Thanks to the PS4 readying itself for a launch, I see Microsoft took the immature road by yelling "FIRST!!1!!" to the world, and like most comments like this on the internet, then offer nothing else.
Unlike most people, I plan to wait months beyond its release before I buy it. This way, I allow the suck, er, gamers to throw down their cash and tell me what's up with the console (especially if it, you know, crashes and requires a send off to be repaired).
While I am fine with these new consoles being reclassified as "entertainment systems", it's really disappointing to see the gaming market is being forced to change in lieu of proprietary crap like this.
Doesn't matter if the game requires an always-on internet connection, or that codes have to be used to play used games, the bottom line here is Gamestop's billion dollar business model is ruined because everyone else believes those monies should be theirs and no one else.
If this is the future of gaming, they can keep it.
The great news in all this will be those who rush to sell their 360 and games means I can pick them up for a song (and maybe a dance), as I will most assuredly keep my 360 on hand for years to come, thanks to all the "new" games I'll have.
PS: The Kinect will be a deal killer for me. No way in hell will I ever allow Big Business to require a camera in my house for their use. NO WAY.
That's just going far, far, far over the line for "entertainment".
Anyone who complains about this feature in the future, because it will be abused, has no one but themselves to blame.
I applaud your fervor for trying to do something to correct the issues, even if it means "one step at a time", but the problem is the "fix" is covering an issue that, in my opinion, isn't as relevant as the rest of the law.
If someone came to you an claimed patching a leaky hole in a dam is fixing the dam, how much credibility would you put into the remark?
The hole obviously indicates there's a problem with the dam, just as the anti-circumvention clause indicates there's a problem with the law.
I know I should be much more supportive, but I suppose I'm just tired of getting my hopes up only to see the crushed as either not enough people stand up to repair the dam or that the faulty contractor bribes enough politicians to make the issue go away another day.
This is what this law does. It pushes the bigger issues away for another day, and until this day arrives, businesses (who are trying to serve those very customers complaining they can't do with their product as they want) are being closed down due to the much, much bigger problem of the DMCA: take down notices and false claims of copyright ownership.
Bigger fish to fry, and this law seems to be going after goldfish rather than the white whale.
Good luck with this fight, but I hope no one minds I sit this one out.
Either I'm at a loss or there's something missing in the "math" of the DMCA "bragging".
Did the DMCA notice explicitly claim the entire blog was infringing? If not, then how did an entire site get taken down?
Not to side with anyone in this ridiculous situation, but the bragging to me seems to come off as "I sent them a DMCA to remove a picture and instead took down the whole blog! LOL!"
Did I misread?
Wait. Why am I even concerned over this. DMCA abuse is so rampant, I doubt it's even used for legitimate claims. :S
To the first AC:
I have, in my 20+ years in fighting against copyright abuse, have never seen a legal use of the DMCA.
You do realize these are only illegal because the law was updated to make them so, right?
Before that, these were all once legal under fair use and, even better, in the public domain since most works were never registered.
If you want to tout about the "legality" of the situation, first realize the law was only put on the books so this abuse could take place.
So, in short: they're all abusing copyright law because they're only valid under the DMCA law.
See how that works?
But you keep telling yourself all this is proof the "pirates" are winning while Hollywood celebrates another $1B movie making success, making it the 10th movie to do so in less than 10 years.
If Hollywood's still claiming piracy is hurting their business and profit loss is the result, then this means even an idiot can see the loss is internal, not external.
I pity your belief, because I know you were part of the Propaganda Machine while you were in school. Don't Mix that Tape, Criminal!
That's precisely why the RIAA targeted you when you were young.
Of course they're being paid more. When these businesses hire lawyers to shake down $2k+ from people, why sell DVDs and airtime when it's much more profitable to screw over innocent consumers (some are even dead!).
I suspect a raise will occur this year, since business is booming.
These are foreign to me now. When I cut cable, it's more apt to say I severed my relationship with these "businesses".
Cable bill? Haha. It's amazing what one can do with an HD antenna and a $100 DVR (because the wife demands her CSI).
Though, I suppose ICE, FBI, CBS, ABC, and NBC will one day kick in my door and scream "INFRINGEMENT!" at the top of their lungs I'm not paying for the show.
This isn't going to change a thing. Having read some articles on this yesterday, the most laughable comment was that "By displaying their prices, customers can then choose what facility they want to visit."
Bullshit.
Sorry to curse, but these legislators have no clue what they're talking about (no surprise there).
Anyone who has insurance knows we're locked into a very specific group of health care facilities. In order to save money, we're required to stick with these facilities and physicians.
And the hospitals know it, which is precisely why they charge what they do.
Should the law pass, I still won't have a choice to select the hospital which charges less for the same procedure.
But thanks, government, for pretending this is an issue Americans need so they can sit back and fume they can't make a choice because their insurance prevents it.
To think kids today are going to school is the bigger issue. They're prisons. I mean, they have to literally toe the line worse than actual prisoners do.
It's moronic at its best. Strip away the arts, recess, and now imagination, and we're actually looking at the future of even more shootings since these kids will not adapt because a black mark tarnished them for life.
(untitled comment)
Thanks to the PS4 readying itself for a launch, I see Microsoft took the immature road by yelling "FIRST!!1!!" to the world, and like most comments like this on the internet, then offer nothing else.
Unlike most people, I plan to wait months beyond its release before I buy it. This way, I allow the suck, er, gamers to throw down their cash and tell me what's up with the console (especially if it, you know, crashes and requires a send off to be repaired).
While I am fine with these new consoles being reclassified as "entertainment systems", it's really disappointing to see the gaming market is being forced to change in lieu of proprietary crap like this.
Doesn't matter if the game requires an always-on internet connection, or that codes have to be used to play used games, the bottom line here is Gamestop's billion dollar business model is ruined because everyone else believes those monies should be theirs and no one else.
If this is the future of gaming, they can keep it.
The great news in all this will be those who rush to sell their 360 and games means I can pick them up for a song (and maybe a dance), as I will most assuredly keep my 360 on hand for years to come, thanks to all the "new" games I'll have.
PS: The Kinect will be a deal killer for me. No way in hell will I ever allow Big Business to require a camera in my house for their use. NO WAY.
That's just going far, far, far over the line for "entertainment".
Anyone who complains about this feature in the future, because it will be abused, has no one but themselves to blame.
(untitled comment)
Yes, but the lawsuit's enough to drive this business, which admits it doesn't have profits, on its way out the door.
Just as these lawsuits are intended to do.
Veoh, you may find yourself with company soon.
(untitled comment)
I'd like to offer a counter to the article's summary.
If Acetrax didn't have any DRM to begin with, it's more than likely they wouldn't be shutting down at all.
(untitled comment)
Well, as unpleasant as the demand looks, it's a sad state of affairs that those who are in this world have to use threats like this all the time.
Personally, I see this as no different than Google's buyouts of patents. "Don't sue us or else!"
I mean, by now everyone should know these laws aren't about protection of "rights".
(untitled comment)
These 6 students should be lucky they weren't using Super Soakers.
We'd be burying 6 students.
Police States of America, coming to your local neighborhood! Misleading News at 11!
/ugh
Re: Re:
Mike,
I applaud your fervor for trying to do something to correct the issues, even if it means "one step at a time", but the problem is the "fix" is covering an issue that, in my opinion, isn't as relevant as the rest of the law.
If someone came to you an claimed patching a leaky hole in a dam is fixing the dam, how much credibility would you put into the remark?
The hole obviously indicates there's a problem with the dam, just as the anti-circumvention clause indicates there's a problem with the law.
I know I should be much more supportive, but I suppose I'm just tired of getting my hopes up only to see the crushed as either not enough people stand up to repair the dam or that the faulty contractor bribes enough politicians to make the issue go away another day.
This is what this law does. It pushes the bigger issues away for another day, and until this day arrives, businesses (who are trying to serve those very customers complaining they can't do with their product as they want) are being closed down due to the much, much bigger problem of the DMCA: take down notices and false claims of copyright ownership.
Bigger fish to fry, and this law seems to be going after goldfish rather than the white whale.
Good luck with this fight, but I hope no one minds I sit this one out.
(untitled comment)
Either I'm at a loss or there's something missing in the "math" of the DMCA "bragging".
Did the DMCA notice explicitly claim the entire blog was infringing? If not, then how did an entire site get taken down?
Not to side with anyone in this ridiculous situation, but the bragging to me seems to come off as "I sent them a DMCA to remove a picture and instead took down the whole blog! LOL!"
Did I misread?
Wait. Why am I even concerned over this. DMCA abuse is so rampant, I doubt it's even used for legitimate claims. :S
(untitled comment)
Pointless. Why create a new law when it's clear the existing law is broken?
Waste of time. I have zero faith in a Congress that can't even take the time to fix the problems which made the DMCA an issue to begin with.
We don't need new laws. We need the existing laws corrected.
And obviously, my calls to my (Ind) senators have done nothing to make this happen.
Do that, instead of supporting this law, please.
Tell Congress to fix what they broke in the first place.
(untitled comment)
To the first AC:
I have, in my 20+ years in fighting against copyright abuse, have never seen a legal use of the DMCA.
You do realize these are only illegal because the law was updated to make them so, right?
Before that, these were all once legal under fair use and, even better, in the public domain since most works were never registered.
If you want to tout about the "legality" of the situation, first realize the law was only put on the books so this abuse could take place.
So, in short: they're all abusing copyright law because they're only valid under the DMCA law.
See how that works?
But you keep telling yourself all this is proof the "pirates" are winning while Hollywood celebrates another $1B movie making success, making it the 10th movie to do so in less than 10 years.
If Hollywood's still claiming piracy is hurting their business and profit loss is the result, then this means even an idiot can see the loss is internal, not external.
I pity your belief, because I know you were part of the Propaganda Machine while you were in school. Don't Mix that Tape, Criminal!
That's precisely why the RIAA targeted you when you were young.
(untitled comment)
These 8 should buy Google Glass the second it's released to the public and wear them into the job.
This way, there's at least some intelligence being brought into our government these 8 obviously don't have.
Re: "share the cultural experience" -- TV? -- HA, HA! & OY.
Does anyone else see these annoying segments appearing in our discussion?
I think it's English, but none of it makes any sense.
(untitled comment)
Of course they're being paid more. When these businesses hire lawyers to shake down $2k+ from people, why sell DVDs and airtime when it's much more profitable to screw over innocent consumers (some are even dead!).
I suspect a raise will occur this year, since business is booming.
(untitled comment)
Disney? ABC?
These are foreign to me now. When I cut cable, it's more apt to say I severed my relationship with these "businesses".
Cable bill? Haha. It's amazing what one can do with an HD antenna and a $100 DVR (because the wife demands her CSI).
Though, I suppose ICE, FBI, CBS, ABC, and NBC will one day kick in my door and scream "INFRINGEMENT!" at the top of their lungs I'm not paying for the show.
(untitled comment)
Next up: Canipre will start issuing DMCA take down notices of anyone reporting this story, to "educate" how to properly fix copyright violations.
(untitled comment)
Unanimously?
Including the two ex-Monsanto lawyers?
Thank goodness there isn't a conflict of interest.
(untitled comment)
One can only hope someone with the cell recording was smart enough to transfer it to the internet for future safe keeping of their own life.
Otherwise, with no evidence, these 9 walk away without any disciplinary action.
(untitled comment)
I'm curious as to know how this is legal. Doesn't this law trample a few federal laws regarding free trade?
I'm sure Tesla's lawyers are about to be paid well.
(untitled comment)
This isn't going to change a thing. Having read some articles on this yesterday, the most laughable comment was that "By displaying their prices, customers can then choose what facility they want to visit."
Bullshit.
Sorry to curse, but these legislators have no clue what they're talking about (no surprise there).
Anyone who has insurance knows we're locked into a very specific group of health care facilities. In order to save money, we're required to stick with these facilities and physicians.
And the hospitals know it, which is precisely why they charge what they do.
Should the law pass, I still won't have a choice to select the hospital which charges less for the same procedure.
But thanks, government, for pretending this is an issue Americans need so they can sit back and fume they can't make a choice because their insurance prevents it.
(untitled comment)
Timothy,
Hit up any of these sites and do a search on "hand rash".
It'll take you about two seconds to realize why someone can easily spend 7 hours on these sites.
Finding a post that's not ridiculous is getting to the point of impossible.
And that's after you wade through all the "Doctor's are evil and only want to push pills for kickbacks!" posts.
(untitled comment)
To think kids today are going to school is the bigger issue. They're prisons. I mean, they have to literally toe the line worse than actual prisoners do.
It's moronic at its best. Strip away the arts, recess, and now imagination, and we're actually looking at the future of even more shootings since these kids will not adapt because a black mark tarnished them for life.
I feel sorry for any kid that plays doctor.