newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2005
- Messages
- 28,472 (4.23/day)
- Location
- Indiana, USA
Processor | Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz |
---|---|
Motherboard | AsRock Z470 Taichi |
Cooling | Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans |
Memory | 32GB DDR4-3600 |
Video Card(s) | RTX 2070 Super |
Storage | 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache |
Display(s) | Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28" |
Case | Fractal Design Define S |
Audio Device(s) | Onboard is good enough for me |
Power Supply | eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3 |
Software | Windows 10 Pro x64 |
http://gizmodo.com/5901263/court-rules-it-is-impossible-to-steal-computer-code
[sigQUOTE]The 2nd Circuit Appeals Court ruled that since computer code cannot be physically obtained, it doesn't fit the legal description of a stolen good. "Because Aleynikov did not ‘assume physical control' over anything when he took the source code, and because he did not thereby ‘deprive [Goldman] of its use,' Aleynikov did not violate the [National Stolen Property Act]," the court wrote in its decision.[/sigquote]
[sigquote]The court was quick to point out that this decision should not be interpreted for all cases of electronic theft, however the legal recognition that code isn't physical property (which people have been saying for years) is sure to make this case a focal point in future MPAA/RIAA wranglings.[/sigQUOTE]
Sounds to me like they just threw a big wrench in a lot of MPAA/RIAA cases against people.
I'm glad someone finally did what is right and officially stated that if you aren't depriving someone of something it isn't stealing.
[sigQUOTE]The 2nd Circuit Appeals Court ruled that since computer code cannot be physically obtained, it doesn't fit the legal description of a stolen good. "Because Aleynikov did not ‘assume physical control' over anything when he took the source code, and because he did not thereby ‘deprive [Goldman] of its use,' Aleynikov did not violate the [National Stolen Property Act]," the court wrote in its decision.[/sigquote]
[sigquote]The court was quick to point out that this decision should not be interpreted for all cases of electronic theft, however the legal recognition that code isn't physical property (which people have been saying for years) is sure to make this case a focal point in future MPAA/RIAA wranglings.[/sigQUOTE]
Sounds to me like they just threw a big wrench in a lot of MPAA/RIAA cases against people.
I'm glad someone finally did what is right and officially stated that if you aren't depriving someone of something it isn't stealing.