This case is another example of the DOJ doing the work of a large corporation with no interest to the actual law. The issue here shouldn't be with the guys that were exploiting the bug, the casino(s) should be pursuing the issue with the company that wrote the software in civil court.
Why don't you use buskers and street performers as examples? I know a great guitarist in DC, Mark, who has been a busker for the last 20 years. This is one of his main sources of income. He sets up on a street corner, opens his guitar case, and plays because he enjoys playing music. He does some studio work, but playing his music and interacting with people on the street listening to his music is what he enjoys. This is somewhat of a give it away and pray method, but in a sense it's also selling the scarcity of his performances and he's utilizing the scarce time his audience has to enjoy his music.
People have been making a living by giving music away for free for a long time. It's not a new concept so it's a shame everyone thinks they have some right to a guarantee that they can make a living the way they dictate it.
Funny, i remember reading On The Road for the first time when I was 19 years old. Keroac spoke a lot about Billie Holiday and quoted the lyrics from Loverman in the book. It was that passage that made me go out and buy a large part of Billie's catalog and made me a fan. I bet Keroac didn't have to ask permission to use the lyrics.
Having also been a fan of Kate Bush, I'm sure if she used the lyrics and attributed them, as she would have in her liner notes, many, many people would have gone out to investigate the works of Joyce.
I think part of the problem with this is the thought that submitting a paper is akin to publishing it, therefore, once it's been published you wouldn't submit it to another source to re-publish it.
What it leaves out is that revising a paper from one class and submitting for an assignment in another class is really an extension of the writing process. Especially if the author is doing new research or updating their thesis. Writing is a constantly evolving process.
What i was trying to explain earlier is that WB clearly loses in this as they are pissing off their customer. But i keep thinking about the previous stories on this and how it was questioned why Netflix would agree to it.
Obviously it's because Netflix is looking forward. More and more entertainment is moving to streaming, so increasing their access to movie catalogs for streaming (at a lower price to them as well) definitely benefits the consumer and Netflix.
So for as dumb as it seems for Hollywood add another window, it seems like a smart move by Netflix to leverage this window to their advantage for streams.
I thought of this very subject today when I saw news that Netflix signed a similar deal with Sony. Sony gets the delay and Netflix gets more access to streaming the Sony catalog.
This is a win for Netflix and a win for the consumer in that the expanded streaming is what the consumer wants (or at least what I and my friends want). Seriously, who actually uses the DVDs from Netflix anymore?
I think a lot of people are missing the point of this story, especially if they came to it by way of slashdot.
The professor was asked, as were other security personnel, to try to break the system. He had one of his classes go at it, and eventually one student found a back door. It does show that pretty much anything web-based is going to have vulnerabilities, but at least the DC officials are going about this the right way by asking people to try to break it, instead of taking the developer's word that it's secure.
This wasn't a rogue attack or action and it's not for city-wide voting either. They're trying to set up a system so overseas personnel can cast their votes securely without risking them getting lost in the mail. They're building this system for about 900 voters.
I live near an IHOP (church) in DC, and there are no IHOP (restaurants) in DC that I'm aware of. The church sells soul food out of it's basement and is a very popular place for take-out lunches. I'll assume that their churches in other cities do the same, so there may be some basis for the trademark suit.
Was away for the weekend, so i'm getting to this late.
As a special educator of 12 years, I'm not aware of any access accommodation for Bi-Polar Disorder. Bi-Polar Disorder does not have access issues, unless she's arguing that she was banned because she's Bi-Polar. But it seems she was banned because of her actions, which may or may not have been a result of her disorder, not because of the disorder. Her actions are not covered under ADA.
I'm sure everyone that attended a college or university had at least one class that they didn't really need to attend. The professor didn't care much about attendance, and as long as you could learn the material and pass the test/write the paper/whatever you received a grade. None of those classes were ever referred to as being great classes.
The professors are what make the classes great, regardless of the materials or information. Anyone can find the knowledge online these days, but it's the access to the professor and to the other students that makes the classes valuable. The insight provided by the professor and classmates are what make the knowledge accessible to the student.
The lawsuit isn't entirely about money. It's about selling individual songs, specifically on iTunes. Pink Floyd's contracts have always prohibited the sale of songs "out of context" as they felt their albums were seamless and meant to be consumed whole. EMI argued that the current contract didn't only applied to CDs and LPs, and were therefore able to offer the songs individually on iTunes.