Drones could also be used for medical purposes on the battlefield. Provide some basic medical knowledge to 20% of the battlefield soldiers and then they can call in a medicbot with proper medical equipment for specific wounds. Since the Meditbot would have plenty of testing in the civilian world, it would also be very helpful to save the lives of soldiers shot or otherwise harmed in the line of duty.
But then again, a bad example. It could also be used to move interrogation material to the battlefield to interrogate a fallen enemy soldier, keeping then alive long enough to provide information about the enemy.
Well, the effect of this ruling could be that Apple is now forced to tell the World (okay, just the UK) that Samsung did NOT copy them. Such a confession might have some additional effects on similar cases world-wide and possibly even help with the case in the USA, which Apple won.
In the USA, Samsung could now present this advertisement/confession from Apple and turn that ruling around...
Of course, not just in the USA. It could happen everywhere, where Apple sued Samsung over the design. Apple is forced to confes they've been wrong. Such a confession can be very valuable, when other courts recognize it as such.
Actually, transferring the "original pictures" does make a lot of sense, since it would also transfer any copyrights on those images. With the originals now owned by the Royal family, they can stop any other usage of those images with an infringement claim...
Too bad the magazine wasn't the owner, and thus could not transfer the original license, just the license of what they've done to those images. Basically, they just got a license from the original photographer to create a derived work (which was already published) and then stop any further publishing of this derived work.
It's not a matter of owning the negatives or whatever. It's about owning the rights on those images.
You won't sell much when the "Buy" button is disabled.
Also, I've noticed another problem. I wanted to order a t-shirt for a friend of mine which costs $29.00 but shipping costs to the Netherlands adds another $47.95 to the price. Wow! With such expensive shipping costs, you won't sell much merchandise outside the USA.
Cancelling that order again... Way too expensive! :-)
Please keep in mind that Techdirt has plenty of international visitors. Maybe you should find a way to cut those costs?
Well, I use Google Chrome, latest version. And I'm an insider as you can see by my icon.
What I can see is this screenshot on my website which doesn't seem to contain any option to actually purchase anything.
German laws are becoming less real every day. Okay, I don't like facial recognition in facebook either, since it allows people to follow me on pictures taken by others, where I've been tagged. It could one day even result in some freak who takes a picture of my face on the street to use that picture to track my own facebook profile and all information that I share, plus what others share about me.
If this technique continues then I could end up with a bunch of stalkers who find out who I am, where I live, where I work, simply by taking a picture of me.
But having to destroy that database? That's over the top. It should stay, but each facebook member must give permission first before she can be tagged. (Yes, opt-in instead of opt-out.)
Actually, he's getting 1.3 million for a single tune that's heard in the anti-piracy jingle on each and every DVD published by the Dutch market. It's a few seconds long, probably less than a minute and the narrator talking through the jingle isn't part of the song.
And no, not Dutch movies, but any movie that's sold after 2007, possibly all over the world too. As long as it has been produced in the Netherlands. It's been proven that his music was used in at least the anti-piracy spots of over 77 DVD's but more likely even more songs.
Maybe, then again, I live there. Corrupt politicians, board members and other top people seem to be supporting each other a lot so he won't disappear. He'll probably end up with a different job somewhere else. He'll have to stay low for a few years but then this will probably forgotten ot some other board member will be exposed.
Problem is, no one knows if what he did breaks the law. If it didn't then people will soon forget again and he'll be back. Besides, he has his own company and plenty of financial resources and at times of a financial crisis he'll will be welcome everywhere...
No matter how corrupt he is.
Jochem Gerrits didn't really resign but stepped down for the duration of some internal investigations before he'll be allowed to return to his old position again. Basically, they're just waiting for the news story to blow over and then they can continue to enrich themselves.
Re: Re: Justin Bieber's love Child is more important!
At first I wondered how that woman had gotten pregnant anyways. Lesbians can't become pregnant from each other! :-)
But now I realise that Justin is secretly a boy. Well, that's a great hidden secret. :-)
To be honest, I'm not a citizen of the USA. I don't even want to visit the USA during holidays. I'm from the Netherlands so US legislation is mindnumbingly boring to me. And it's unlikely to have any effects on me. But if some woman has the love child of Justin Bieber then I want to know every detail of this whole story! So, please tell us more about little Bieb... :-)
This reminds me of the Dutch Psychology professor in the Netherlands, Diederik Stapel. Recently, he published a report which told that people who eat meat are salfish bastards. He explained that meat eaters are basically the scum of the world and Vegetarians are just nice, friendly people.
He should not have done this, though. People distrusted this report and asked for facts, scientific data and whatever more. There was none...
Then they started asking for facts and research data for his other publications... Still none.
And now this Professor is suspended, probably to lose his tenure and all his publications are now suspected to be untrue.
So, this research looks like Diederik Stapel wrote it. Then again, he's probable not the only unreliable professor. As long as these people are encouraged to just publish a lot, there will always be some fraudulous publications just for the heck of it...
I have a DVD collection of nearly 800 titles, collected over a period of about 8 years. So on average, I buy 100 DVD's per year. Most of them in discount stores for EUR 5 or less. I rarely spend more than 10 Euro on a single DVD, unless I really want to see that movie.
To be honest, I reserve about 50 Euro per month for new DVD's and since I have a nice income and no big expenses, I can easily set aside that much.
If MPAA thinks I'm willing to buy twice as much DVD's then they'd first have to lower the prices a lot! About half their current price, I'd suggest. Then it still fits within my budget. :-)