![](/i/fill.gif) |
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Jim Henderson wrote:
> That's why it would be more correct/proper to answer "John and I will be
> attending" (still passive voice, but the subject is unified between
> discourse and sentence).
Sure. It just wasn't a *wrong* sentence, like "John and me will come" would be.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Serving Suggestion:
"Don't serve this any more. It's awful."
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 21/01/2011 7:11 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> What were we talking about?;-)
>
No idea. Now.
>>> >> I keep forgetting that you've got 20 years on me. Shame on me, must be
>>> >> that old memory thing.:-)
>>> >>
>> > What did you say?
> I'm not sure.:)
>
What!
I heard that. Pardon?
>> > Shame, but our loss is Oregon's gain. Head 'em up, move 'em out.
>> > http://tinyurl.com/67bqthx
> Nice of you to say - who knows, maybe the rules will change while it's
> still feasible for us. I blame Cameron (though that's largely "just
> because").
>
I blame Cameron, too. ;-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 21/01/2011 7:42 PM, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> That's why it would be more correct/proper to answer "John and I will
>> be attending" (still passive voice, but the subject is unified between
>> discourse and sentence).
>
> Sure. It just wasn't a *wrong* sentence, like "John and me will come"
> would be.
>
Rude as well ;-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> On 1/20/2011 2:10 PM, Darren New wrote:
>> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>>> you could, for legit use, photocopy pages out of a book, for a
>>> classroom, or to show someone, etc., as long as you don't *sell* the
>>> book, or its pages, to someone else.
>>
>> That's not actually the case, and never has been.
>>
> Fair use. You mention it yourself soon after.
Yes. But it's not just "if you're not selling it, it's OK." That's a common
mistake people have. Photocopying an entire article out of a magazine and
giving it out to your class for free is *not* fair use.
> All well and good, but, in a practical sense, this is meaningless for
> "digital" content.
Not really. People just get in trouble because they're making copies
illegally. Show me someone who has been sued for ripping a CD he owns so he
can listen to it himself, without giving either to anyone else.
>> Yes. That's called "public performance", and it's not one of the legal
>> rights you get when you purchase the content.
>>
> Oddly, reading a book isn't "public performance". Even if you put it
> under a projector it probably wouldn't be. On the other hand.. plug your
> iPad into a big display on a wall... Would it?
Note that it's more "public" in question than "performance". Certainly
getting up on stage in front of a crowd and reading poetry from a book is
public performance.
>>> They could, in principle, even deny you the right to what you already
>>> have, if they put in a clause for it, rent it to you (I mean WTF),
>>> and, more to the point, stop supporting the device, in effect, denying
>>> your right to ***everything*** you bought that is on it.
>>
>> This isn't true, as I understand it. I'm sure there are loopholes and
>> such, and that it's more complex than either of us are giving credit
>> for, but the intention isn't to keep you from playing stuff you legally
>> own.
>>
> The biggest "loophole" is, if the software stops working, or the server
> goes down, even if they promised to let you replace a copy, if you lost
> the local one, you lose the thing you bought. So, no, I am quite correct
> in this.
You were talking about something different. I was talking about the
legality, you're talking about the technology.
> Same with "giving/selling the original". Try that with an eBook...
That's certainly harder without support from the vendor.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Serving Suggestion:
"Don't serve this any more. It's awful."
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:42:55 -0800, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> That's why it would be more correct/proper to answer "John and I will
>> be attending" (still passive voice, but the subject is unified between
>> discourse and sentence).
>
> Sure. It just wasn't a *wrong* sentence, like "John and me will come"
> would be.
Correct.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:46:36 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>> > What did you say?
>> I'm not sure.:)
>>
> What!
> I heard that. Pardon?
I said "Duck Season!" ;-)
>>> > Shame, but our loss is Oregon's gain. Head 'em up, move 'em out.
>>> > http://tinyurl.com/67bqthx
>> Nice of you to say - who knows, maybe the rules will change while it's
>> still feasible for us. I blame Cameron (though that's largely "just
>> because").
>>
>>
> I blame Cameron, too. ;-)
I'm not surprised. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 21/01/2011 7:51 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> What!
>> > I heard that. Pardon?
> I said "Duck Season!";-)
>
Oh!No! You didn't
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:55:18 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 21/01/2011 7:51 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> What!
>>> > I heard that. Pardon?
>> I said "Duck Season!";-)
>>
>>
> Oh!No! You didn't
You sure about that? After all, you said you didn't hear what I
said....maybe you did after all. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 21/01/2011 8:10 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:55:18 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 21/01/2011 7:51 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> What!
>>>>> I heard that. Pardon?
>>> I said "Duck Season!";-)
>>>
>>>
>> Oh!No! You didn't
>
> You sure about that? After all, you said you didn't hear what I
> said....maybe you did after all. ;-)
>
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'bang.jpg' (27 KB)
Preview of image 'bang.jpg'
![bang.jpg](/povray.off-topic/attachment/%3C4d39e8c0%40news.povray.org%3E/bang.jpg?preview=1)
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 20:12:42 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> [graphic "BANG!"]
LOL
That would explain the hearing loss. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |