Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - 6 month subscription of Pandora One at 46% off. ×

Comment Re:Wasn't the MPAA who shut down the network (Score 1) 323

That's crap... What the MPAA did was completely legitimate. Someone illegally downloaded their movie, and they informed them of the infringement. It would be no different than if a local government was pirating copies of MS Office, and MS demanded that they either removed the software or pay them for it.

A government that DOESN'T fear corporations and its constituents is what I consider scary. I'm not saying corporations are always in the right, and that the government doesn't have the right to smack them down when they misbehave... a corporation is BY LAW given many of the legal protections individuals are given. As such, the law applies to them, and they are protected by the law. It's a two way street. If corporations fear the government and the government does not fear the corporations, then there are no longer checks on what the government can do, as there IS no recourse that the companies have if the government wrongs them. I am not arguing that it's better to have corporations not fear the government and the government fearing the corporations, as that means the corporations are above the law, however there is plenty of middle ground, and this case falls squarely in it. While much of what the MPAA does is shady, this particular action was completely within the law, and was their appropriate response.


Comment Why wireless? (Score 1) 167

Would it be too much to ask that these things not communicate wirelessly? It seems to me that this just unnecessarily multiplies the threat. (Everyone here should remember the shit storm over RFID passports). They really should use a contact based communication system in such a critical application like this. I suggest the transmitter use a small solenoid to tap (like Morse code) on a sensing plate glued to a rib.

Comment Re:... why bother? (Score 1) 113

That is, your friend should wait a few months or pay $10-$15 more.

Yea, except he's not going to pay that (and it's not "a few months" - more like "a few years" at best for a movie to drop to $10). So it's either he downloads it or he just doesn't buy it. Either way, he's not paying the MPAA's excessive fees. So what motivation is there for him to not download it? The MPAA makes the same profit either way ($0), it's costs are the same either way ($0), so the only variable is if he sees the movie / tv series or not.

It's a flawed argument that speaks as to your motiviation.

Flawed argument that people dislike excessive profit margins? Really? It's called "an oligopoly" and people always despise them, it's just that the government refuses to do anything about it because said oligopoly pays politicians too much.

You can tell the ideals of a nation by its advertisements. -- Norman Douglas