 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 11:05:14 -0800, Darren New wrote:
>
>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 15:34:56 -0800, Darren New wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>>> I think the "making available" argument more or less takes it as read
>>>>> that she acquired the files illegally as well,
>>>> Why would you say that?
>>> I haven't read anything anywhere that says that she distributed tracks
>>> from a CD that she purchased.
>> That's how they know she had them.
>
> What, that she had the CDs?
No. They knew she had the files because they downloaded them from her Kazaa
account. If she ripped them off CDs, that makes my point even moreso.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"How did he die?" "He got shot in the hand."
"That was fatal?"
"He was holding a live grenade at the time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 11:05:56 -0800, Darren New wrote:
>
>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 19:19:30 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>>>
>>>> Any "copies" are charged at a lower cost, either to the
>>>> copier, or the one receiving.
>>> How would one even collect on that, though?
>> If it's via something like a kindle, you're really transferring rights,
>> which is to say, issuing new keys from the license server. If it's not
>> DRMed, you'd have to have it phone home.
>
> Which is hard to do with nonexecutable code (such as audio tracks on a
> CD).
The code doesn't have to be executable to be DRMed. WMA files can carry
DRM. You just have to have a device that plays back the file and eventually
gets in touch with some license server.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"How did he die?" "He got shot in the hand."
"That was fatal?"
"He was holding a live grenade at the time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 15:27:42 -0800, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 11:05:14 -0800, Darren New wrote:
>>
>>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 15:34:56 -0800, Darren New wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>>>> I think the "making available" argument more or less takes it as
>>>>>> read that she acquired the files illegally as well,
>>>>> Why would you say that?
>>>> I haven't read anything anywhere that says that she distributed
>>>> tracks from a CD that she purchased.
>>> That's how they know she had them.
>>
>> What, that she had the CDs?
>
> No. They knew she had the files because they downloaded them from her
> Kazaa account. If she ripped them off CDs, that makes my point even
> moreso.
Well, if she ripped them from CDs, then it would be a clear case of
"making available". If she downloaded them, she may not have had the
intent (ie, may have been unaware of how the technology works).
Not that from a legal standpoint that matters much.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 15:28:33 -0800, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 11:05:56 -0800, Darren New wrote:
>>
>>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 19:19:30 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Any "copies" are charged at a lower cost, either to the
>>>>> copier, or the one receiving.
>>>> How would one even collect on that, though?
>>> If it's via something like a kindle, you're really transferring
>>> rights, which is to say, issuing new keys from the license server. If
>>> it's not DRMed, you'd have to have it phone home.
>>
>> Which is hard to do with nonexecutable code (such as audio tracks on a
>> CD).
>
> The code doesn't have to be executable to be DRMed. WMA files can carry
> DRM. You just have to have a device that plays back the file and
> eventually gets in touch with some license server.
True....though technically I was commenting on "it phon[ing] home" not
the player phoning home. Splitting hairs.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I consider myself to be moderately good at explaining complex ideas.
>> What I utterly suck at is writing anything of any significant size.
>
> That just comes with practice. Practice that includes feedback that you
> learn from, that is.
Yes, well, given that 98% of everything I write will never be seen by
another pair of eyes, that's not likely to change.
> That also comes with practice and feedback. What really helps is to
> understand your audience - which requires asking prospective members of
> your audience what their experience is in the field you're presenting on.
Usually the answer is "for ****'s sake, we don't /care/ about Haskell!"
> GIYF:
>
> http://www.wikihow.com/Become-a-Sound-Engineer
I'm loving the "warning - sound engineers earn peanuts" bit. Nice to know!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27/01/2011 07:02 PM, Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> not good at deciding what order to explain stuff in.
>
> When you know a whole bunch about a subject, that can happen. It just
> takes practice. And writing an outline first.
Trouble is, for a large, complex topic, you usually find that you have
to explain X before Y will make any sense. Except that instead of being
a simple hierarchical tree of information, what you have is a tangled
dependency web, and finding a suitable path through it is an NP-complete
problem. Trying to find such a path that doesn't also involve jumping
from topic to topic in a potentially baffling way only makes it harder.
Add to that the psychology of keeping your readers interested and having
a sense that they're getting somewhere, and...
...well, I end up drafting and re-drafting in an endless cycle which
never produces a document of more than a few dozen pages. :-(
> If you want to get good at this, write a page-long lesson on anything
> you like, twice a week, starting with an outline. In a few weeks, you
> should be able to finish the whole essay in 20 minutes.
Writing a page or two isn't too hard. (Parsec, anyone?) Writing
something that's 30 pages long is another matter.
> Show it to someone else each time, and ask where it was confusing.
I don't know anybody who is this patient.
>> I haven't had the pleasure of working with a professional editor yet.
>
> That's what a good high school is for. ;-)
Now I'm going to have to look up what the UK-equivalent term is...
>> Yeah. Logically, there must be books and courses and things somewhere
>> which explain how to do this properly.
>
> I would think you learn by sitting with other professional sound
> engineers. I wouldn't think "sound engineer" is something you could read
> about.
You're probably right about that.
Even if this isn't the case, it's unlikely that the necessary material
can be accessed for free. It's more likely you'd have to pay money for that.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28/01/2011 9:29 AM, Invisible wrote:
>> That's what a good high school is for. ;-)
>
> Now I'm going to have to look up what the UK-equivalent term is...
English equivalent. They have high schools in Scotland, I went to one.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Does that explain it?
>
> It doesn't explain why I am not allowed to watch iPlayer.
(I assume it's because you don't live in UK)
The rights the BBC has for programming is totally separate to how the
license fee system is set up. For almost all the TV programs the BBC
don't have (and don't want) the rights to show it outside the UK.
They'd rather sell these off to foreign broadcasters (if they own the
content) or simply only pay for the UK rights. The only way it is
possible for iPlayer to exist is if it's only accessible to UK residents.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 1/27/2011 9:47 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 19:19:30 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>
>> Any "copies" are charged at a lower cost, either to the
>> copier, or the one receiving.
>
> How would one even collect on that, though?
>
> Jim
With the *newer* technologies. I am talking like how E-books are like,
pretty much, always connected to the network, and the like. For most
current systems, it won't work.
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Yes, well, given that 98% of everything I write will never be seen by
> another pair of eyes, that's not likely to change.
And what we're telling you is that has to change.
> Usually the answer is "for ****'s sake, we don't /care/ about Haskell!"
You need to read something other than Haskell blogs.
Read a book, and write a book report, and ask someone to critique it for
you. Everything you've written and posted here, even the wall-of-text
posts, has been interesting, even tho I looked at Haskell and said "huh,
interesting" and ignored it from then on.
Have you read no fiction in your life that when you got to the end you said
"wow, that was pretty cool. I thought about something I wouldn't have
thought of." Have you read no science article where you said "I bet in 50
years this will..."?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"How did he die?" "He got shot in the hand."
"That was fatal?"
"He was holding a live grenade at the time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
