aaron.trevena at gmail.com
Wed Dec 10 16:24:01 GMT 2008
2008/12/10 Jonathan Stowe <jonathan.stowe at gmail.com>:
> 2008/12/10 Denny <london.pm at metamathics.org>:
>> On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 14:36 +0000, Jonathan Stowe wrote:
>>> So, we all think that a site with no O'Reilly branding [...]
>> The first image I can see on that page is the O'Reilly 'Programming
>> Perl' image. The second link on the page goes to oreilly.com. Call me
>> gullible, but it wouldn't have occurred to me to question it.
> Doesn't the link improve it's google page rank?
> The whole geek community has a big problem with intellectual ambiguity
> in respect of the whole intellectual property thing anyway IMO, we all
> tend to agree that ripping off the books is a bad thing and everything
> and then half of you go off and advocate using dodgy russian MP3 sites
> and bit-torrents BECAUSE THE CONTENT MUST BE FREE MAN!
Mostly true, there are plenty of grey areas tho...
Some "Dodgy" russian mp3 sites are no less legit than ITunes, in that
they have contracts with national record industry bodies, apparently
it's ok for Apple for instance to source cheap labour from china or
africa, but it's not ok for consumers to source cheap (not
counterfeit, or illegally copied) imports (digital or physical) from
say thailand or russia.
Strictly speaking it's illegal for me to use torrents to download
songs because I'm too lazy to go into the loft, get the LP, find a
record player, play it, put it back, and even illegal to copy a CD I
purchased (or even to workaround DRM preventing me from even playing
my Duran Duran CD on my computer).
LAMP System Integration, Development and Hosting
More information about the london.pm