As a grandfathered/unlimited customer, I can't wait for that inevitable class action lawsuit, followed, in three to five years, by a check for $3.49 made out to me! And what's the share for those class action law firms? You guessed it... unlimited.
So... if it's possible to copyright a contract, it would be for the purpose of protecting its commercial value. For a book or a song, the purpose would be to sell the book or song for money, and publishing a copy (arguably) diminishes the article's commercial value.
But if, as claimed, the commercial (read: copyrightable) value of a contract document lies in its novel language or methods, then it's the actual use of the contract in commerce that's being protected. So, publishing the language wouldn't infringe, since there's no inherent value in seeing/hearing it, as there is with a book or song; but copying the language and using it in a contract of your own would diminish the contract's value, failing to compensate its author.
In other words, the only infringement would be ripping the language/ideas/methods, and using them in a new contract. No infringement for simply showing off the language. In my opinion.
If we agree to use the printer manufacturer's materials, can we use it to print DRM-free 3D Keurig coffee pods? Or maybe my coffee maker can learn to print gun parts using generic 3D printing media. One big, happy family, DRM'ed to the gills!
Well, to ratchet-down the hyperbole just a bit, a "swipe-o-matic" is a reference to a down-and-dirty test commercial intended for communication within the creative team only. It's a found object, moving image version of the longstanding "animatic", in which a camera performs zooms and pans on static images and sketches to suggest just what the final product might look like once it's shot. Roughly the equivalent of cutting out pictures of broccoli from Good Housekeeping magazine to create your fourth grade collage on green vegetables.
But I get the "yikes" comment... even for a throwaway, the irony of a Google swipe isn't lost on Kalouria.
Shouldn't we lay some blame at the feet of the team? It's one thing to maximize return; but to cut a deal where predatory pricing will prevent local viewership seems like a bad idea. The team can claim a commitment to the community by sending handicapped 8-year-olds to Disneyland, or bringing the mascot to a benefit event; but how about some arrangement that helps fans watch their home team play baseball?
TWC lost its way. With giant, lush sets (for faux meteorologists... really?), multiple custom-made reality series, and its own, homebrewed plan to dole out bizarre names to rainstorms and snowstorms, it clearly had misread its mandate.
Returning to the core mission... what a concept! Early CATV systems, to a one, featured an almost DOS-like black and white screen showing time, temp, wind speed and direction at the cable head end; and once the National Weather Service started a teletext-like data service, you could read a regional forecast, too. Unsophisticated as it was, it was nonetheless the most popular channel on the system at times.
In the last year or two, before Verizon made the switch to Accuweather, I found myself watching fifteen minutes of giant tow trucks, Alaskans, or (of course) giant Alaskan tow trucks just to check a forecast. Now, the Alaskan tow truck channel has gone away, there's weather all the time (like a 46" wall-mounted smartphone!), and life is simpler.
There's another group Juenger misses: entrenched customers, maybe a bit older, who engage enthusiastically with multiple OTT services, but who haven't cut the cord... yet. [Raises hand] And we're constantly seething over the crazy-high rates these mercenary cable providers charge, with their inflexible channel packages and near-mandatory services bundles. Something, some day, will turn the seethe into rage, and we'll all be gone.