that it would have been granted for the type of operation described in the article.
Whether he _thought_ something should be classified and not divulged isn't his business. The command structure declared it to be classified... it's classified. Transferring it to an unauthorized location is a violation of orders under military law, whether or not it's classified. Using unauthorized software on military computers is another. Getting around mandated security mechanisms is another.
In other words the military are supposed to "follow orders".
If I remember correctly "following orders" was not a defence at the Nurnberg trials.
Every human being has moral obligations that transcend the rules of the system he finds himself within.
Of course he can expect that organisation to follow its own rules and it may not go well for him - but in the final analysis the organisation will be judged by history on grounds that go beyond its own rules.
IFPI investigations into KAT indicate that the website's operators have changed its domain registrant details repeatedly over the last five years, shifting the relevant addresses between France, Lithuania, Serbia, Spain, Ukraine and the United States in that time. The most recent domain registrant has an address in Belgrade. When further investigated, those details have also been found to include false addresses and aliases. Likewise, the website appears to have repeatedly shifted between different service providers, and in the past three years has moved between various ISPs in France, Germany, Luxembourg, Poland, Romania, Spain, Sweden and Ukraine."
and they will also change the URLs and IP addresses - rendering the blocking pointless.
In the end, I can't see how the FCC has a legitimate say in the matter, even if I agree with their stance that consumers should be able to unlock their phones.
FCC can't stop devices being locked - but they could create an excuse to ban them from the airwaves. Arguably all s/w on a device capable of transmitting should be open source and verifiable on every device for health/safety/interference suppression reasons - seems to fall under the FCC mandate to me...
I don't know about this. I'm of the firm belief that all of our current intellectual property/copyright law is well and truly screwed, but I think "abolishing" copyright law isn't the answer at all. There is a lot of usefulness inherent in a short-term government granted monopoly and it DOES serve to incentivize content creators, however it needs to be much, much more narrow in scope, and set to a maximum of maybe two decades at the ABSOLUTE most.
The problem is that this is how copyright law started. So, if you succeed in reverting to that state, how do you stop a repeat of the extensions and expansions?
You can't. Abolition is the only solution since that is the only way to get rid of the people who leech on the system and have plenty of time and money to lobby for more.
Copyright is like cancer, you can't compromise with it!
Re: Re: Re: Re: It's what you get when capitalists control a market...
Once agains you quote a few sensationalist newspaper reports that exaggerate the scale and reach of a few local problems.
The fact is that the US has been trying to have a private "capitalist" system for years and it has worked worse and worse over time. As a consequence there have been numerous attempts to fix the system whilst not really changing it (as you list them yourself) and every time it has failed and made things worse.
No country in the world successfully implements the system you propose whereas there are many reasonably successful variants of the system in the UK.
The system in the UK is also extremely popular with the public. That is not an accident it is because by and large the system works and we don't have to worry about health costs at a personal level.
If the isolated events you quote were widespread then the public would not be so supportive of the system.
The real problem in the US is that most people's healthcare used to be handled through their employer and most people expected to work in the same job throughout their lives. That has gone and will not come back - hence your present predicament.