Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:no options? really? (Score 1) 312

...
3g/LTE is very, very far from universally available.
An Ipad?
On dialup?
Certainly, you can as a competent user probably use it that way.
Good luck training people in the OPs relatives position to use it.

As others have raised, dialup often costs per-minute.
Webmail may be a terribly expensive option.

Comment: Not quite as silly as you might think. (Score 1) 207

by queazocotal (#47897077) Attached to: Early iPhone 6 Benchmark Results Show Only Modest Gains For A8

Moores law is hitting a wall - and sharply limits the possibility of simply improving the speed of increasing the performance of single-core processors.

Interestingly however, one alternative - in addition to magical as-yet-unthought of technology is single purpose cores that remain switched off most of the time, and are only powered up to do a specific task very efficiently.

Comment: Re:ok (Score 2) 102

by queazocotal (#47884087) Attached to: Top EU Court: Libraries Can Digitize Books Without Publishers' Permission

That's not required under my reading.
The full text of the original law referred to is 'use by communication or making available, for the purpose of research or private study, to individual members of the public by dedicated terminals on the premises of establishments referred to in paragraph 2(c) of works and other subject-matter not subject to purchase or licensing terms which are contained in their collections; '

It is quite arguable that VPNing into a virtual screen of a terminal is in fact compliant with the law - as long as it does not allow >1 person to view it at once.

Comment: Re:"they will need to pay the publisher" (Score 1) 102

by queazocotal (#47884053) Attached to: Top EU Court: Libraries Can Digitize Books Without Publishers' Permission

It specifically refers in the body of the judgement to not putting libraries that had digitised books at an advantage' - so you can't digitise a book, and show it to more than one person at once.
(unless you have more than one physical copy).
If the physical copy goes away, so does your right to show it.
It's not clear you have the right in that case to keep the digital copy.

Comment: Re:Fair Use (Score 3, Interesting) 102

by queazocotal (#47884017) Attached to: Top EU Court: Libraries Can Digitize Books Without Publishers' Permission

Reading lightly the judgement at http://curia.europa.eu/juris/d... - a number of issues are raised.

It is several times noted that it's a 1:1 based on physical books.
One of the most important reasons for digitisation would be to protect physical books from being lost.
Digital books, of course, can be backed up.

The judgement does not quite help with that - if a paper book is disposed of, destroyed, or catches fire - you lose the right to at the least display it - it is not clear to me that you have any right to retain the digital copy.

"use by communication or making available, for the purpose of research or private study, to individual members of the public by dedicated terminals on the premises of establishments referred to in paragraph 2(c) of works and other subject-matter not subject to purchase or licensing terms which are contained in their collections; "

This has some problems.
If you digitise your collection, can you only provide access at the site you digitised it at?
At any building in the same complex?
At any building managed by the same entity as the original digiser?
At any library with inter-library loan arrangements with the first library?

The judgement diddn't address this, they just said the fundamental right existed.

Another major hole in the judgement is 'by communication' - unless this is separately defined - one could imagine it being OK to connect (with DRM) to some dedicated terminal which provided copies of books via your phone or tablet.

The judgement also notes that it's free for national lawmakers to permit libraries to print or give digital copies - if the original publisher is properly compensated - even if the original publisher declines this.
This could vastly free up access to some books where the publisher is unidentifiable.

Comment: Re:It also helps me.... (Score 1) 362

by queazocotal (#47859955) Attached to: BBC: ISPs Should Assume VPN Users Are Pirates

In this case - the broadcast arm of the BBC only has the rights to broadcast certain shows in certain locations.
It is violating the copyright of the original provider to use them outside agreed borders of those locations.
If you are accessing the BBC via a VPN in the UK - you are in fact violating the copyright terms - even if you are accessing a free service.

As to the point raised by a commenter - yes, of course you should be able to pay for access - but this access can't (apart from BBC self-produced content) be assumed by the BBC, it would need to be separately negotiated by the BBC.

Comment: Re:forensic 'science' (Score 1) 135

by queazocotal (#47847023) Attached to: New DNA Analysis On Old Blood Pegs Aaron Kosminski As Jack the Ripper

'This is where I think we get in trouble with forensic science. Certain things, like finger prints and DNA, can exonerate a suspect but we have seen enough analysis around here to know that it is a fallacy to think that these things prove guilt. it only proves guilt if we assume the probability of guilt is 100% initially. When comparing the sample to a database, random error can create a match under certain common circumstances.'

However, in this case, they were comparing not against a database of millions, but one of several possibilities.

Comment: Re:What the heck? (Score 2) 354

by queazocotal (#47840901) Attached to: DMCA Claim Over GPL Non-Compliance Shuts Off Minecraft Plug-Ins

This relies on the GPL 'you can't distribute at all if you can't comply with the licence' - if you distribute with a binary blob (effectively) that you have no rights to in your allegedly GPL codebase - then you're in violation of the GPL.

You can then come into compliance with the GPL in principle by supplying source for that blob. It is possible that the only way that compliance could be done is to release the whole of minecraft under the GPL - but the impossibilty of that does not factor into the legality of distributing.

The only way you can be forced to release source code is for a judge to compel you to release source code, after a copyright suit.
They are probably more likely to assess financial damages - rather than compelling release of source code.
I'm not aware of any compulsory release of source code ever happening.

The number of arguments is unimportant unless some of them are correct. -- Ralph Hartley

Working...