Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:The problem is the fuzz, not the swatters (Score 2) 569

And, just like the previous poster, you have provided no citation for this quote, and I can't seem to match it via multiple search engines. Even assuming it is true, I read this quote as more of a "some person is mentally unstable, has firearms, and has stated intentions to use them" complaint, rather than a "active shooter" call. Apple to (possibly imaginary) oranges.

Comment: Re:Makes sense (Score 1) 239

by Damarkus13 (#49256313) Attached to: FAA Says Ad-Bearing YouTube Drone Videos Constitute "Commercial Use"
You hit the nail on the head in your last paragraph. The DMCA is a horrible piece of legislation that puts a huge amount of power in the hands of copyright holders. Unless Google wants to be personally liable for your video, they have to take the video down until you assert (and take full liability for) that there is no copyright infringement in your video.

In short, yes, the DMCA has virtually eliminated fair-use in many situations, not just on YouTube.

Comment: Re:Makes sense (Score 1) 239

They're not really that lenient. If the copyright holder complains to Google, they may, at the copyright holders discretion, have ads embedded in the video and the revenue shared with the copyright holder, instead of the uploader.

This was Google's solution to the "my baby dancing to video was taken down" problem.

Make it right before you make it faster.

Working...