Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Don't sweep it under the rug as collateral dama (Score 1) 150

Don't claim copyright on every video, this will make you guilty of perjury under the DMCA. Claim copyright on one video and then claim that every other video appears to be a derived work of that video. This is exactly the mechanism that the big studios use.

Comment: Re:Don't sweep it under the rug as collateral dama (Score 2) 150

The perjury clause doesn't say what you think it says. If I own the rights on work A, to file a notice on work B, I claim that work B infringes work A. The perjury clause kicks in only if I do not own the rights to work A (or represent the person who does). If work B doesn't infringe, then that's a matter for the courts. This is quite annoying, but it does make sense. It's clear cut if works A and B are the same, but not in the case that B is a derived work of A. A court has to decide whether the use of A in B counts under fair use or not.

The counterbalance for this is that the DMCA does indemnify YouTube if they respond to a counternotice and reinstate the work. If you, the owner of work B, think it does not infringe then you send such a notice to YouTube. I then have no further recourse against YouTube and must take you to court directly.

The problem here is that it's very easy to automate sending takedown notices, but very hard to automate sending counter-notices. Mass-sending of automated takedown notices was something that the authors of the DMCA didn't foresee and the act probably needs amending to require the notice to explicitly state (under penalty of perjury) the person who has compared the works and their reason for believing that they are infringing.

Comment: and... (Score 4, Insightful) 150

by Tom (#47435245) Attached to: "Internet's Own Boy" Briefly Knocked Off YouTube With Bogus DMCA Claim

as activists are all too aware, false copyright claims can can knock legitimate content offline.

As not only activists but almost everyone aware of the rampant abuse going on has been claiming for years, it is high time that the "under penalty of perjury" part of the DMCA claims is actually enforced. Mistakes can happen, nobody is perfect, but some companies have been taking down large amounts of content for years, repeatedly and with not even a slap on the wrist.

Comment: Re:Dimmable LEDs (Score 1) 224

by icebike (#47432221) Attached to: My most recent energy-saving bulbs last ...

Also, Lumens per watt can vary quite significantly from one to another.

Agreed. Not only in the actual usage, but also in the supposed "equivalence".

Get to know your Lumens boys and girls, because watts mean nothing anymore and we need
a new yard stick. As far as equivalence goes, 60 watts = 800ish Lumens, plus or minus any
fudge factor the manufacturer thinks they can get away with.

Oh, and years of life... Always calculated at 3 hours per day, or some silly very short period of time.
Still, I've got only a few more trips up the ladder because I don't expect any of the LEDs to fail in my remaining life time.

Comment: Re:This is great and all... (Score 1) 175

Also, in case you hadn't noticed, congress does pretty much whatever it wants of late. Interstate commerce? nah... Intrastate commerce is so much more fun to regulate. Warrants to search? nah... so much more fun to just search as is convenient. Property rights? nah... they'll take your land for commercial reuse, it's potentially much more profitable. Ex post facto law? nah... sometimes, that's just the thing. Shall make no law? Oh HELL no. Rights that shall not be infringed? Oh, ho ho ho, isn't that quaint.

"Jurisdiction" ... what a funny old word. :)

The only problem with being a man of leisure is that you can never stop and take a rest.

Working...