You're reading more criticism into that than I really feel. I just answered a question. And my original point was merely that while the article makes it almost sound like this ruling was final, it isn't. The war will be entering its second battle soon.
FriendOfDeSoto
joined 3 years ago
If we only look at content available on DVD until about the mid 00s still torrenting about the ether today, I'm sure the majority are ripped from rentals. I had friends who basically bled a rental place dry.
There is no European standard. A huge chunk of Europe gets their content dubbed (or narrated) anyway. And for everything else, sometimes they block other preexisting credits, sometimes they don't.
Hero isn't a title for life. His willingness to fuck his own life up to reveal NSA secrets to the world was heroic. Him staying in Russia with everything they've done more recently is decidedly less so.
We want to judge him by absolute categories like morals and convictions. And that's unfair because nobody is that pristinely moral all the time. I get that after his 007-like escape to Hong Kong, he would choose the easier way out now. If that means tacitly approving of Russia's illegal attack on their neighbor then so be it. I think his morals compelled him to release the surveillance secret to the world. And the experience has sufficiently dulled any moral urges. Combine that with a limited list of choices of where else to go. A true superhuman hero would not want to stay where he once sought asylum if that country was itself responsible for hundreds of thousands of people seeking asylum elsewhere. As I said, hero isn't a title for life.
Libre Office.
So this was the regional court (Landgericht). The next one is the superior regional court (Oberlandesgericht) where Google will appeal now. Since I don't see any issues of the Bavarian constitution relevant to this case, the next one up is probably the federal court of justice (Bundesgerichtshof). And there is a small chance that either Google or the courts along the way decide to throw this to the EU court of justice.
Most decisions like this get suspended upon appeal, completely or partially, until people give up or there are no more courts to pester. But every appeal will be taken seriously and goes into review at the court whether there is merit to it. That takes time. And Google has the money for a frivolous tour through the courts. And then there is the danger of court ping-pong where the superior court sends this back with notes to the regional. Whose ruling may be appealed again, etc.
On Lemmy you're your own algorithm. I assume you already know what you're thinking.
Google can challenge the court’s ruling. As of writing, Google hasn’t decided whether it will appeal the verdict.
This article is out of date because Google has decided to appeal in the meantime.
This verdict is not legally effective yet. And it may never be. On the high seas and in a German courtroom, the people say, you're in God's hand. The next higher court can send this back to the lower court or could overrule it all together. And if they don't do any of that, Google can go to the next higher court. Every appeal will add anywhere from 6 months to 2 years to the timeline. By the time this gets a final ruling Skynet may have killed us all.
A Canadian singer/songwriter could surely do something with an article talking shit about so-called AI having a so-called AI bullet point summary at the top. Don't you think?
You are going to run into a self defense deadend there.
And spray paint may be used for graffiti.
Bootleg records were a thing in Europe in the days of reel to reel tape as the only alternative. It wasn't so much that people did it privately but people would try to make a buck through re-sale and especially on flea markets where oversight by the law was virtually nonexistent. Rare records have always been a thing. Bootleggers tried to profit off it.
I was bequeathed my parents' record collection of about 200 LPs. One was a bootleg they kept, some rare Beatles stuff. Other ones were thrown away because the quality was bad or would have been deteriorating to a point where it became unlistenable.
This sounds like an interesting conspiracy theory. I would just say there are plenty of reasons why people shouldn't use Windows. The JE angle isn't necessary.
The man wasn't so much into mass surveillance and hacking as ingratiating himself to other rich people. He did that by handling their finances and reducing their tax bills. Or by providing girls and young women to be abused. He did and collected favors. He amassed influence. He may have crossed paths with people responsible for Windows. But I don't think the product is tainted by that. Microsoft didn't need JE for that.