I mean honestly, these companies are making more than $1M each. Did our dumb Mr. Cuban really think these companies are going to take a simple million to give up more than $1M/year in revenue? They'd probably have to agree to a million *every year* just to make up for a million in revenue, and since it's companies that pay tax I'm sure they'd want to make up for say 50 years of revenue plus tax?
Suddenly the magic idea doesn't seem so viable, as that'd be in the potential trillions for the top thousand as i'm sure they make more than a mil a year.
technically, the only thing fair use shouldn't calculate in use is anything copyright does. Thus if our total economy is 8 trillion and copyright is 1.5, then 6.5 is fair use, since fair use encompasses everything else, really, every business in more ways than people realize.
Kurt has defended himself all over on twitter. Beyond the immediate response, I fail to see what harm or reason justifies telling the school's IP address what the commenter had done.
maybe someday papers will realize that not only should they allow comments, but they actually should try replying to some of them to make people feel more involved! what an idea!
if I recall correctly, parties often have to sue to retrieve property after charges are dropped, because the police are lazy as hell about this. I recall something about someone who had a server seized supposedly for illegal crap and then 5 years later they gave it back, at which point it was useless.
Didn't they say "trust us" about UK Libel Laws too? Clearly guilty until proven innocent seems to be a british model at this point, granted the constant surveillance.
brazil has had a very vibrant community that already recognizes the freedoms that should already be allowed.
Look up the technobrega (depending on spelling, tecno brega) brazillian community, where people remix other people's music daily and sell it on the street cheap. Many articles have covered this in the past.
it may be hush, but wait for the modern warfare 2 stats to come out.
all I can say is, lots of gamers are revolting on this - sales numbers won't be pretty, and plenty have stated the intent to boycott activision at this point.
Activision wants to be able to make a case that nobody wants PC games so that they can shove console DRM on every gamer under the land. Console DRM is a lot easier to control than PC's where people can get around DRM and actually have rights (and not be overcharged). This is the real situation that nobody pays attention to. Many groups are colluding by flat out boycotting activision at this point.
only reason murdoc's bad business moves even get a peep out of the news is because he owns said news. Overall, the man is basically the cause of newspaper downfall (and plenty of websites going bad).
wow, that's pretty crazy. I imagine they're going to get sued by the people they're trying to sue for this one.
I thought you can only take a physical possession in most cases when cases are criminal, even outside of the US (where my inquiry is obviously aimed)?
Oh wait! I got it! This is what they meant by "graduated 3 strikes!" First we threaten you, then we steal your computer, and then we actually take you to court!
it never intended to be a long term business. All it takes is a year of saying "We made 5 million dollars" to get some CEO somewhere to suck up and invest as well.
I mean really, how many times has phorm/etc renamed themselves?
Diebold -> premiere election services.
There isn't an actual penalty for these companies, they just rename with what they earned and move and do it again.
console designed games have a horrifically limited FOV. It's not a cheating thing, but it does cause eyestrain on PC's.
Want to know how bad it is? Go take a look at what's going on with boderlands when people have to manually change the FOV. I had to change it from 60 degrees to 130 because it looked *that crappy* without 130.
Just because you can "See to your side" doesn't provide you much of a real benefit - because you would then have to be focused on your sides more than in front and your focus would wane. If you're trying to imply that a 360 degree FOV might be cheating, I'd like to remind you that such a thing looks horrifically awful in a FPS.
Glenn beck is only trying to keep uninformed people uninformed. That's not a way to keep first amendment rights safe.
Accusatory questions that imply guilt which cannot be refuted by the other party is a great way to get people to believe that the first amendment is gone when in fact it may have been weakened lately, but it's still there.
oh it's not the only way,but fun and effective? absolutely. In the same way japanese people learn english or english people start to learn some japanese. It helps foster an interest.
RSS
Twitter
I thought it was unbelievable too (as Designerfx)
I mean honestly, these companies are making more than $1M each. Did our dumb Mr. Cuban really think these companies are going to take a simple million to give up more than $1M/year in revenue? They'd probably have to agree to a million *every year* just to make up for a million in revenue, and since it's companies that pay tax I'm sure they'd want to make up for say 50 years of revenue plus tax?
Suddenly the magic idea doesn't seem so viable, as that'd be in the potential trillions for the top thousand as i'm sure they make more than a mil a year.
its still off (as Designerfx)
technically, the only thing fair use shouldn't calculate in use is anything copyright does. Thus if our total economy is 8 trillion and copyright is 1.5, then 6.5 is fair use, since fair use encompasses everything else, really, every business in more ways than people realize.
he seems quite defensive (as Designerfx)
Kurt has defended himself all over on twitter. Beyond the immediate response, I fail to see what harm or reason justifies telling the school's IP address what the commenter had done.
simple enough :) (as Designerfx)
I think even without watching the video (although it helps), plenty of techdirt readers will get it just from the preview image.
Nice and simple and well done though :)
Re: (as Designerfx)
you can't protect and maximize your content. It's one or the other, and that's the problem.
just wait (as Designerfx)
maybe someday papers will realize that not only should they allow comments, but they actually should try replying to some of them to make people feel more involved! what an idea!
Re: Re: (as Designerfx)
if I recall correctly, parties often have to sue to retrieve property after charges are dropped, because the police are lazy as hell about this. I recall something about someone who had a server seized supposedly for illegal crap and then 5 years later they gave it back, at which point it was useless.
enterprise software needs to learn this (as Designerfx)
(but they don't like learning in general.)
UK Libel Law (as Designerfx)
Didn't they say "trust us" about UK Libel Laws too? Clearly guilty until proven innocent seems to be a british model at this point, granted the constant surveillance.
don't forget this from todahy (as Designerfx)
Im not sure if this is canada or not, though.
http://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-may-kill-zombieland-sequel-writer-claims-091111/
As noted on TF, it's the highest grossing zombie movie on record or something, but the writer lauds piracy as why they might not make a sequel.
now I know why fileplanet and gamespy suck (as Designerfx)
they're owned by Murdoch. No wonder.
Re: Re: technobrega (as Designerfx)
yeah yeah I know, just putting it in the comments for those who don't usually click that far :)
technobrega (as Designerfx)
brazil has had a very vibrant community that already recognizes the freedoms that should already be allowed.
Look up the technobrega (depending on spelling, tecno brega) brazillian community, where people remix other people's music daily and sell it on the street cheap. Many articles have covered this in the past.
lots of boycott (as Designerfx)
it may be hush, but wait for the modern warfare 2 stats to come out.
all I can say is, lots of gamers are revolting on this - sales numbers won't be pretty, and plenty have stated the intent to boycott activision at this point.
Activision wants to be able to make a case that nobody wants PC games so that they can shove console DRM on every gamer under the land. Console DRM is a lot easier to control than PC's where people can get around DRM and actually have rights (and not be overcharged). This is the real situation that nobody pays attention to. Many groups are colluding by flat out boycotting activision at this point.
murdoch and idiocy (as Designerfx)
only reason murdoc's bad business moves even get a peep out of the news is because he owns said news. Overall, the man is basically the cause of newspaper downfall (and plenty of websites going bad).
I look forward to when the man croaks.
wow (as Designerfx)
wow, that's pretty crazy. I imagine they're going to get sued by the people they're trying to sue for this one.
I thought you can only take a physical possession in most cases when cases are criminal, even outside of the US (where my inquiry is obviously aimed)?
Oh wait! I got it! This is what they meant by "graduated 3 strikes!" First we threaten you, then we steal your computer, and then we actually take you to court!
/solved.
not a long term business (as Designerfx)
it never intended to be a long term business. All it takes is a year of saying "We made 5 million dollars" to get some CEO somewhere to suck up and invest as well.
I mean really, how many times has phorm/etc renamed themselves?
Diebold -> premiere election services.
There isn't an actual penalty for these companies, they just rename with what they earned and move and do it again.
Re: (as Designerfx)
console designed games have a horrifically limited FOV. It's not a cheating thing, but it does cause eyestrain on PC's.
Want to know how bad it is? Go take a look at what's going on with boderlands when people have to manually change the FOV. I had to change it from 60 degrees to 130 because it looked *that crappy* without 130.
Just because you can "See to your side" doesn't provide you much of a real benefit - because you would then have to be focused on your sides more than in front and your focus would wane. If you're trying to imply that a 360 degree FOV might be cheating, I'd like to remind you that such a thing looks horrifically awful in a FPS.
Re: (as Designerfx)
Glenn beck is only trying to keep uninformed people uninformed. That's not a way to keep first amendment rights safe.
Accusatory questions that imply guilt which cannot be refuted by the other party is a great way to get people to believe that the first amendment is gone when in fact it may have been weakened lately, but it's still there.
Re: English as a video game language (as Designerfx)
oh it's not the only way,but fun and effective? absolutely. In the same way japanese people learn english or english people start to learn some japanese. It helps foster an interest.