I wonder what police agencies would think if people started putting similar devices on their private property / personal vehicles that photographed police vehicles, geo-tagged them, and uploaded the data to a website?
Wow. Now go back and re-read what you've posted and tell me how stupid you feel.
So if I tell you about a product I like, I'm stealing from professional advertisers? I hear the Packers won last night. Please don't call the NFL and tell them I told you.
to download the game via BT, etc. first -- If you like it, you can pay for a licensed copy. If you don't you're only out some unsupervised computing time.
Hey AC -- The clips were broadcast on TELEVISION. Another group used them, apparently within the guidelines of fair-use.
Fox apparently didn't like that and is abusing the legal system to make the videos disappear -at least for awhile.
I'm thinking that a news broadcast is definitely something that should be exempt from copyright. Either that, or you don't get to call it a news broadcast.
This is the traditional "If you have nothing to hide, you won't mind us inspecting you" mindset that the average sheep has. I bet you also enjoy traffic checkpoints on the roadways and shopping bag inspections at your local big box store.
What DirecTV and now DISH did/are doing is an inch away from extortion. Just because a person purchased a legal device doesn't mean they used it in the way that you are thinking of.
Unless you have some credible proof that they have done something that injures your company with said legal device (smart card programmer, bolt cutters, sawzall, etc.) you have no right to damage them by extorting money from them or forcing financial hardship on them by dragging them into court.
We seriously need to adopt a "Loser Pays" legal policy in this country.
You tell them to screw themselves, and then they cost you $5k to go to court for a trial that you still have a chance, however minute if your innocent, of losing. OR -- They get 3 grand for sending out a 42¢ letter...
Umm... nice try.... but at the theatre (and some of them have no problem with you setting in on the second showing), has a FINITE number of seats to sell, has to comply with local fire codes, pays insurance to cover you as a customer should you choke on a good-n-plenty, etc.
If you stayed over for a movie and by doing that cost the theatre a paying customer because they were out of seats, then you've injured the theatre. This does not hold true with watching a PPV movie/event twice. The cost associated in getting the data to you has already been paid for in the initial transaction.
How long until you're told that you're not allowed to *remembe*r a PPV event longer than 24 hours?
LOL. By the way, I just took a screenshot of your homepage... but it says "All Rights Reserved" at the bottom... Please don't send the black helicopters after me!
DirecTV is no longer using TiVO units... so it may be longer than that.. But, there always is the "analog hole".
Same thing for the guy who says "why not just pull the HD and get the video from it".. well, if you could find it, you'd find it's encrypted.
DRM hurts consumers. Period. I guarantee that people that were going to share the content anyway will not be hindered in the least.
I don't understand how Hollywood expects to compete with filesharing, when the product you get through filesharing is VASTLY SUPERIOR to what Hollywood's pushing. I can watch it when I want on whichever device I wish. --being free of charge is just an added bonus
The MPAA and RIAA are just two rats on a sinking ship.
Umm.... let's see...now, get up real close to your screen so you don't miss this. A little closer, closer... OK: How about FITTING IN YOUR POCKET.
Jackass.
It's people like you that foster the general suckidtude of electronic devices, because you're willing, I dare say proud, to put together a ghetto "workaround".
O'Rllly? That's the best argument you can come up with.. I hope your next RIAA paycheck bounces... IF they spent less money on this (and other) kind of foolishness and more money working on a business model that would be acceptable to modern society at large, maybe they wouldn't be "hurting" for money.
Illicit drugs, prostitution, and 9/11 have NOTHING in common with filesharing.
Now, I don't normally wear my tinfoil hat in public.. but this sounds more like another "opener" for the government to delve/data-mine their way even deeper up the collective citizenry's ass than any kind of REAL threat.
As far as the hospitals, and other major infrastructure goes...the have (or freakin' better have) their own back up generators on site (hospitals do for sure).
The monetary system was "broken down" many, many years ago... to think it isn't is ostrich-like as well.
The whole idea of cellular technology is that your phone locks onto ONE cell-site until it's ready to move to the next. It may poll several sites in the area... but once you are on a call, you are on ONE cell-site.
I've heard that a phone being handed off from site to site as quickly as it would in a airplane can cause some trouble with the network... but I don't know if those claims have actually been substantiated.
Well.. if you saw Bill Gates' recent interview on TV, Microsoft invents TONS of cool innovative things that people steal from them before Microsoft can actually bring them to market. I'm sure Firefox and the eBay toolbar are just more examples of people stealing Microsoft's legendarily great ideas.
erm... Saying that only iTunes music will play on an iPod is a total misstatement of fact. An iPod will play any unprotected MP3 that you put on it (as well as a few other file formats).
Apple created the ITMS to augment iPod sales. Not the other way around.
Could you sympathize with someone who can't understand the difference between $2.00 and $200.00?
This isn't exactly rocket-science...
If you told Verizon you were going to send them $200 towards your bill, and actually only sent them $2 because you're not good with math.. .how understanding do you think they'd be?
I've got a Rev 1 iMac 233 Mhz G3 that functions great as a 10 gig mp3 player. But you wouldn't want to carry it around... the function is essentially the same as any other mp3 player... but the form would be less than desirable.
Like another poster said -- if Luxpro's product was so great, why would they need to copy (pretty much exactly) the form of the iPod? I'm guessing because they wish to trade on the iPod's good name (as it were) and popularity.
One thing Apple is *really* good at is producing clever designs that pay attention to fit and finish, form factor, interface usability, etc. They invest a lot of cash in hiring prominent industrial designers to come up with these things, and expect to be able to benefit from the fruits of their labor. I'm sure the components in both devices are a relatively small fraction of the costs of the production run as compared to the R&D, market testing, etc.
I would consider things like footballs, basketballs, the wheel, etc... to be things that are in the public domain. I'm sure there may be subtle differences between 2 quality basketballs... but I don't think (and I guess I could be wrong) that there's all that much R&D left to do.
Marketing and endorsements are pretty-much all that separates the various brands.
--but let's say you spent 2 million on developing a basketball that had, by design of the pattern on the outside, a better interface -- let's say it flew 30% truer, or had a more intuitive feel that made players feel more confident and made them more accurate. The ball is made of the same material, but the dimple design is different. And then, lets' say that I came along, acquired one, took it to China, copied it exactly --but changed just enough insignificant details to just squeak by international copyright law-- and started selling them. My cost of development was 1 of your products, and a plane ticket. I can sell my "improved" basketball for a TON less than you can because I don't have that 2 million dollar investment to pay off.
My nearly-slave-labor costs in China may yield less quality -- but my price point is sooo much less than yours, it's difficult for you to persuade your customers to buy your quality product. I have effectively eaten your lunch.
Copying others ideas: 1, Innovation: 0
Forgot to mention earlier... if my memory serves me correctly, Apple legally acquired the concepts of the GUI, the Mouse, and etc from the Xerox PARC team of "California Hippies" (not my terminology) that couldn't sell the concept to their close-minded "East Coast" board of directors
... unlike the "real" player in the OS market who saw something cool and decided to copy (or embrace and extend) it. --but I digress.
While I think that arguing just for the sake of arguing can be fun, and everybody likes to play "Devil's Advocate" from time to time, there is no way you can convince me that, if you have, at least, a central nervous system -- and eyes, you can't see that that product is a blatant rip-off of an Apple design.
Virtually everybody (in the market) _wants_ an iPod. Luxpro can see this, as they have eyes. They produced a product that, from not much of a distance, would be mistaken 99% of the time for a real iPod, and if you profess to disagree - I'd call you a liar.
Also, as I'm sure you know, in order to maintain control of a trademark or patent, one is expected to vigorously defend it. Not defending it would be allowing consumer brand confusion.
If I bought a set of Taylor Made golf clubs, made molds of them, and roto-cast a complete knock-off set --but added an additional item to the underside where you would mostl likely not see it in product packaging would I not be guilty of ripping off someones image (at the least) and/or engineering?
Goose v. Gander...
I wonder what police agencies would think if people started putting similar devices on their private property / personal vehicles that photographed police vehicles, geo-tagged them, and uploaded the data to a website?
Re: Prisoner 201's asinine comment
Wow. Now go back and re-read what you've posted and tell me how stupid you feel.
So if I tell you about a product I like, I'm stealing from professional advertisers? I hear the Packers won last night. Please don't call the NFL and tell them I told you.
Re: Re: Apple Wins Europe-Wide Blockade Of Samsung Tablets; Guess Which Tablet Apple Is Scared Of Most?
Yeah... you forgot about the Apple Newton that pre-dates all of that stuff.
Just another reason...
to download the game via BT, etc. first -- If you like it, you can pay for a licensed copy. If you don't you're only out some unsupervised computing time.
I call BS.
Hey AC -- The clips were broadcast on TELEVISION. Another group used them, apparently within the guidelines of fair-use.
Fox apparently didn't like that and is abusing the legal system to make the videos disappear -at least for awhile.
I'm thinking that a news broadcast is definitely something that should be exempt from copyright. Either that, or you don't get to call it a news broadcast.
Not very fair or balanced.
Obvious
When they outlaw Google Earth, only outlaws will have Google Earth.
You bend over if you want to....
This is the traditional "If you have nothing to hide, you won't mind us inspecting you" mindset that the average sheep has. I bet you also enjoy traffic checkpoints on the roadways and shopping bag inspections at your local big box store.
What DirecTV and now DISH did/are doing is an inch away from extortion. Just because a person purchased a legal device doesn't mean they used it in the way that you are thinking of.
Unless you have some credible proof that they have done something that injures your company with said legal device (smart card programmer, bolt cutters, sawzall, etc.) you have no right to damage them by extorting money from them or forcing financial hardship on them by dragging them into court.
We seriously need to adopt a "Loser Pays" legal policy in this country.
You tell them to screw themselves, and then they cost you $5k to go to court for a trial that you still have a chance, however minute if your innocent, of losing. OR -- They get 3 grand for sending out a 42¢ letter...
Re: Re: moe
Umm... nice try.... but at the theatre (and some of them have no problem with you setting in on the second showing), has a FINITE number of seats to sell, has to comply with local fire codes, pays insurance to cover you as a customer should you choke on a good-n-plenty, etc.
If you stayed over for a movie and by doing that cost the theatre a paying customer because they were out of seats, then you've injured the theatre. This does not hold true with watching a PPV movie/event twice. The cost associated in getting the data to you has already been paid for in the initial transaction.
How long until you're told that you're not allowed to *remembe*r a PPV event longer than 24 hours?
Re: It's Piracy
LOL. By the way, I just took a screenshot of your homepage... but it says "All Rights Reserved" at the bottom... Please don't send the black helicopters after me!
Re: No problem
DirecTV is no longer using TiVO units... so it may be longer than that.. But, there always is the "analog hole".
Same thing for the guy who says "why not just pull the HD and get the video from it".. well, if you could find it, you'd find it's encrypted.
DRM hurts consumers. Period. I guarantee that people that were going to share the content anyway will not be hindered in the least.
I don't understand how Hollywood expects to compete with filesharing, when the product you get through filesharing is VASTLY SUPERIOR to what Hollywood's pushing. I can watch it when I want on whichever device I wish. --being free of charge is just an added bonus
The MPAA and RIAA are just two rats on a sinking ship.
Re: Oh, Who Gives A Monkey's Anyway?
Umm.... let's see...now, get up real close to your screen so you don't miss this. A little closer, closer... OK: How about FITTING IN YOUR POCKET.
Jackass.
It's people like you that foster the general suckidtude of electronic devices, because you're willing, I dare say proud, to put together a ghetto "workaround".
Re:
O'Rllly? That's the best argument you can come up with.. I hope your next RIAA paycheck bounces... IF they spent less money on this (and other) kind of foolishness and more money working on a business model that would be acceptable to modern society at large, maybe they wouldn't be "hurting" for money.
Illicit drugs, prostitution, and 9/11 have NOTHING in common with filesharing.
But nice strawman anyhow...
Gov't Phishing Expedition
Now, I don't normally wear my tinfoil hat in public.. but this sounds more like another "opener" for the government to delve/data-mine their way even deeper up the collective citizenry's ass than any kind of REAL threat.
As far as the hospitals, and other major infrastructure goes...the have (or freakin' better have) their own back up generators on site (hospitals do for sure).
The monetary system was "broken down" many, many years ago... to think it isn't is ostrich-like as well.
Re: FAA has good reason to ban cell phones on plan
Nate K: That's rubbish.
The whole idea of cellular technology is that your phone locks onto ONE cell-site until it's ready to move to the next. It may poll several sites in the area... but once you are on a call, you are on ONE cell-site.
I've heard that a phone being handed off from site to site as quickly as it would in a airplane can cause some trouble with the network... but I don't know if those claims have actually been substantiated.
Just ask Bill Gates
Well.. if you saw Bill Gates' recent interview on TV, Microsoft invents TONS of cool innovative things that people steal from them before Microsoft can actually bring them to market. I'm sure Firefox and the eBay toolbar are just more examples of people stealing Microsoft's legendarily great ideas.
Re: Clueless
erm... Saying that only iTunes music will play on an iPod is a total misstatement of fact. An iPod will play any unprotected MP3 that you put on it (as well as a few other file formats).
Apple created the ITMS to augment iPod sales. Not the other way around.
Re: Mark my words...
Umm yeah.. I don't think there would be anything like 30 second time-limit as to when you can send the photo to law enforcement.
I'm wondering if there would be a "trouble ticket" you would get so you can follow up on your "complaint"...
Re: Almost wanted to side with Verizon...
Could you sympathize with someone who can't understand the difference between $2.00 and $200.00?
This isn't exactly rocket-science...
If you told Verizon you were going to send them $200 towards your bill, and actually only sent them $2 because you're not good with math.. .how understanding do you think they'd be?
Form / Function / yada
I've got a Rev 1 iMac 233 Mhz G3 that functions great as a 10 gig mp3 player. But you wouldn't want to carry it around... the function is essentially the same as any other mp3 player... but the form would be less than desirable.
Like another poster said -- if Luxpro's product was so great, why would they need to copy (pretty much exactly) the form of the iPod? I'm guessing because they wish to trade on the iPod's good name (as it were) and popularity.
One thing Apple is *really* good at is producing clever designs that pay attention to fit and finish, form factor, interface usability, etc. They invest a lot of cash in hiring prominent industrial designers to come up with these things, and expect to be able to benefit from the fruits of their labor. I'm sure the components in both devices are a relatively small fraction of the costs of the production run as compared to the R&D, market testing, etc.
I would consider things like footballs, basketballs, the wheel, etc... to be things that are in the public domain. I'm sure there may be subtle differences between 2 quality basketballs... but I don't think (and I guess I could be wrong) that there's all that much R&D left to do.
Marketing and endorsements are pretty-much all that separates the various brands.
--but let's say you spent 2 million on developing a basketball that had, by design of the pattern on the outside, a better interface -- let's say it flew 30% truer, or had a more intuitive feel that made players feel more confident and made them more accurate. The ball is made of the same material, but the dimple design is different. And then, lets' say that I came along, acquired one, took it to China, copied it exactly --but changed just enough insignificant details to just squeak by international copyright law-- and started selling them. My cost of development was 1 of your products, and a plane ticket. I can sell my "improved" basketball for a TON less than you can because I don't have that 2 million dollar investment to pay off.
My nearly-slave-labor costs in China may yield less quality -- but my price point is sooo much less than yours, it's difficult for you to persuade your customers to buy your quality product. I have effectively eaten your lunch.
Copying others ideas: 1, Innovation: 0
Forgot to mention earlier... if my memory serves me correctly, Apple legally acquired the concepts of the GUI, the Mouse, and etc from the Xerox PARC team of "California Hippies" (not my terminology) that couldn't sell the concept to their close-minded "East Coast" board of directors
... unlike the "real" player in the OS market who saw something cool and decided to copy (or embrace and extend) it. --but I digress.
Re: Re: design by misanthropic humanist
While I think that arguing just for the sake of arguing can be fun, and everybody likes to play "Devil's Advocate" from time to time, there is no way you can convince me that, if you have, at least, a central nervous system -- and eyes, you can't see that that product is a blatant rip-off of an Apple design.
Virtually everybody (in the market) _wants_ an iPod. Luxpro can see this, as they have eyes. They produced a product that, from not much of a distance, would be mistaken 99% of the time for a real iPod, and if you profess to disagree - I'd call you a liar.
Also, as I'm sure you know, in order to maintain control of a trademark or patent, one is expected to vigorously defend it. Not defending it would be allowing consumer brand confusion.
If I bought a set of Taylor Made golf clubs, made molds of them, and roto-cast a complete knock-off set --but added an additional item to the underside where you would mostl likely not see it in product packaging would I not be guilty of ripping off someones image (at the least) and/or engineering?