Comment: secret standards? (Score 2) 87
Comment: Re:I use my iPhone very judiciously (Score 1) 254
Comment: Re:Make it static. (Score 1) 586
If I were purporting you represent you in these conversations with my lover, then I think you would have some right to know what I was saying. In democratic societies there are serious limits to what can be negotiated in private specifically because the population DOES have significant rights to know about them. That is how it should be. Too much has been negotiated in private. It is not right and it is time for that to stop.
New Material Can Store Vast Amounts of Energy 253
from the ok-let's-squash-more-stuff dept.
Comment: Re:Is tecnically feasible? (Score 4, Insightful) 208
Copyright infringement is already illegal, like murder.
This is more like thinking a ban on the sale of hunting knives will prevent murder. Actually it is a little more like telling the transit company that they can't have transit routes that pass by one store that sells knives, but doing nothing about people walking there or taking a taxi, or even the other stores.
Totally lame.
Nexus One Name Irks Philip K. Dick's Estate 506
from the acting-like-a-dick dept.
Comment: Re:Yes!!! (Score 1) 145
I don't think it is unreasonable to have some type of expiration date or balance reduction time limit on gift cards, as long as it isn't too soon.
They already do. It's called inflation.
Comment: Re:TOR (Score 1) 643
Your personal freedoms and right to anonymity end when you use equipment that is not your own (but your company) and you are doing it while on the clock for purposes other than those tasked to you while on the clock.
BS
By that token, even your home computer can be censured by your ISP, because hey, you're using their equipment to transmit the message. You also need to be careful what you say on the phone at work, or who you talk to. even during your breaks because it is company equipment you know. This excuse for expunging peoples freedoms is used frequently and is often even promoted by many of the people on this site who otherwise are against unreasonable limitations of freedom. I don't buy it, and no one else should either.
My question is would he have been fired if the school knew what he was doing, but he posted a less offensive message?
Are Game Publishers a Necessary Evil, Or Just Necessary? 173
from the everybody-loves-ea-right dept.
Comment: Re:Always about the money. (Score 1) 260
They should have enough by now to start their own country.
Don't they already own one? http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/31/microsoft_screw_google/
Comment: Re:Obligatory Open Source comment (Score 3, Informative) 260
Hell Yeah, Have you ever tried to buy a computer without windows on it? It is always cheaper to by a windows machine and wipe the OS then it is to buy a NoOS machine.
+ - Company uses DMCA to take down second-hand softwar->
The suit was filed by Timothy Vernor, a seller on eBay, after Autodesk, citing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, asked eBay to remove some of its software products that Vernor had listed for sale there, and later to ban him from the site.
Vernor had not illegally copied the software but was selling legitimate CDs of the products secondhand. For that reason, he argued, he was not infringing Autodesk's copyright.
Autodesk countered that because it licences the software, rather than selling it outright, a licensee does not have the right to resell its products."
Link to Original Source
Comment: Re:haha (Score 1) 319
do I believe that a person should have a monopoly over the products of the labor of his/her own mind? Absolutely. Society has no right to something that someone has created. It is the property of the person/company that created it.
That is only true for as long as the person who created it keeps it to themselves. As soon as they allow it to become part of the culture, then they have to be willing to give up some control over it, and eventually all control. When it becomes part of the culture it is no longer their sole possession, they have conceded to share it with the world, and they must therefore also concede some of the ownership rights too.
Once works become part of our culture people will naturally use those works to reinterpret that same culture. Witness YouTube. People have to be free to create derived works and share them otherwise we have what I guess could be referred to as cultural tyranny.