Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery
and how exactly would you tell that i have it no longer on my machine without violating my privacy.
|
many many ways for apps - simple 'call home' technology on application launch - to see if more than 1 copy is 'calling home' from different locations. If you are on a laptop connecting from many locations the call home technology can ask you some 'prove who you are' questions.
As for 'data' - I clearly said that 'If you are found to still be in posession of...' - didn't say anything about actively hunting down the little fishes - just saying that if you are the object of an investigation anyways - your computers can be seized by a court order - and your 'perfect crime privacy rights' go straight out the window.
The object of this treaty is not to send every citizen to jail - but to take down the major offenders - the trickle down effect on the little fish will be huge
Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery
but 3m doesn't own the copies of microsoft windows they have installed on every machine they only licience them
that the point, your no shared backup solution would kill the sms market, or explode the cost of a corporate backup
becuase they would be forced to back up everything including the common os stuff that every machine shares.
|
again, you show your desperation to grasp at any straw that justifies your fantasy - as per the license agreement between 3m and MS - business will remain exactly as it is now - two corporations, 1 the client, 1 the provider, will set the license up so that no infractions of treaty or law will happen - NO change to exactly what is happening now. NO extra business costs - NO changes to backup or distribution - NO liabilities (as long as both parties honor the terms of the agreement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery
and if the password was weak, or easily hackable, the corporation would be liable, considering the cracking tools now available that is going to get very messy
|
more desperate straw-grasping on your part. If it is hacked then the ISP gives up the information on the 'hacker' and the 'hacker' is liable - what exactly would the corporation be liable for anyways???? public distribution of their own property???? you aren't even trying anymore...
their stuff got hacked - they patch the hole - the hacker gets pursued by the law - only one liable here is the theif.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery
tell that to all the downfall parody creators who had their works ripped down from youtube before the EFF successfully defended their rights.
do you really think those types of parodies would be protected under the abusive laws you want written, especially when many people here argued that shouldn't be considered parody (even though it met all of the 4 fair use conditions and the eff parody proved it within the video itself).
|
they would be protected just as much as they are now - nothing changes - guy in basement makes a parody - posts it - copyright owner complains - court decides if it is taken down or not - NOTHING changes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery
|
weakest link you have given to-date
writing them a check is not the same thing as 'throwing their corporate support' behind them - its a PR trick used to make them look like they want to be 'fair to all parties'. But I don't blame the weak minded from drawing the inference that you have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery
you just said you wanted to have them disconnected if they keep infringers online.
so either they will disconnect people without actual proof that they are guilty (ip address alone) or they will face loss of their own business from your side of the law, and on the other side the economic damage that was caused by wrongfully cutting off the falsely accused "infringer"
that a huge liability on both sides
talk about being caught between a rock and a hard place.
|
AGAIN -
this is not about going after every surfer in their basements - this is about going after the mass providers - get a grip on the big picture - take out the rapidshares, take out the websites that steal content to sell, the hosts that host them - take out the people that
continually post stolen digital product (no one said you will be disconnected for 1 infraction - but that you will be if you
continually do it) - and the little fish will go back to small scale 'sharing with
actual friends', not their merry band of 2 million 'internet friends'.
and life will be good.
.