This is the same govt that made it illegal to disparage the police or gather in unauthorized protests, and it also sabotaged Spain's free press.
So this law really doesn't come as a surprise, does it?
The same thing apparently happened a couple weeks ago with a Star Wars kid's book which was shipped to a bookstore early and then bought by an employee. He posted images to Imgur which were later removed.
The guy was too intimidated by Disney's legal threats to talk about it, but I think from the way the images were pulled from Imgur suggests the use of bogus DMCA notices.
Ah, but Axel Springer is innovating, Mike.
The suits aren't intended to get the apps off the market but to drain the resources (time, energy, money) of the developers. This bullying is designed to be a deterrent which wills care others away from developing similar apps.
And here's another wrinkle.
The copyright has already expired in countries with death plus fifty copyright terms. I for one would love to see someone in Canada challenge this rights grab.
And that is what the court did in its original ruling, yes.
It would be a shame if something happened to it.
This is exactly what i was going to post. There are consequences for breaking a contract, as iFixit learned the hard way.
"If ebook platforms and technology were more open, it's quite conceivable that we'd be experiencing a different kind of ebook revolution right now."
Ah, but we do have an open ebook platform. It's called Epub, and while the open concept worked at first, eventually things went awry. The latest version of Epub, Epub3, has so many innovative features suggested by so many contributors that it is effectively nonfunctional.
We're approaching the 4th anniversary of the Epub3 specs being finalized, and yet support remains sporadic at best. Epub3 is so complicated that (according to the EpubTest website) Apple only supports about 60% of the spec. Google supports less, and Kobo supports somewhere between 54% and 65% (depending on the app).
In comparison, Apple released its proprietary form of Epub3 (it's called iBooks) in early 2012, and released a tool to make that format (iBooks Author).
Amazon also has its own response to Epub3 (it's called KF8). That was announced in late 2011, beta-launched on the first-gen Fire tablet that year, and released to the world in January 2012.
Far from ebook innovation being held back by closed and proprietary formats, it would seem to me that the closed ebook formats are more successful and more functional due to the fact that they are closed.
And while this open/closed conclusion might not apply in all situations, it does in ebooks because the real problem isn't open-ness but technical complications and market disinterest. Consumers don't really want ebooks that are more complicated that the paper books they buy, so there's no demand to push innovation forward.
P.S. I edit a blog called The Digital Reader. This is my area of expertise, so I know what I am talking about.
For those who haven't seen the movie, it's more or less like someone took the idea in this XKCD comic seriously:
https://xkcd.com/311/
It is a gloriously unique action film. It is so different from the average action film that I honestly can't tell yo if it is good or not.
PETA doesn't have a case, and they don't have a good argument for why copyright law should be rewritten.
Copyrights exist as a way of rewarding creators and encouraging them to produce more works. If the monkey gets this copyright, will it be inspired to take more photos?
Will other monkeys be inspired to take of photography or another art form?
No? Then there's no point in upsetting existing law.
But wouldn't this interpretation of French law also make used book saled illegal as well?
"RaGaPa's tech loads the page via the hotspot, then make three edits over HTTP: the injection of an advertising style sheet, the loading a backup advertisement (in case the user's browser has disabled Javascript), and the injection of a pair of scripts for managing advertisement selection and loading."
So this is clearly piracy, right?
"if he'd run into a stick-up artist"
But I thought that was what happened?
Yep.
"Hey, that's a nice shop you got there. It would be a shame if something happened to it."
Does that mean 18 months identity theft protection on top of the other two offers of 18 month identity theft protection?
I ask because I have letters dated 3 September and 22 March which detail two previous hacks (say the word and I will scan and post them).
So is the identity theft protection offered concurrently or consecutively, do you think?
According to a lawyer friend of mine who went through a divorce, the IP created during a marriage is owned by both spouses.
If the photo was taken during the marriage then Rosie has the right to post it.
Then again, IANAL so could someone back me up on this?
" But he doesn't live there any more (and the Estate is in the UK)."
According to the estate's website, the US agent is based in Evanston, a suburb of Chicago.
And the estate is suing in New Mexico. I'll let you do the math.
Just so you know, Cullins clarified on Twitter than he did not write the screenplay; the filing is wrong.
And did anyone else notice that all of the infringement claims mention the book, but not the movie?
"It seems that many citizens are getting emails accusing them of illegally selling unwanted eBooks."
I've only seen the one email. Do you have any additional sources?
Also, this story isn't nearly as simple as you make it sound.
When the resale of ebook was legalized in the Netherlands in a ruling back in January, the judge attached conditions to the resale which were intended to reduce the chance of piracy. These ebook(s) were being sold through the Dutch equivalent of Ebay, and so the sales may have been illegal.