Demonizing fat

On 5/3/2004 11:39 AM, Ignoramus1563 wrote:
A NY Times article. Looks like written by medically ignorant
psychology freaks.

And posted by someone ignorant of copyright law...

--
jmk in NC

On 5/3/2004 12:44 PM, Ignoramus1563 wrote:
In article , jmk wrote:

On 5/3/2004 11:39 AM, Ignoramus1563 wrote:

A NY Times article. Looks like written by medically ignorant
psychology freaks.


And posted by someone ignorant of copyright law...


I am relatively well versed in copyright law, as a layman, but I
despise it. I applaud the work of people who undermine copyright
laws by means of clever technical solutions.

Hmmm. I suppose that you completely disregard other laws as well then, huh?

--
jmk in NC

"jmk" wrote in message
...
Hmmm. I suppose that you completely disregard other laws as well then,
huh?

Most people do that and chose only to respect a subset of the laws offered
by their nation. Most people don't respect all traffic laws, many don't
respect the laws banning smoking in some areas, many do not respect part of
the tax code (if they understand it), most parents do not respect school
segmentation laws when they require their kids to go to a school with high
rape/murder/drug rates, a great deal of people do not respect drug laws...
Mostly, people are for respecting the laws unless they annoy them.
Some of the copyright laws are stupid, it's a good thing they don't get
respected. Thankfully, some people chose not to respect some laws sometimes.
If everyone had respected all the laws during WWII, we would have sent twice
as many people to the death camps. I'm glad some people decided to be picky
about the laws they should follow back then.

"Ignoramus1563" wrote in message
...
In article , jmk wrote:
On 5/3/2004 11:39 AM, Ignoramus1563 wrote:
A NY Times article. Looks like written by medically ignorant
psychology freaks.

And posted by someone ignorant of copyright law...

I am relatively well versed in copyright law, as a layman, but I
despise it. I applaud the work of people who undermine copyright
laws by means of clever technical solutions.


I assume from this statement that you are not a producer of intellectual
works (books, music, film, software, etc.). If you were, you might have a
different perspective regarding the theft thereof.

BTW - do you also "despise" laws against shoplifting? Or, do you only
despise laws that can be broken with relative impunity?

GG

"Ignoramus1563" wrote in message
...
In article , GaryG wrote:
"Ignoramus1563" wrote in message
...
In article , jmk wrote:
On 5/3/2004 11:39 AM, Ignoramus1563 wrote:
A NY Times article. Looks like written by medically ignorant
psychology freaks.

And posted by someone ignorant of copyright law...

I am relatively well versed in copyright law, as a layman, but I
despise it. I applaud the work of people who undermine copyright
laws by means of clever technical solutions.


I assume from this statement that you are not a producer of intellectual
works (books, music, film, software, etc.). If you were, you might have
a
different perspective regarding the theft thereof.

Surely, a person's vantage point does infuence how they perceive
reality.

You are mistaken however, as I am an author of a software program that
is being used quite widely by a small community of users.

This computer program is free to use and download.

As for the gratuitous likening of sharing with theft, I do not
consider sharing to be theft, in a moral sense.

Ahhh...well, if you produced creative works for a living you might have a
different opinion. As a professional software developer who depends on
sales to pay my mortgage, I can assure you that I view "sharing" of my
products as theft.

From my perspective, "sharing" of registration keys, "cracks", and "warez"
are completely synonymous with shoplifting. Owners of grocery stores are
forced to install various security systems to prevent shoplifting. Producers
of commercial software are forced to do the same to prevent lost sales due
to "sharing". In both cases, the costs of these non-value-added security
features, and the costs of lost sales due to "pillferage" or "sharing" are
passed on to the legitimate consumers in the form of higher prices.


BTW - do you also "despise" laws against shoplifting?

I do not specifically despise laws against shoplifting.

Or, do you only despise laws that can be broken with relative
impunity?

I despise some laws that cannot be broken with impunity, as
well. (think gun control). I choose to never break gun control laws,
however, even though I despise them.

Copyright laws cannot be broken with impunity, and yet I despise them.

Why do you despise them?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
@ @ @ Please forgive my typos as my right hand is injured. @ @ @

char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}"; main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
"It's never too late to have a happy childhood."

"jmk" wrote in message
...
On 5/3/2004 11:39 AM, Ignoramus1563 wrote:
A NY Times article. Looks like written by medically ignorant
psychology freaks.

And posted by someone ignorant of copyright law...

--
jmk in NC

I am also ignorant of copyright law, apparently. As a published writer, I
assure you that nothing irks me more than to have my material used and not
referenced. However, taking a publicly available article and reposting it
to a newsgroup along with the publisher and author does not seem to violate
copyright law. Does it?

j

"Ignoramus1563" wrote in message
...
In article , jmk wrote:
On 5/3/2004 11:39 AM, Ignoramus1563 wrote:
A NY Times article. Looks like written by medically ignorant
psychology freaks.

And posted by someone ignorant of copyright law...

I am relatively well versed in copyright law, as a layman, but I
despise it. I applaud the work of people who undermine copyright
laws by means of clever technical solutions.

Apparently, you never write for publication.

Consider that I spent hours designing a HIPAA Privacy Rule compliance
product that included education for staff, forms, policies, etc. and then
sold it to clients for 300.00 - 500.00 dollars. It was all original work,
except for what I appropriately referenced and put into a format that was
easily usable by multiple health care facilities.

Consider that one friend 'copied' it for another and suddenly, I have only
sold about half the programs out there.

Or consider that I write an article for publication in an industry journal.
The next time I hear someone talk, they include one or more of my original
ideas without proper credit. Can I tell you this irks me? As a consultant,
I sell credibility!

I abhor the work of people who practice intellectual theft.

j
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
@ @ @ Please forgive my typos as my right hand is injured. @ @ @

char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}"; main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
"It's never too late to have a happy childhood."

On 5/3/2004 2:34 PM, Julianne wrote:
"jmk" wrote in message
...

On 5/3/2004 11:39 AM, Ignoramus1563 wrote:

A NY Times article. Looks like written by medically ignorant
psychology freaks.


And posted by someone ignorant of copyright law...

--
jmk in NC


I am also ignorant of copyright law, apparently. As a published writer, I
assure you that nothing irks me more than to have my material used and not
referenced. However, taking a publicly available article and reposting it
to a newsgroup along with the publisher and author does not seem to violate
copyright law. Does it?

Redistributing a quote would not be in violation. That would be fair
use if appropriately referenced. Redistributing the work in it's
entirely, however, is not considered fair use.
--
jmk in NC

"jmk" wrote in message
...
On 5/3/2004 2:34 PM, Julianne wrote:
"jmk" wrote in message
...

On 5/3/2004 11:39 AM, Ignoramus1563 wrote:

A NY Times article. Looks like written by medically ignorant
psychology freaks.


And posted by someone ignorant of copyright law...

--
jmk in NC


I am also ignorant of copyright law, apparently. As a published writer,
I
assure you that nothing irks me more than to have my material used and
not
referenced. However, taking a publicly available article and reposting
it
to a newsgroup along with the publisher and author does not seem to
violate
copyright law. Does it?

Redistributing a quote would not be in violation. That would be fair
use if appropriately referenced. Redistributing the work in it's
entirely, however, is not considered fair use.
--
jmk in NC

Oops, I do it all the time when I find a link I think might be of interest
to the group. My faux pas.

j

"Ignoramus1563" wrote in message
...
In article jkwlc.37580$NZ4.29439@lakeread05, Julianne wrote:

"Ignoramus1563" wrote in message
...
In article , jmk wrote:
On 5/3/2004 11:39 AM, Ignoramus1563 wrote:
A NY Times article. Looks like written by medically ignorant
psychology freaks.

And posted by someone ignorant of copyright law...

I am relatively well versed in copyright law, as a layman, but I
despise it. I applaud the work of people who undermine copyright
laws by means of clever technical solutions.

Apparently, you never write for publication.

I had an article published, but I never published for moey.

Consider that I spent hours designing a HIPAA Privacy Rule compliance
product that included education for staff, forms, policies, etc. and
then
sold it to clients for 300.00 - 500.00 dollars. It was all original
work,
except for what I appropriately referenced and put into a format that
was
easily usable by multiple health care facilities.

Consider that one friend 'copied' it for another and suddenly, I have
only
sold about half the programs out there.

I would completely understand that you would be upset.

Or consider that I write an article for publication in an industry
journal.
The next time I hear someone talk, they include one or more of my
original
ideas without proper credit. Can I tell you this irks me? As a
consultant,
I sell credibility!

Just because I despise copyright laws, I do not believe that, for
example, authors are not entitled to proper credit.

I abhor the work of people who practice intellectual theft.

So do I, if you intellectual theft you mean plagiarism.

What's the difference?

j
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
@ @ @ Please forgive my typos as my right hand is injured. @ @ @

char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}"; main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
"It's never too late to have a happy childhood."