you can see the editing in the footage when the yellow things(butterflys?) fly across the right side of the video and there's a blur where the image was doctored. And that's only just what I noticed from watching it once.
Not that I condone the hate emails and death threats, but part of the reason they're receiving it is because often times that's the only way people can vent on the situation; too often, as stated in the article, there's nothing done more than grand speeches of "truth" and "justice" with perhaps a slap on the wrist.
And to add to your point, it's sad that people don't recognize that deleting something is far from erasing it's existence forever. All whoever was responsible did, was make it that much more obvious they have something to hide.
When I was in 5th grade we pretended yard sticks where guns and rolled up socks with tennis balls where grenades... for a school project to reenact the revolutionary war!
I'm confused though. Why would they want it taken down in the first place? They spend money on lawyers, it gets taken down... then what? Could someone perhaps enlighten me?
How does that patent even relate to Ditto's services considering the patent is for a "3D model" and Ditto's service is for a video of the consumer's face?
I'm getting really tired of the argument: "while it's possible the law can be abused, we don't intend for it to be abused so we'll leave it the way it is. Trust us we're the government and we've never gone back and abused something we said we wouldn't."
Myriad Patent logic: "I spent X amount of money and Y years developing something, therefore I deserve a patent rather than Bob who did it for free. In fact, Bob shouldn't even be allowed to use that something at all because money."
Even if we set aside the problematic issues of copyright. Ethically, I think Disney is in the wrong here, for the handbag anyway. Is Disney really so short on talent they have to resort to profiting off of someone else's work? I'm fine with transformative work, but I can't stand it when someone claims another person's art as their own.
Never bought Premium PS Network, and everything worked fine. It's not like they gave you "better internet" for having a premium account, instead they gave you other perks.
Re: Re: Quick to Judge and WRONG
ALSO! I don't see how anyone can deny the overhead picture embedded in the article showing only one side? Is this perhaps a case of doublethink?
Re: Quick to Judge and WRONG
you can see the editing in the footage when the yellow things(butterflys?) fly across the right side of the video and there's a blur where the image was doctored. And that's only just what I noticed from watching it once.
(untitled comment)
Not that I condone the hate emails and death threats, but part of the reason they're receiving it is because often times that's the only way people can vent on the situation; too often, as stated in the article, there's nothing done more than grand speeches of "truth" and "justice" with perhaps a slap on the wrist.
Re: Re:
I actually think either way is correct.
And to add to your point, it's sad that people don't recognize that deleting something is far from erasing it's existence forever. All whoever was responsible did, was make it that much more obvious they have something to hide.
(untitled comment)
I'm surprised Clubs even still exist in Germany with these kind of fees...
(untitled comment)
wow yeah, they're crazy...
Re:
When I was in 5th grade we pretended yard sticks where guns and rolled up socks with tennis balls where grenades... for a school project to reenact the revolutionary war!
Re:
Personally, I am offended you didn't shoehorn in a nazi joke in there...
(untitled comment)
I'm confused though. Why would they want it taken down in the first place? They spend money on lawyers, it gets taken down... then what? Could someone perhaps enlighten me?
(untitled comment)
How does that patent even relate to Ditto's services considering the patent is for a "3D model" and Ditto's service is for a video of the consumer's face?
(untitled comment)
My friend just recently got on of these actually. I originally thought it was just a joke 0_o
Re: Re:
agreed.
(untitled comment)
I wouldn't mind being a lawyer in Italy right about now... I hear they've got lots of job opportunities
(untitled comment)
More proof that there's no need to fear a "spectrum crunch". As humanities data usage increases at an exponential rate, so too does it's technology.
(untitled comment)
I'm getting really tired of the argument: "while it's possible the law can be abused, we don't intend for it to be abused so we'll leave it the way it is. Trust us we're the government and we've never gone back and abused something we said we wouldn't."
(untitled comment)
Myriad Patent logic: "I spent X amount of money and Y years developing something, therefore I deserve a patent rather than Bob who did it for free. In fact, Bob shouldn't even be allowed to use that something at all because money."
Re: WTF?
You're right. Scalia seems to think of patents as an end rather than a mean.
(untitled comment)
Even if we set aside the problematic issues of copyright. Ethically, I think Disney is in the wrong here, for the handbag anyway. Is Disney really so short on talent they have to resort to profiting off of someone else's work? I'm fine with transformative work, but I can't stand it when someone claims another person's art as their own.
Re:
You can click on it to open a larger image.
Re: Re: Re:
Never bought Premium PS Network, and everything worked fine. It's not like they gave you "better internet" for having a premium account, instead they gave you other perks.