Author Topic: MPAA violates software liscences  (Read 1071 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kosh

  • A year behind what's funny
  • 210
MPAA violates software liscences
"The reason for this is that the original Fortran got so convoluted and extensive (10's of millions of lines of code) that no-one can actually figure out how it works, there's a massive project going on to decode the original Fortran and write a more modern system, but until then, the UK communication network is actually relying heavily on 35 year old Fortran that nobody understands." - Flipside

Brain I/O error
Replace and press any key

 

Offline neo_hermes

  • MmmmmmNode!
  • 28
  • What the hell are you lookin at?
Re: MPAA violates software liscences
i forget what the word is for occasions like this....i think it's irony but i don't think thats right. :lol:
Hell has no fury like an0n...
killing threads is...well, what i do best.

 

Offline jr2

  • The Mail Man
  • 212
  • It's prounounced jayartoo 0x6A7232
    • Steam
Re: MPAA violates software liscences
not paradox, is it?

 

Offline Bobboau

  • Just a MODern kinda guy
    Just MODerately cool
    And MODest too
  • 213
Re: MPAA violates software liscences
irony
Bobboau, bringing you products that work... in theory
learn to use PCS
creator of the ProXimus Procedural Texture and Effect Generator
My latest build of PCS2, get it while it's hot!
PCS 2.0.3


DEUTERONOMY 22:11
Thou shalt not wear a garment of diverse sorts, [as] of woollen and linen together

 

Offline Davros

  • 29
Re: MPAA violates software liscences
Irony ;)


 

Offline Unknown Target

  • Get off my lawn!
  • 212
  • Push.Pull?
Re: MPAA violates software liscences
So...any other news on it? Is he gonna sue or something?

 

Offline Ghostavo

  • 210
  • Let it be glue!
    • Skype
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: MPAA violates software liscences
It seems that he didn't sue them but settled with them either removing (which they aparently did) the content or paying for the license.

Weirder is the MPAA's response.

Quote
The material has been removed from our Web server.

        * No Web links were ever provided to the blog.
        * The blog was never assigned a domain name.
        * The blog was never advertised to the public in any way.
        * The material on the server was a proof of concept awaiting approval to move into production.
        * The blog was only ever used for testing purposes.
        * Should we have decided to make the move to production, then we would have paid the 25 Pounds that would have authorized us to run a version of the blog without the logos and links.

So according to them, if you "acquire" a movie and get caught, you can get away with it by saying you planned to buy it later.
"Closing the Box" - a campaign in the making :nervous:

Shrike is a dirty dirty admin, he's the destroyer of souls... oh god, let it be glue...

 

Offline Flipside

  • əp!sd!l£
  • 212
Re: MPAA violates software liscences
Yup, they've just given all the excuses they refuse to accept from other people. :)

 

Offline Herra Tohtori

  • The Academic
  • 211
  • Bad command or file name
Re: MPAA violates software liscences
i forget what the word is for occasions like this....i think it's irony but i don't think thats right. :lol:

Hypocrisy? :lol:
There are three things that last forever: Abort, Retry, Fail - and the greatest of these is Fail.

  

Offline IceFire

  • GTVI Section 3
  • 212
    • http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/ce
Re: MPAA violates software liscences
Irony.

Corrupt.

The two words that come to mind.
- IceFire
BlackWater Ops, Cold Element
"Burn the land, boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me..."