OT: Which is better: XP or 2000? > Another Piracy Discussion

[Fyron]

They do have something "to do with the concept of being compensated for your work" when the worker and the person demanding compensation are two different parties, and when the demander is a megacorp demanding that everyone pay them as often as they can get away with, for as long as they can get away with, when it's utterly impractical and counterproductive to assert such rights in the face of the realities of broadcast media and ubiquitous technology such as computers on a worldwide network.

Either way, you still have no right to their work, unless they give you that right, either through free distribution or a legal license to possess and use it.

I do not agree. Sharing ideas is not stealing, even if you heard the idea from someone else, as long as you don't claim the idea was thought up by you. Creative people should be rewarded for sharing their ideas, art, music (etc), in the first place, and if they can think of reasonable and practical ways to limit the way they share their work with others so as to make more money from them, fine. However, I believe that in general it should be the resonsibility of the vendor (not the government) to maintain control of their own media.

Sharing ideas is not stealing, no. Sharing physical copies of a very specific set of "ideas" (such as a song) that you have no right to share is stealing, however. Even downloading a song is stealing, as it is still a physical copy of the song (electrons and circuits are quite physical).

Where the heck did the government come into this? It has always been the responsibilty of the vendor to maintain control! The only role the government plays is to provide courst in which the vendor can have a legal means to strike back at those that would wrongfully steal their product (rather than doing something nasty like breaking their legs or some such ).

With media such as pop music, the crap is broadcast via radio throughout the planet, including into private houses, and it is played in public places. In neither case is there a contract between the sender and receiver.

Sure there is. There is a contract between the owner of the music and the person that is playing it over the radio.

Reception and recording devices are not illegal to own and use (yet?). The original creator has already received their miniscule fraction of a percent. It's silly to say someone can't tape a broadcast and replay it.

It is actually quite illegal to record anything off of the radio. Has been for many decades in the US at least.

Illegal to fast forward past ads? BS!

Again, you have absolutely no right to watch whatever program it is. It is a privelege granted to you by the broadcasting networks.

When does it ever become something that the public is allowed to share? Never?

When it is released into public domain by the owner, or when enough time for the copyright to expire has passed.

[Fyron]

Originally posted by JayBdey:
I think they way this board works is screwy, it just seems unnatural to have the newest post at the top. Everyone may not like that feature but that doesn't make wrong. You have to choose one way to do things, and someone will complain that the way you chose isn't their preference.

Exactly. The option to choose how to sort is always a good thing to have though... too bad Shrapnel gives browsers no option.

[evader]

I like Xp I use it at home and work. Speaking strictly from a network administrator point of view I like xp. Less having to work around some of the securtity issues in 2000

Also Xp solved the NT bug.

Granted it now has and XP bug now but that is olay only hit that once or twice

[PvK]

Originally posted by JayBdey:
The way it sorts files is fine.

I think they way this board works is screwy, it just seems unnatural to have the newest post at the top. Everyone may not like that feature but that doesn't make wrong. You have to choose one way to do things, and someone will complain that the way you chose isn't their preference.

That's why both this BBS and XP should include an option for which way to sort. There doesn't have to be only one choice.

PvK

[PvK]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
... Either way, you still have no right to their work, unless they give you that right, either through free distribution or a legal license to possess and use it.

The question is what kinds of laws are reasonable to control the distribution. I'd say broadcasting songs everywhere in radio and sound waves is definitely "free distribution".

...
Where the heck did the government come into this? It has always been the responsibilty of the vendor to maintain control! The only role the government plays is to provide courst in which the vendor can have a legal means to strike back at those that would wrongfully steal their product (rather than doing something nasty like breaking their legs or some such ).

The government came into it when corps started trying to get laws to support BS like the right of a corporation to own exclusive copyrights to "intellectual property" forever.

quote:

---

With media such as pop music, the crap is broadcast via radio throughout the planet, including into private houses, and it is played in public places. In neither case is there a contract between the sender and receiver.

Sure there is. There is a contract between the owner of the music and the person that is playing it over the radio.

---

In a just legal system, that contract can't be binding on the people who don't sign it or even know about it, but who just get bombarded by the music anyway. It's the so-called owner's responsibility to limit distribution, and they do the opposite, freely distributing it without any contract involved.

quote:

---

Reception and recording devices are not illegal to own and use (yet?). The original creator has already received their miniscule fraction of a percent. It's silly to say someone can't tape a broadcast and replay it.

It is actually quite illegal to record anything off of the radio. Has been for many decades in the US at least.

---

Even if true, that's preposterous.

quote:

---

Illegal to fast forward past ads? BS!

Again, you have absolutely no right to watch whatever program it is. It is a privelege granted to you by the broadcasting networks.

---

Only in a system where public freedom has been sold to corporations. If someone broadcasts a signal into a living room, the resident has every right to receive it and do whatever they want with it. There is no contract or just law that can say otherwise.

PvK

[JayBdey]

I believe you could change the way it sorts, but it would not be simple to do.

Even if it is illegal to record things from the radio, no one cares, and when no one follows a law it becomes meaningless. Like filesharing, yes it's illegal but everyone does it anyway.

[Fyron]

No... everyone does not do it anyways. There are many people that do not do it. Bandwagon arguments are just silly. Everyone smokes, so why don't you? Everyone is jumping off that cliff, so why don't you?