Forgot your password?

typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Their Game, Their Content (Score 1) 224

When you buy a CD, you don't also buy the rights to use the music on that CD as the soundtrack for that movie you're making for general distribution. The scenarios seem parallel to me.

But do I have the right to make my own covers of the songs on the CD? Because that's a much more accurate analogy for this situation.

Comment: Re:Content-maker, not tool-maker, owns content (Score 1) 224

Nintendo's position that they own these videos, simply because their games were used in the making of these videos, is ridiculous and completely unsupportable.

In an analogous situation, if I record a screen capture of a demonstration of how to use a specific feature in Word, and post it to YouTube, Microsoft does NOT own my video simply because it owns Windows and Word. (The screen capture tool maker does not own my video either.)

The person who MAKES the video holds the copyright on the video, regardless of the tools used in the making of said video. It's that simple.

Kinda have to agree with this; Otherwise, Milwaukee, Stanley, Black & Decker, and Craftsman own all my furniture, since those are the brands of tools I used to make it.

+ - Federal Appeals Court Says Police Can't Search Cell Phone Without Warrant->

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "In a decision that's almost certainly going to result in this issue heading up to the Supreme Court, the Federal 1st Circuit Court of Appeals today ruled that police can't search your phone when they arrest you without a warrant. That's contrary to most courts' previous findings in these kinds of cases where judges have allowed warantless searches through cell phones."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:They should ask about health (Score 1) 173

People are assaulted all the time. Hopefully those assailants will be found guilty and a civil suit can be used to recover damages.

So, nothing to say about the criminal pervert secretly taking pictures of people's cocks? Some may find that philosophy telling...

FYI, some states, like the one I live in, have castle laws that deny other rights to those in the process of commissioning a crime. Thus, if a person is actively breaking the law by making illegal, lewd recordings of others, they will enjoy no such legal protections.

I would say, better to err on the safe side and take those stupid goggles off before entering a private area.

Comment: Re:huh what? (Score 1) 173

explain to me again the parallels between street view and glass. I think we'll avoid a similar privacy breach by not being even remotely the same thing.
  Aside from that, we're talking about sticking a camera phone to your face. I don't think that really raises any new issues.

Street view cars can't go into restrooms or other 'public' places with a certain expectation of privacy.

That's my main bitch, and it's going to have to be solved culturally, not legislatively (especially considering it's already illegal to record in bathrooms).

Comment: Re:Way to be on the ball Congress. (Score 2) 173

Where were these questions when LEO and private businesses rolled out CCTV everywhere?????????

They didn't care, because there was little to no chance said CCTV apparatus would be pointed at them.

Considering the occasional "Senator caught soliciting gay sex in a public restroom" stories that pop up, I for one am not surprised.

Comment: Re:They should ask about health (Score 1) 173

What possible health effects could there be?

We know cell phones don't cause any problems and we know glasses don't seem to cause any health problems, so I think this is pretty well already covered.

Perhaps, but what about the health risks of having the shit kicked out of you by angry folks who, right or wrong, assume you're making recordings of their junk?

It'll happen, mark my words.

If you learn one useless thing every day, in a single year you'll learn 365 useless things.

Working...