Is Techdirt going full on constitutionalist, if not what does this have to do with tech or copyright, patents or tech innovation?
Money in politics is a common theme on Techdirt, especially when it comes to new laws such as CISPA, SOPA, PIPA, etc being proposed. The Question often comes down to "Who is buying this law?"
So with this little bit of information, we can learn how much it costs to "buy" a Congressman or Senator.
Should be fairly simple to intercept whatever the game sends to the server, parse it and write it to a flat file locally. Then do the reverse when the game loads a save file.
This recent video shows how some doctors are fighting back against these absolutely insane practices.
http://reason.com/reasontv/2012/11/15/the-obamacare-revolt-oklahoma-doctors-fi
The punishment for shoplifting 24 songs (2 cds): A maximum of 1 year in jail and/or a $1,000 fine.
The "punishment" for sharing 24 songs online: $220,000 fine.
Do you not see a disconnect here?
Article 1 Section 6 of the US Constitution:
"The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place."
The problem is not that 2 people in 7billion would come up with the same solution to the same problem. The problem is that 2 people in the same narrow expertise would come up with the same solution to the same problem. The fewer the number of people in a field and the more specialized the field, the more likely it is that individuals would independently come up with the same solution to the same problem.
There is no other way to consider it. That is the purpose of the obviousness requirement. It is not to measure whether a moron in a hurry would come up with the same idea, it is to measure if a software engineer would be able to write the same "software" a patent would cover or any other field of expertise..
SMAIS is a thief. Why? Because they made a promise to pay and then refused to do so. That is theft.
I don't particularly like the insinuation that Mormons in particular support this kind of legislation. This kind of legislation has an emotional appeal to a vast array of emotional and shortsighted people of all faiths and lack thereof.
"I tell you, a clever person would form a political party."
People have been forming new parties for years now with little luck. The major problem with that idea is that the two major parties have so entrenched themselves in government and media that it is nearly impossible to gain national party status consistently between the 50 states. If you do manage to gain status in all 50 states, the problem then becomes a matter of exposure. With most media outlets being run by entrenched players in the current two parties, getting serious air time on their networks is near impossible.
Do we need new parties? Yes. Yes we do. However, short of a revolution, it will be near impossible for such an effort to take hold in the minds of the people.
better than the less than 5% writers get under a traditional publishing deal.
I would object, however, to the idea that Amazon gives authors a "friendly split." No way! They take 30% (one third!) of your profits.
While 100% of the revenue would be the most ideal scenario for any creator, 70% of the sticker price is still leaps and bounds better than the
What the court is saying is that if convicted, the time he has spent imprisoned without bail will apply to the final sentence. Sounds pretty fair to me, all things considered.
If the corrupted have the power to suppress the evidence of their corruption through the classification process, exactly how are you proposing we go about exposing said secret corruption?
No you won't. Any complaints about the process will simply never be published.
In order to have a 51% section of the graph, it would need at least 100 points of data. With only 10 points, the closest it could get would be 50%.
The DRM itself is not the reason for Steam's success. It is all the features that come with agreeing to use DRM. The Achievements, the play on any device with the same account. The cloud saving and storage., The massive friends lists. The gifting features. The sales. Many many more positive features. With all that, the DRM seems pretty much unnecessary.
If all else fails, Yahoo could send them 2.7 billion Pesos claiming they thought that was what they were asking for. While $208 million is still no laughing matter, it is a far less bitter pill to swallow.
Obviously, these people are paid actors in an improvised and un-televised satire of the US legal system. There is no other way to explain this.
Re: Re: @"Ninja" - "how the fuck this is fair"?
It explicitly does NOT provide that those who don't pay for the works can still enjoy them for free.
That is dodging the actual question. We were asking how denying paying customers the content they paid for fair and just. Do you have an answer to that?
those who produce are to get the rewards, while those who merely use the products must TRADE something of value for goods or works.
So paying money, which most economists agree is something of value, does not guarantee access to a good or work?