That's possible, assuming it is a franchise and not a corporate-owned location. However I would think that a) he would still be concerned about bad publicity given that the McDonalds is in the area of the protests and thus most of his customers would be too and b) McDonalds corporate office would lean on him heavily because of the bad publicity it would bring them, possibly it could even be a violation of the franchise agreement.
I mean, everyone always complains about how kids these days don't like to read. I can't imagine that for most of them going to adult books is going to be their first choice. So if they're seeking out books instead of watching videos then good on them I say!
with this, aside from the principle of the thing I mean, is let's say that, uh, someone who isn't me likes porn and has AT&T for internet. What happens when their algorithm decides that since they like porn so much they should start getting ads for adult sites injected and their kids start getting those ads since it's the same connection?
>The fact that the EFF has apparently stepped up and shown interest might be enough to keep it from reaching that point, it depends on how much control the publisher has over their lawyers, and themselves.
Well it really makes sense for the EFF to be willing to get involved if it goes to court. A victory for the publisher would almost certainly mean that extensions like Adblock would also be made illegal. In fact, pretty much any extension that alters a page could become illegal (so, most of them?).
Cause I'm pretty sure I would have raised a stink about it and I would have not only reposted them on Facebook (along with a scathing description of what went down), I probably would have put them up on Reddit and anywhere else they would have gotten attention too. Maybe even my local news channels.
So a couple of months ago I was in the AT&T store getting a replacement SIM card for a phone and the rep started talking to me about U-verse. She sold me on it but I decided to give Comcast one last chance to provide me with a similar deal. I called them up to tell them what AT&T was offering me and give them a chance to match it. If they had even been close I probably would have accepted just for the hassle factor. I got through to retentions and the guy on the other end was a complete jerk. He talked down to me, his comments, questions and tone of voice made it pretty clear that he thought I was trying to scam them and they wouldn't even come CLOSE to what AT&T was offering me. Aside from the $300 in Visa gift cards, Comcast wanted about $70 more a month for a package close to what AT&T offered.
So I said screw it, canceled Comcast by taking everything into the local office and had U-verse installed. I now get more channels by far, my internet is comparable (Comcast was rated for 50 mbps, U-verse for 45). I won't say everything was perfect (it wasn't, I had a few issues caused by the initial installer doing a crap job, a couple of equipment issues and problems at the node up the road) but I've been pretty happy with it outside of those. Most of the people have been very helpful and polite. The onsite techs even gave me their cell numbers and said if I had any more problems in the next 30 days that I could call them directly. It's like they looked at what Comcast is doing and said, "Let's not do that. In fact, let's do the fucking opposite of that."
I think they do have a special system that the big guys (like the studios and record labels get access to) that doesn't use DMCA takedowns. Normal peons don't get to use that. Also you might be thinking of ContentID?
Easy. Let's say you want a single cup of coffee. You can either make a pot, have your cup and throw out the rest and make another pot when you want some more two or three hours later or use use something like this to make just the one cup and it's fresh each time.
It will be telling if Green Mountain files a DMCA lawsuit
I wonder if Green Mountain will file a DMCA lawsuit against TreeHouse since bypassing the DRM is technically a violation of the DMCA. My guess is that their lawyers will be smart enough not to do that facing the threat of monopoly lawsuit. If they file a DMCA lawsuit then they're effectively admitting that the purpose of the markings IS DRM and not just to make a better cup. It could get interesting if they do though.
And for every person like you there are probably 10 that find that sort of feature helpful. Just like when Word first went WYSIWYG. A few people bitched about it. They wanted their old display where it just showed the document with a markup-style layout instead of WYSIWYG. Most people wanted the latter and that's what we get now.