ON THE CASE

Sunday, May 24. 2009

I write this just after drying off from my shower. What flea-barf lacks in quantity, it makes up for in smell. Yuck.
Anyway, now I'm clean. It's been an interesting week, starting the minute I got home from Beige U. for the summer. Immediately after
throwing my stuff in my room, I went across the street with Kell to Ms. Eyeshine's house.
Since I already knew that Ms. Eyeshine had three different computers since she left Manxwell Hammer, I suspected he'd gotten into her files through her E-mail account. After checking the basics, that was confirmed when she divulged her password which was a single word that was easily guessed. Just substituting a few numbers for letters didn't stop him from gaining access.
At this point I should caution everyone on both sides of the portal to be extra careful when choosing passwords. It can trip up anyone, even someone as smart and savvy as Ms. Eyeshine.
I set up a new E-mail for Ms. Eyeshine, but we kept the old compromised account which Ms. Eyeshine then filled with erroneous data. I can only guess what happened when he applied that data to his demo.
At any rate, the failure of his demonstration led to a hearing in which the terrain favored Ms. Eyeshine....mainly because she had R.L. and the full weight of Herd Thinners, Inc. protecting the investment they'd made in her. I'll write more next weekend on the outcome.
I'll be limited in my responses this week, so you'll all mainly have to talk amongst yourselves. What are intellectual property rights like over there?

Posted by Lindesfarne at 01:27 | Comments (17) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

I have several passwords that I personally can easily remember, rather than those 6Tr3FDcz kind if things that I would not remember and just lose the paper it is written on. Fortunately I just use the computer for entertainment.
You agreed to try the experiment with Fenton. Now you know it doesn't work. Please don't take it out on him, he was just trying to help.
Wired magazine for June has an interesting take on how books are going to have to be published more openly if the publishing industry is to survive. That is about all I know of intellectual property rights, sorry.

#1 Thomas Mazanec (Link) on 2009-05-24 10:02 (Reply)

Fenton offered to "conserve water", didn't he?

#2 The J.A.M. on 2009-05-24 10:20 (Reply)

Oh, I don't blame Fenton. (And no, I showered alone.)

#3 Lindesfarne Dewclaw on 2009-05-24 11:08 (Reply)

I could make a nasty remark comparing some political and semi-political personages' statements to flea barf: Smelly from the Small. (Please note that as written, this can be applied to either side of an argument or either political party. This open-ended statement was made that way intentionally.)

I was certain that you had showered alone: not only is Fenton that rarest-of-the-rare males (a true gentleman), Tree would certainly have acted as a charerone... whether you wanted her to or not.

I'm not happy about intellectual property rights on our side. The only rights that are still respected are those of patent holders... since most patent are held by corporations both large and small. All other intellectual property right seem to have blown away in the Internet wind. The same people who feel justified in downloading music (or any other creative work) because "the companies make all the money and the artists starve!" almost never even pay as much as one penny to the artist for the work they enjoy. So the company is out the money they spent to popularize the artist and the artist gets no money at all, instead of the pittance s/he would get contractually.

(Ignore the rant, if you wish: I'm just a bitter old man who doesn't like what he sees...)

#3.1 CharlieG on 2009-05-24 14:09 (Reply)

Most likely, rules and laws about intelectual property rights are the same here as where you are, Lindesfarne (although we don't have sharks for lawyers, at least not in the literal sense). As a writer for an online newspaper, I can't just up and copy something without giving credit for it.

Our paper recently covered a story concerning the rights to a name when Taser Incorporated sued Linden Lab, the owners of Second Life. They were upset over people making virtual copies of their stun guns in the metaverse and selling them without their permission, and Linden Labs not doing anything about it. They eventually dropped the lawsuit without explanation. Linden Labs hadn't done anything, though virtual merchants were changing the wording in their advertising, saying they were not endorsed by Taser.

#4 Bixyl Shuftan (Link) on 2009-05-24 14:47 (Reply)

What? Making a lawsuit over "virtual tasers"? That is just as bad as hearing the US Treasury commenting on plans to tax "virtual cash" that is traded inside "virtual worlds". Sure, if said funds go in as "real cash" and come back out, I can understand. The blood suckers are always ready to sink their fangs in to any "real" cash movement channels. But, virtual cash is as good as pretend. Might as well send a tax collector in on any game of monopoly they can find in progress and tax that, too. (Oooo...gotta get that Luxury Tax money real fast-like.)

Sorry if I made any mistakes. The television is being quite the distraction right now. Seems that Fonzie is preparing to do a motorcycle stunt over a shark tank. It's really quite the eye catcher.

#4.1 jup-reindeer on 2009-05-25 05:53 (Reply)

I doubt money was the major motivation. I imagine the reason was they were a bit sensitive about their name being used.

Both parties found themselves criticized. Taser is itself the subject of lawsuits, and it didn't take long for people to accuse them of taking it out on Second Life. Linden Lab had recently acquired an online marketplace for virtual goods, and people were selling the stun guns there, with Taser's name, leaving LL open to criticism.

Intelectual Property rights are an issue within Second Life as occasionally someone will copy someone else's work and sell it as their own.

#4.1.1 Bixyl Shuftan (Link) on 2009-05-25 13:50 (Reply)

Wow, you're really good at hacking. Do you ever use your skills for personal gains?

#5 Brandon on 2009-05-24 17:57 (Reply)

No, I use my powers for good, not evil.

#6 Lindesfarne Dewclaw on 2009-05-24 18:58 (Reply)

I'm not a lawyer and don't pretend to be one. Intellectual property rights is a contentious issue right now. On the one hand you have those that say information wants to be free. On the other you have those who want to lock it down so tight and for so long that it has a detrimental effect. As a sometimes writer who has been paid for his work (yay!), I'd like to see it protected. Yet is it really necessary to protect my writing for several decades after my death?

Over here we have several versions of intellectual protection that varies from country to country. Trademarks are the longest - I think. Patents are short and I have a rather sour view, courtesy of a relative who had an invention stolen. Copyrights are for longer periods now. Yet many times it boils down to who has the biggest lawyers and deepest pockets.

#7 Harry on 2009-05-24 20:22 (Reply)

I say that yes, it is. After all, there may be others involved that would also like to see "your" writings protected.

Case in point. Charles Shultz personally wrote into his (literally death bed) comic strip a fond farewell to all the fans of his Peanuts strip and had it well known that he wished the strip to conclude from that point, forth. The notice would print days later, outliving him.

However, with all the corporations tied in and so forth to his work, his wish was discarded as quickly as they could have done so. The news print didn't drop. They merely rewound and started running "Classics Peanuts". Merchandising actually went up. The theme park held as tight as ever.

So yes. Very important that your work stay protected, even when you are no longer able to offer it any kind of protection.

#7.1 jup-reindeer on 2009-05-25 06:01 (Reply)

Shultz asked for conclusion of Peanuts in that no new strips featuring his characters be drawn. His publishers indeed did honor that request.
At least according to Wikipedia, he didn't ask for the comic to never be rerun.

#7.1.1 Robert Langdon't on 2009-05-28 12:51 (Reply)

In the technical fields? I have little idea.

In the creative fields? Disaster.

Over the past few decades intellectual property laws for creative fields have been rewritten in favor of major corporations. The pool of public domain work has been steadily sealed off, leaving megacorporations as the writers of popular mythology. Only the internet and the Creative Commons and Open Source movements protect the zeitgeist from being completely packaged and marketed.

#8 Bookkeeper-At-Arms on 2009-05-25 04:05 (Reply)

From an artists viewpoint on intellectual property, one can hardly disagree with the view of Edgar Degas on his watching one of his paintings sell for millions at auction:

"I feel as a horse must feel when the beautiful cup is given to the jockey."

I've 'lost' several pieces of art to the internet, name and whatnot replaced or simply unlinked. It's disheartening. I appreciate that people enjoy it enough to share, but would like some tip of the hat. Those that take credit drive me berserk.

At any rate, good for Ms Eyeshine. I envy those creatives who can get the support... I just hope she doesn't pay for it in the end.

#9 Jay in the UK on 2009-05-25 11:08 (Reply)

What's this 'jockey' that you speak of and why is it getting the cup? Or, is that a term name for the trainer?

#9.1 jup-reindeer on 2009-05-27 04:53 (Reply)

I believe I might be able to explain, as I have a friend or two in the racing business.

It's a method of handicapping races: where some of the participants are naturally faster runners than the others (they race 'Wild' style, on all fours, of course), they are required to carry a certain amount of extra weight on their backs. This usually takes the form of a passenger; usually a Primate of some sort, as you wouldn't want a predator on your back.

The name 'Jock' or 'Jocko' used to be a catchall term for any sort of simian; hence, these passengers are now referred to as 'jockeys', regardless of species. So, if you've been running your heart out, only to find your prize being given to a monkey who didn't do a bloody thing during the race, you might, understandably, feel rather discouraged.

That, anyway, is what I've heard; it might be different when Humans are involved...... 7@=e

#9.1.1 Lucius Appaloosius on 2009-05-27 22:17 (Reply)

Hey I thought I saw Hammer guy. I was making my was toward the boarding house when I saw a cat trapped in a tree by a lawyer. Was that him?

#10 Dragon Lizard J (Link) on 2009-05-25 22:29 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry
Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.