"Why would anyone not expect Gibson to protect its valuable parts of its business?"
So what is the valuable part of their business? Is it that they have unique guitar shapes or is it that they make great guitars that sound great and play well? I'm not a musician myself but I would say that to them the sound is more important than what it looks like.
Many instrument makers can command a (huge) premium because they sell quality instruments that sound consistently great and because they have great brand recognition because of that, even if their shape is pretty similar to the competition. Steinway comes to mind.
So, should Gibson focus on the valuable part of their business or should they focus on stupid IP laws?
For a country that praises itself for being the bestest, fairest, shiniest and openest democracy, you sure seem to have a lot of issues making elections fair.
Looking from here it sounds like a good idea if you dropped districts to prevent gerrymandering and dropped the electoral college. Generally speaking that would give one person one vote and it would be also be easier to offer third (fourth, fifth, sixth etc.) party options. Campaign finance reform is also a thing you could look into.
Obviously that is not new. However, the powers that be have obviously no interest in changing it, thus the kakocracy continues.
The fun thing is that if the traditional EU publishers actually wanted to innovate and somehow got together a consortium to make their own Google News, article 11 makes that business case a non-starter. Even if Google News would quit Europe.
If they have to pay snippet tax, the loss leading cost of that project would be prohibitive.
That was so stupid it made me laugh. To fill out the bingo card they should've added "being in possession of superfluous melanin" or "speaking Spanish" as 10 point criteria.
However, at this point it would probably be easier if they just added everybody to the database. Seeing that basically existing will already net you enough points to get into it.
I'm not even going to disagree with that statement. With insurance the many pay for the individual. I think that as long as you don't call it communism I could go with the idea that is a socialistic concept. It was invented by capitalists (ever heard of Lloyd's?) but, hey, don't let that spoil your breakfast.
Now please explain why insurance is a bad idea? There doesn't really need to be a middle man collecting a toll, you can have co-operative funds where the fund is only used to create a buffer for bad times. If the fund is judged to be big enough payments can decrease or stop.
Insurance should be used to cover stuff that would go beyond your means if it happened to you. I think a general rule of thumb is that if the possible damage would be higher than 2 monthly salaries it should be insured. So a fire insurance for your house is a good idea. Of course, some due diligence into your insurer is also a good idea.
I recently read that in the US more than half the people that get cancer completely wipe out their life savings and are left in debt. Feel free to check how big the chance is you will get cancer at some point in your life but I can assure you it's not small, especially if you plan on getting old. The socialists in North/West Europe do not have this problem though because their insurance covers that. At the same time the overall cost (combined government and private spending) is a fraction of the cost in the US but that's another discussion.
Now, you keep rejecting insurance because it smells like dirty, unwashed socialists. Just don't complain when your house burns down or you get cancer.
"the problem is clearly with the Romanian Data Protection Authority, not the law."
Yes, it clearly is. However in a country where corruption is more a way of life than an exception (you even need to fork over some cash to get a doctor's appointment) it would've been nice if somebody built in some safeguards to prevent this from happening. I'm fairly sure the RDPA could find a "friendly" judge somewhere.
Or we could not try to fix something that's not broken but who am I to stand in the way of the bureaucrats.
When I saw this I was just wondering if the GoT font designer might have a claim here. Not that I'm saying they should pursue it but that is the only claim I see that could stand a chance.
Okay, I see where you're coming from now. You don't see the actual picture as the end result but the combination of picture and reference to the original art work is for you the total of the copyrighted work.
I don't think this logic will hold up in court as infringement though. Essentially all artists reference previous artists and work. For example I once saw a guy making a convincing argument that Rothko was inspired by Vermeer. If that was the case than if you take away Vermeer, the Rothko could not exist. However I don't think anybody would claim that the Rothko work was copyright infringement.
So the argument that it's infringement because one cannot exist without the other does not fly.
It is true that we were conquered in a matter of days, mainly because we had very little and very outdated weaponry. I've been told bi-planes don't fare well against Messerschmitts. We were tryng to be neutral in the conflict, true, but Hitler didn't care about that much.
However, after the surrender the Dutch government in exile in London has worked tirelessly to liberate the country again.
The law mentioned above isn't "stalled". It's just in the legislative process.
It has been approved by the "Tweede Kamer" (very loosely comparable to Congress) and still needs to be approved by the "Eerste Kamer" (Senate, although the differences between the Dutch system and the US system are bigger than the similarities).
The problem here is not so much the foreign heads of state but rather our own. The change would also make the King fair game. Some conservative Christian parties are a bit worried about that.
Anyway, I wouldn't worry too much about the guy. I would be surprised if he got more than a slap on the wrist, even if he was convicted. The maximum punishment looks scary but Dutch judges have wide discretion in setting punishments and I think the harshest they would go in this case will be a fine of a few hundred Euros.
Still, not good the Dutch government collaborates with the Turkish government in this.
Not an international law expert, or any law expert at all, but generally speaking I don't think the US is extraditing American Citizens to other nations.
I seem to remember this was an issue for the US to join the International Peace Court in The Hague as well.
So, I'm not really hopeful this guy will be extradited.
(to me, who has list of nearly all accounts for the last 5 years)
It's really hard to say this without sounding insulting but you really need help. This kind of obsession is really not healthy. Please, please, please talk to somebody. I'm serious.
Alternatively, try to wean yourself of your compulsive behaviour to visit and comment on this site. Just go watch porn or something whenever you feel the need to go here..
I would find it reasonable if the receiver of the erroneous takedowns (Google in this case) sent an invoice for weeding out the false positives. They have to spent time and money to fix it but why should they be the ones to bear the cost?
If you really cared you would support military action against these countries driving these people to these situations"
In the forest of stupid you wrote above, this takes the cake. How many times has war, or forced regime change for that matter, made things better for anyone? How many times has war reduced the number of refugees?
The problem here is the plea deal system, combined with the stacking mentioned in the article.
If you're arrested for something minor and during the arrest something happens that might conceivably be construed as bodily injury if you look at it sideways with your eyes seriously squinted. That's not even considering how the incident is reported if there are no witnesses except cops.
So what do you do (guilty or innocent) if they offer you a plea deal for 6 months in jail versus the potential risk of going to prison for 10 years plus? You'll take the deal or you will trust the public defender to get you off, even though they added 98 cases to his workload just this week?
As per usual if you can afford proper legal representation this law will not affect you much, probably.
Re: Re: Here we go again.
"Why would anyone not expect Gibson to protect its valuable parts of its business?"
So what is the valuable part of their business? Is it that they have unique guitar shapes or is it that they make great guitars that sound great and play well? I'm not a musician myself but I would say that to them the sound is more important than what it looks like.
Many instrument makers can command a (huge) premium because they sell quality instruments that sound consistently great and because they have great brand recognition because of that, even if their shape is pretty similar to the competition. Steinway comes to mind.
So, should Gibson focus on the valuable part of their business or should they focus on stupid IP laws?
ICE is solid on literature though
I can't help but think that ICE had a thorough grounding in both Kafka and Joseph Heller (Catch 22).
Foreigner with raised eyebrow here
For a country that praises itself for being the bestest, fairest, shiniest and openest democracy, you sure seem to have a lot of issues making elections fair.
Looking from here it sounds like a good idea if you dropped districts to prevent gerrymandering and dropped the electoral college. Generally speaking that would give one person one vote and it would be also be easier to offer third (fourth, fifth, sixth etc.) party options. Campaign finance reform is also a thing you could look into.
Obviously that is not new. However, the powers that be have obviously no interest in changing it, thus the kakocracy continues.
Re: Re:
"Another search engine"
The fun thing is that if the traditional EU publishers actually wanted to innovate and somehow got together a consortium to make their own Google News, article 11 makes that business case a non-starter. Even if Google News would quit Europe.
If they have to pay snippet tax, the loss leading cost of that project would be prohibitive.
(untitled comment)
That was so stupid it made me laugh. To fill out the bingo card they should've added "being in possession of superfluous melanin" or "speaking Spanish" as 10 point criteria.
However, at this point it would probably be easier if they just added everybody to the database. Seeing that basically existing will already net you enough points to get into it.
Re: Close, but not quite
Thanks, I wanted to check if I was understanding that correctly and it seems I did.
Which begs the question if RCMP was asking for his identity, would the court have decided the same? Is there jurisprudence on that in Canada?
Re: Re: Another profit center.
"It also, in a way, is socialism."
I'm not even going to disagree with that statement. With insurance the many pay for the individual. I think that as long as you don't call it communism I could go with the idea that is a socialistic concept. It was invented by capitalists (ever heard of Lloyd's?) but, hey, don't let that spoil your breakfast.
Now please explain why insurance is a bad idea? There doesn't really need to be a middle man collecting a toll, you can have co-operative funds where the fund is only used to create a buffer for bad times. If the fund is judged to be big enough payments can decrease or stop.
Insurance should be used to cover stuff that would go beyond your means if it happened to you. I think a general rule of thumb is that if the possible damage would be higher than 2 monthly salaries it should be insured. So a fire insurance for your house is a good idea. Of course, some due diligence into your insurer is also a good idea.
I recently read that in the US more than half the people that get cancer completely wipe out their life savings and are left in debt. Feel free to check how big the chance is you will get cancer at some point in your life but I can assure you it's not small, especially if you plan on getting old. The socialists in North/West Europe do not have this problem though because their insurance covers that. At the same time the overall cost (combined government and private spending) is a fraction of the cost in the US but that's another discussion.
Now, you keep rejecting insurance because it smells like dirty, unwashed socialists. Just don't complain when your house burns down or you get cancer.
(untitled comment)
"the problem is clearly with the Romanian Data Protection Authority, not the law."
Yes, it clearly is. However in a country where corruption is more a way of life than an exception (you even need to fork over some cash to get a doctor's appointment) it would've been nice if somebody built in some safeguards to prevent this from happening. I'm fairly sure the RDPA could find a "friendly" judge somewhere.
Or we could not try to fix something that's not broken but who am I to stand in the way of the bureaucrats.
Re: Re: What do "Krolis", "Narcissus", and "Dark Helmet"...
Me too! What's the bet?
Font
When I saw this I was just wondering if the GoT font designer might have a claim here. Not that I'm saying they should pursue it but that is the only claim I see that could stand a chance.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Clearly derived work
Okay, I see where you're coming from now. You don't see the actual picture as the end result but the combination of picture and reference to the original art work is for you the total of the copyrighted work.
I don't think this logic will hold up in court as infringement though. Essentially all artists reference previous artists and work. For example I once saw a guy making a convincing argument that Rothko was inspired by Vermeer. If that was the case than if you take away Vermeer, the Rothko could not exist. However I don't think anybody would claim that the Rothko work was copyright infringement.
So the argument that it's infringement because one cannot exist without the other does not fly.
Re:
You recall wrongly.
It is true that we were conquered in a matter of days, mainly because we had very little and very outdated weaponry. I've been told bi-planes don't fare well against Messerschmitts. We were tryng to be neutral in the conflict, true, but Hitler didn't care about that much.
However, after the surrender the Dutch government in exile in London has worked tirelessly to liberate the country again.
So, perhaps you should read your history again?
Just a small correction
The law mentioned above isn't "stalled". It's just in the legislative process.
It has been approved by the "Tweede Kamer" (very loosely comparable to Congress) and still needs to be approved by the "Eerste Kamer" (Senate, although the differences between the Dutch system and the US system are bigger than the similarities).
The problem here is not so much the foreign heads of state but rather our own. The change would also make the King fair game. Some conservative Christian parties are a bit worried about that.
Anyway, I wouldn't worry too much about the guy. I would be surprised if he got more than a slap on the wrist, even if he was convicted. The maximum punishment looks scary but Dutch judges have wide discretion in setting punishments and I think the harshest they would go in this case will be a fine of a few hundred Euros.
Still, not good the Dutch government collaborates with the Turkish government in this.
Re:
Not an international law expert, or any law expert at all, but generally speaking I don't think the US is extraditing American Citizens to other nations.
I seem to remember this was an issue for the US to join the International Peace Court in The Hague as well.
So, I'm not really hopeful this guy will be extradited.
Re: Re: Re: I think the age of anyone caring about comment policing is past
Perhaps my point was not as clear as it could have been
Yes it was. At least if your point was that you're completely detached from reality.
Re: Scott Yates or beernutz, 59 comments total, 6 average per year,
(to me, who has list of nearly all accounts for the last 5 years)
It's really hard to say this without sounding insulting but you really need help. This kind of obsession is really not healthy. Please, please, please talk to somebody. I'm serious.
Alternatively, try to wean yourself of your compulsive behaviour to visit and comment on this site. Just go watch porn or something whenever you feel the need to go here..
Re:
I would find it reasonable if the receiver of the erroneous takedowns (Google in this case) sent an invoice for weeding out the false positives. They have to spent time and money to fix it but why should they be the ones to bear the cost?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Outrage
If you really cared you would support military action against these countries driving these people to these situations"
In the forest of stupid you wrote above, this takes the cake. How many times has war, or forced regime change for that matter, made things better for anyone? How many times has war reduced the number of refugees?
Re: What Does “Hate Crime” Mean Anyway?
The French even have a term for it: Crime passionel
Re: Re: Re: Not every bump
The problem here is the plea deal system, combined with the stacking mentioned in the article.
If you're arrested for something minor and during the arrest something happens that might conceivably be construed as bodily injury if you look at it sideways with your eyes seriously squinted. That's not even considering how the incident is reported if there are no witnesses except cops.
So what do you do (guilty or innocent) if they offer you a plea deal for 6 months in jail versus the potential risk of going to prison for 10 years plus? You'll take the deal or you will trust the public defender to get you off, even though they added 98 cases to his workload just this week?
As per usual if you can afford proper legal representation this law will not affect you much, probably.