From the original article, it seems that the "free wi-fi" signs are not outdoor commercial advertising signs, like billboards, but are instead made to look like standard-issue green state signs. I can see how this could be both deceptive and confusing. I'm pretty sure I can't put up a red octagonal "garage sale" sign in my neighborhood, either. If they want to put up signs, just make them different from the state signs.
#14: "under the assumption that it would always be free"
And it always will be free. You contributed to Wikipedia, Wikipedia is still free. Bertelsmann is trying to sell a copy of something that is freely available on-line.
"how the hell do they justify turning around and then selling the content as though it belongs to them"
Actually, they are not. Bertelsmann is making their own copy, under the GFDL, and selling the copy that they made. German Wikipedia has nothing to do with Bertelsmann's decision. Frankly, I'm surprised at the number of people that just don't understand this.
He apparently uncovered some thieves in January, but I can't find anything about raising prices back then. Perhaps all the brouhaha this time is simply about much-needed publicity?
By this logic, then, one might successfully sue eHarmony for discrimination on the basis of sex, since their dropdowns do not allow women seeking women, men seeking men, or married people seeking, well, anything.
He was not profiting, and everyone knows that. He was soliciting donations to cover expenses related to hosting and distributing his work. His work, not Creative's.
You know, "The Man", it's this sort of useless, anonymous blather that has dropped TechDirt from our radar. They used to have some mild standards around here...
Hey, Techdirt is always saying how businesses need to change their dying business models to adapt to new conditions, instead of changing laws to protect their old ways of doing business. Sounds like the Star is doing just that. They've found a new way to make money, shilling for big name brands. What's the problem?
That's the real advantage to faith-based anything; true believers still believe, in spite of concrete evidence right before their eyes. Left Behind Games shouldn't worry about the negative reviews; both they and their customers should just have faith and believe that the games are as good as they say they are.
I can assure you, by the time the "independent gaming commission" sees the "evidence" provided by the casino, it will be a software glitch. If these scams continue to hold up under scrutiny, it will become a standard feature of casino software to auto-generate a 'glitch' whenever the big payoff happens. That won't keep determined gamblers from gambling, since most people lose most of the time anyway.
The product that was being sold was still the physical media. It was in a different form, but was still basically the same product. The physical media was what was sold with the content being the incentive to make you buy that physical item.
Not true. I would never pay $15-$20 for either a CD or a tape; it's the content I'm paying for. Just like I don't care whether a Picasso is on canvas or paper; it's the art, not the media, that you're buying. Especially when you consider that the media typically costs a small fraction of the sale price.
RSS
Twitter
Profit (as Michael Brutsch)
The only people who advocate the current system of "intellectual property" are those who in some way profit from it. Luckily, the reverse is not true.
Oddly, there used to be laws against this (as Michael Brutsch)
Champerty, anyone?
(as Michael Brutsch)
"So how can his heirs claim that everyone will suffer if those works aren't protected? "
Because they, too, wish to live off of his works, and feel entitled to do so.
Not a billboard (as Michael Brutsch)
From the original article, it seems that the "free wi-fi" signs are not outdoor commercial advertising signs, like billboards, but are instead made to look like standard-issue green state signs. I can see how this could be both deceptive and confusing. I'm pretty sure I can't put up a red octagonal "garage sale" sign in my neighborhood, either. If they want to put up signs, just make them different from the state signs.
Kia...? (as Michael Brutsch)
Who are they again? They make shoes or something, right?
You just don't get it, do you (as Michael Brutsch)
#14: "under the assumption that it would always be free"
And it always will be free. You contributed to Wikipedia, Wikipedia is still free. Bertelsmann is trying to sell a copy of something that is freely available on-line.
"how the hell do they justify turning around and then selling the content as though it belongs to them"
Actually, they are not. Bertelsmann is making their own copy, under the GFDL, and selling the copy that they made. German Wikipedia has nothing to do with Bertelsmann's decision. Frankly, I'm surprised at the number of people that just don't understand this.
where's yer seein-eye dog, ump? (as Michael Brutsch)
Wow, Mike. Never seen you call one this badly before. Perhaps you'd like to be an official for a Dallas Mavericks game? ;)
What happened last time? (as Michael Brutsch)
He apparently uncovered some thieves in January, but I can't find anything about raising prices back then. Perhaps all the brouhaha this time is simply about much-needed publicity?
Let's extend this logic (as Michael Brutsch)
By this logic, then, one might successfully sue eHarmony for discrimination on the basis of sex, since their dropdowns do not allow women seeking women, men seeking men, or married people seeking, well, anything.
Re: I think this seems off, Mike. (as Michael Brutsch)
He was not profiting, and everyone knows that. He was soliciting donations to cover expenses related to hosting and distributing his work. His work, not Creative's.
Free market! (as Michael Brutsch)
That'll teach the ESA, huh?
Re: Re: Re: Review by InkChemist (as Michael Brutsch)
You know, "The Man", it's this sort of useless, anonymous blather that has dropped TechDirt from our radar. They used to have some mild standards around here...
Get what you ask for... (as Michael Brutsch)
Hey, Techdirt is always saying how businesses need to change their dying business models to adapt to new conditions, instead of changing laws to protect their old ways of doing business. Sounds like the Star is doing just that. They've found a new way to make money, shilling for big name brands. What's the problem?
Unfortunately, it works (as Michael Brutsch)
Black Friday has already taken theirs down. That's the beauty of a society run by lawyers.
Faith-based advantage (as Michael Brutsch)
That's the real advantage to faith-based anything; true believers still believe, in spite of concrete evidence right before their eyes. Left Behind Games shouldn't worry about the negative reviews; both they and their customers should just have faith and believe that the games are as good as they say they are.
(as Michael Brutsch)
"why waste government, law enforcement and judicial time and money over what's really a corporate problem?"
Because that's what the politicos get paid for - shilling for corporate interests.
Oh. That was a rhetorical question, wasn't it?
Re: And to think... (as Michael Brutsch)
You don't really want to work for an employer like that anyway...
As a programmer for 28 years (as Michael Brutsch)
I can assure you, by the time the "independent gaming commission" sees the "evidence" provided by the casino, it will be a software glitch. If these scams continue to hold up under scrutiny, it will become a standard feature of casino software to auto-generate a 'glitch' whenever the big payoff happens. That won't keep determined gamblers from gambling, since most people lose most of the time anyway.
Stay out (as Michael Brutsch)
Remember, Freedom isn't Free! So if you want to keep your Freedom, stay out of this Free country!
Re: Re: (as Michael Brutsch)
The product that was being sold was still the physical media. It was in a different form, but was still basically the same product. The physical media was what was sold with the content being the incentive to make you buy that physical item.
Not true. I would never pay $15-$20 for either a CD or a tape; it's the content I'm paying for. Just like I don't care whether a Picasso is on canvas or paper; it's the art, not the media, that you're buying. Especially when you consider that the media typically costs a small fraction of the sale price.