Sorry, but look and feel and rules and game design -- are not subject to copyright. Only a very specific expression is.
That means something that just looks "similar" is not infringing.
There might be very well a case for infringement of so-called design patents (look & feel) or even trademarks, but if Moonton programmed its games themselves and made the artwork themselves, there cannot be a copyright infringement.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3eeJZOUMAAW-Ew.jpg
Number 1, 2, 3, 7 and 12.
It's like the robber barons of the 19th century are resurrecting. And they demand that they must be able to create monopolies, corner markets and corrupt government. All to help the poor of course.
Would you really obey a gag order?
I've no idea, but I probably wouldn't, no matter what the government says, because I consider the very idea so outlandish fascist, undemocratic, and unconstitutional as can be, so I would actually consider it my absolute DUTY to reveal whatever I was told under any gag order.
Exactly. I don't really think he's NOT meaning it literally, but rather that he considers mathematical laws somehow to be flexible, because in his view everything can be bent the way policymakers want it.
If he doesn't like one study, he lets commission another one that says the opposite. Hey, it seems to work for medicine or the environment.
And I think this is a very bad sign of the general scientific prowess of politicians. They obviously do not understand science, at all.
Your Enemy? It's your own government. Since 2001 at least.
And what's "potential weapons" in that context? Just about everything has the potential to be a weapon, so at least when testing I would do it with very obvious weapons. Like machetes and guns, not box cutters and slings.
You're missing out on guitars:
https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Guitar-Quintets-LUIGI-BOCCHERINI/dp/B000ENWI6C
They're great.
Usually this comes up by goons doing astroturfing. You can tell by
a) that they try to insinuate somebody must have been paid by someone who usually does NOT have a real interest in the outcome.
b) their own position however is one that really does have a lobby in the background that might pay for astroturfing.
in this case, we have Google which doesn't really care about someone else using DRM or not. And on the other side we have at least the manufacturers of DRM which have a big interest in somebody using their products. Plus the idiots and apologists within the content industry who think DRM is necessary (even though it hurts them).
I mean the question "cui bono" is always a good one, but if the answer is "the public", then somebody arguing for astroturfing is almost certainly the astroturfer from those opposed (or an apologist for them).
It's explicitly legal here to region-unlock DVD/BlueRay players. So there's nothing "illegal" with these.
But of course it actually should be illegal to sell them WITH region locks.
Absolutely, the Air Force is clearly unsuited.
Even their ranks are ridiculous. It's clear you can't have a space vessel commanded by something like a "major" or "colonel", This has to be a "commander" or a "captain" or course.
Well, you had Nixon to gut the space program to wage war instead. NASAs budget was cut from 4% to 0.4%. And none of the later presidents, including the one in power now, have reinstated it.
We've got around 10% of all households who could order Gigabit (1000Mbit) symmetrical internet connections via fiber. From several different ISPs. A further 50% can order 100MBit (but then usually asymmetrical), mostly from a few different ISPs (we've got around 250, but some of them only cater to specific regions, customer segments or communities, like ISPs that are run by a specific town).
But of course it took one of the smaller ISPs to move in with Gbit (in the biggest cities, of course), so the bigger ISPs had to follow suit.
The law is probably illegal anyway, because it contradicts the European Convention of Human Rights.
We still would have a problem. But by publishing each and every security hole it found or got hold of, the NSA would be part of the solution, not (a big) part of the problem.
We do know what happened at Roswell.
Apart from the stealth-fighter development, it was one of the biggest psy-ops of the 25AF, where it created this alien/UFO story as a cover for the above stealth-fighter project.
And it's even more successful than anybody ever imagined.
That actually would be a great pre-emptive move to lower the likelyhood such attacks happening in the future.
However, all similar zero-day hoarding outfits like GCHQ, BND, Mossad, NBD would need to be dissolved as well. But you got to start somewhere.
And now with contents:
The problem is, surveillance and security are diametrically opposed. And having your own security compromised is what happens when you're too much occupied with spying on everyone else.
If the NSA would really want to be number one in Cybersecurity, it would need to redefine its mission to pure defence in the first place. No more surveillance and spying (which is supposed the domain of the CIA anyway), just counter-intelligence and securing infrastructure, publishing(!) vulnerabilities, eradicating zero-day exploits.
But with the prevailing mindset within the NSA right now, the NSA is firmly a black-hat with no hope of getting their own security right.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Without merit
Artwork is one thing, but rules and game mechanics are not even copyrightable.