But Spotify also has options to download offline copies of a file for temporary use while the end user subscription is valid. does this offline data file not count as a replication of the quite tangible audio data file?
Yes, was about to point this out. I would still consider it 'temporary', as these downloaded files are encrypted, and can only be played from within the spotify app. Also, these files cannot be used to create other copies, at least without great effort to break the encyption.(i.e. they are not just an .mp3 file)
In my mind, they are best considered as 'offline streaming', and should have the same licences applied as 'online' streaming.
Then again, I'm neither a lawyer nor a copyright expert, and if Spotify has a weakness in it's case, it's probably this.
"You best start believing in police states, Techdirt reader... you're in one!"
That's where you're wrong. I'm not from the US, I'm from the UK.....oh..wait...
Yeah, was just hoping that when My_Name_Here said "if Masnick is against it, I'm all for it.", the converse was true, and he'd stop posting and breathing to spite Mike.
Perhaps a better approach might be to inform and educate the other person as to why they were being 'ignorant'. This would then have the effect of removing the alleged ignorance, while also enlightening other readers, who may also be 'ignorant'.
This would also have the added bonus of making you look less like: a) a person who is also ignorant, but wants to appear not to be so.
b) a person who wants others to remain ignorant, so that they can be smugly superior to others who have a perceived lesser knowledge of the subject.
I think it’s a fair concern that Right-to-Repair laws could lead to an explosion of Radio Shack-like iPhone and Samsung electronics parts shops. Consumers will wander in with broken iPhone and Samsung Galaxy screens, and walk out with all the parts and tools they need to repair them. And some of them will fail, miserably.
Others will succeed, and those who fail will still be able to take them elsewhere for repair, as is their choice.
This is correct. DoomRL had been around for over 10 years, but only when the Jupiter Hell kickstarter appeared did it attract any legal attention from Zenimax. I’d guess the issue might have been more with the Doom logo across the main banner of the website, which was similar enough to the original iD software Doom logo that it might well be infringing under trademark law, (i.e. there may be a likelihood of confusion to the consumer that this is a Bethesda / Zenimax product. ) As this logo has now been changed, and the name changed to DRL, with the site and game still up, this seems pretty likely.
Fight for the Future:
Tip for the future.. Twitter is not US only, the rest of the world uses it too, and may wish to thank twitter as well.
Otherwise, good idea.
Nice idea, Griff, but I can see a few potential issues without even thinking about it.
How long do you think it would be before pirates had cracked the watermark system? I'd give it a week at best.
Also, if your files were stolen (for example if you put them on your government USB stick, which have an unnatural tendency to wander), would you be responsible for the subsequent file sharing, or would it still have to be proven that YOU shared the files for you to be prosecuted?
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Alasdair Fox.
Re: Re:
You could try, but what judge is going to find a guilty verdict in that instance? Turkeys don't vote for Christmas..
Re: I wonder
"Does the FBI think there is a group making the Chat/msg programs JUST for the crooks? " There is. It's called the FBI (with perhaps a little help from the Australian Police) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/08/murder-plots-mass-shootings-thwarted-fbi-designed-app-global/
Re: Five countries, five eyes.
Five Countries, five eyes. No evidence of a brain.
I knew a dutch guy called Eggie Prick. I imagine he has some issues signing up on web sites!
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Re: Re: Re: OMG!!
To be fair though, you probably wouldn't catch anything, as the surface area of the hands is so small. Your greatest risk would be starving instead.
Re: Streaming intangible yes, offline copies no.
But Spotify also has options to download offline copies of a file for temporary use while the end user subscription is valid. does this offline data file not count as a replication of the quite tangible audio data file? Yes, was about to point this out. I would still consider it 'temporary', as these downloaded files are encrypted, and can only be played from within the spotify app. Also, these files cannot be used to create other copies, at least without great effort to break the encyption.(i.e. they are not just an .mp3 file) In my mind, they are best considered as 'offline streaming', and should have the same licences applied as 'online' streaming. Then again, I'm neither a lawyer nor a copyright expert, and if Spotify has a weakness in it's case, it's probably this.
Re:
"You best start believing in police states, Techdirt reader... you're in one!" That's where you're wrong. I'm not from the US, I'm from the UK.....oh..wait...
Re: Re: Re:
Yeah, was just hoping that when My_Name_Here said "if Masnick is against it, I'm all for it.", the converse was true, and he'd stop posting and breathing to spite Mike.
Re:
I hear Masnick is greatly in favour of both posting in Techdirt comments and breathing.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technical question about phone security
Perhaps a better approach might be to inform and educate the other person as to why they were being 'ignorant'. This would then have the effect of removing the alleged ignorance, while also enlightening other readers, who may also be 'ignorant'.
This would also have the added bonus of making you look less like:
a) a person who is also ignorant, but wants to appear not to be so.
b) a person who wants others to remain ignorant, so that they can be smugly superior to others who have a perceived lesser knowledge of the subject.
c) an inflammatory trolling asshole.
d) any or all of the above.
Re: Obviously...
He turned me into a newt!....
(I got better)
Re: Re: Re: t's Time For The FCC To Actually Listen:
Ajit? Is that you?
Voice Rights
So, how long until we see the first voice copyright / vocal rights lawsuit?
One size doesn't fit all
I think it’s a fair concern that Right-to-Repair laws could lead to an explosion of Radio Shack-like iPhone and Samsung electronics parts shops. Consumers will wander in with broken iPhone and Samsung Galaxy screens, and walk out with all the parts and tools they need to repair them. And some of them will fail, miserably.
Others will succeed, and those who fail will still be able to take them elsewhere for repair, as is their choice.
Re: I'm happy
It's only irrelevant until it becomes law..
Re:
This is correct. DoomRL had been around for over 10 years, but only when the Jupiter Hell kickstarter appeared did it attract any legal attention from Zenimax.
I’d guess the issue might have been more with the Doom logo across the main banner of the website, which was similar enough to the original iD software Doom logo that it might well be infringing under trademark law, (i.e. there may be a likelihood of confusion to the consumer that this is a Bethesda / Zenimax product. )
As this logo has now been changed, and the name changed to DRL, with the site and game still up, this seems pretty likely.
If only your fingers were made of glass,
how funny would it be to watch them shatter in impotent copyrage?
Fight for the Future:
Tip for the future.. Twitter is not US only, the rest of the world uses it too, and may wish to thank twitter as well.
Otherwise, good idea.
nice idea, but..
Nice idea, Griff, but I can see a few potential issues without even thinking about it.
How long do you think it would be before pirates had cracked the watermark system? I'd give it a week at best.
Also, if your files were stolen (for example if you put them on your government USB stick, which have an unnatural tendency to wander), would you be responsible for the subsequent file sharing, or would it still have to be proven that YOU shared the files for you to be prosecuted?