Coming to you soon in a theatre near you, or on a DVD in a couple of months time when we've milked the cinema-angle enough. The DVD will include such exclusive (pirated DVDs never have these extra features!) features as: "Pirates are bad mkay!" intro, unskippable not-spoiler-free trailers for other movies and a good dose of condescendance.
Apple are such dicks... Seriously... All they ever did was improve on others ideas, but god help if anyone does the same to their ideas. Steve Jobs obviously made every feature just so PERFECT that changing it isn't an improvement, it's theft.
If they were supposed to be unconnected to political agenda then all such donations should be anonymous. As soon as you get money from someone, whom you know to have a certain agenda, your motivation for supporting that agenda becomes suspect.
Patronage seems like a good word for the behavior of the customers. I act in much the same way when it comes to games (Not much of a music guy). I've quite frequently bought games to support studios that makes games that I find enjoyable even if I know I don't have time or interest in playing that particular game, but I only do this when the game is on sale or once the price has dropped to a reasonable level for what I feel like contributing. I've also bought a lot of old games from Good Old Games because I thouroughly approve of their business modell, the absence of DRM and because the games they release gives me that nice feeling of nostalgia. I buy those games because of the memories and not because I want to play the games again.
Both shows are on their respective sites the day after they air. The daily show regularly have extended interviews there as well. All good stuff. Sometimes I do watch it from other sources though because the quality on their sites is kinda iffy and the player used is kinda crap.
“in consequence of the changes introduced by the plaintiffs, a work of a different character was created which without the plaintiffs’ contribution would have taken a different shape.”
At a glance this judgement doesn't seem that bad but at a closer look it really does feel like it covers way more cases than it should.
What I am more interested about on this topic though is that the author promised to publish the article together with the others. If they were helping with the paper because they had been promised co-authorship and otherwise would not previewed and offered insights on it I can't help but wonder if the one to blame in this specific case was the author herself.
I am not that fluent in legalese and I'm very much not up-to-date on polish laws but I feel that the outcome of the court case is right but that the stated reason for the judgement is wrong.
I would be interested in reading the court decision in full myself but my polish is a bit rusty, I doubt that it gives a blanket permission to just delete something from another work and claim co-authorship like the title implies. The implications for a student-professor interactions during the course of writing a thesis is however worrying but without reading the whole court decision it's hard to know how it will turn out.
Prior art? See my previous post which explains how to circumvent that.
Hint: It involves refiling the patent until it passes. Or you could just make a continuation patent for your lovely "Filing patents while under the influence of heavy narcotics" patent which you filed back in 1998.
That would likely be hard since the pirates support comes from all parts of the political spectrum, on a national level the green parties of different countries generally have a history of cooperation with other established parties who are in power (Red and Green coalitions are common) which makes them a a hard sell for the pirate members who do not want to vote for a party which often give up these issues in exchange for deals on other (often greener) issues.