Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Monday October 01 2018, @11:51PM   Printer-friendly
from the Stage-9-From-Outer-Space dept.

Stage 9 was a non-commercial, virtual reality recreation of Star Trek The Next Generation's Enterprise starship. It allowed fans of the series to explore the beloved vessel and immerse themselves in the chief setting of the series. It was built over the past two years using Unreal Engine 4 by fans who have taken great pains to state that the project was not affiliated or licensed with CBS or Paramount and that they weren't doing this to make money, only to artistically demonstrate their fandom. That did not stop CBS from sending a cease and desist letter, thus shutting down the project as CBS was reportedly unwilling to engage in dialog.

From Techdirt : CBS Bullies Fan Star Trek Project To Shut Down Despite Creators' Pleas For Instructions On Being Legit
and at Ars Technica : Amazing NCC-1701-D simulator issues final command: "all stop"
and at TorrentFreak : CBS Shuts Down Stage 9, a Fan-Made Recreation of the USS Enterprise


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday October 02 2018, @02:45AM (11 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 02 2018, @02:45AM (#742614) Journal

    It's why we need sane copyright laws.

    You cannot fix stupid. In the context: if you hope sane copyright laws to fix stupid execs, you are naive.
    Stupidity is a gas, will fill or use any empty space available. And, boy, no sane law is without holes (the more you try to fill the holes in a law the more insane the law becomes).

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 02 2018, @07:07AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 02 2018, @07:07AM (#742659)

    If their stupidity has no teeth, does it matter?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 02 2018, @10:00AM (9 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 02 2018, @10:00AM (#742691)

    Sure, you won't fix stupidity. But you can control the damage that stupidity does.

    If you give a madman a gun, he'll possibly shoot someone. If you don't give him a gun, he's still as insane, but he won't be able to shoot anyone.

    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday October 02 2018, @11:41AM (7 children)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 02 2018, @11:41AM (#742715) Journal

      If you don't give him a gun, he's still as insane, but he won't be able to shoot anyone.

      As a side note, your analogy has big limitations in applicability to the current case:
      - we aren't speaking of madmen, we are in the context of stupidity
      - we aren't in the context of violent death, but in the larger context of caused harm (in the case of a madman, you aren't taking in consideration maiming the spouse in domestic violence crisis withou using a gun)

      So, no, I maintain that there's no sane law that can prevent harm from active stupid, even less from a stupid in a position of influence.
      Sure, you can try to guard against all manifestation of stupid in a given domain, but the resulting law will be insanely complicated and still not stupid-proof.
      Try to make something idiot/stupid/fool-proof and they'll invent a better idiot/stupid/fool.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 02 2018, @12:47PM (6 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 02 2018, @12:47PM (#742741)

        5 years of copyright since publishing, extendable twice: first time for 3 years (costly), second time for 2 years (damn costly).

        Ok, that wasn't so complicated after all. Alternatively, we could choose to kill copyright for good and replace it with a right to attribution.

        • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday October 02 2018, @01:40PM (5 children)

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 02 2018, @01:40PM (#742764) Journal

          Ok, that wasn't so complicated after all.

          Simpleton thinking.
          You have not considered, for example, that almost everything that offers a chance to Linux to resist abusive CoC-ing (if they choose so) is the copyright [iu.edu]:

          I'm writing now, from all of that experience and with all that
          perspective, about the recent flap over the new CoC and the attempt
          to organize a mass withdrawal of creator permissions from the
          kernel.
          ...
          First, let me confirm that this threat has teeth. I researched the
          relevant law when I was founding the Open Source Initiative. In the
          U.S. there is case law confirming that reputational losses relating to
          conversion of the rights of a contributor to a GPLed project are
          judicable in law. I do not know the case law outside the U.S., but in
          countries observing the Berne Convention without the U.S.'s opt-out of
          the "moral rights" clause, that clause probably gives the objectors an
          even stronger case.

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 02 2018, @02:50PM (3 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 02 2018, @02:50PM (#742808)

            Different AC.

            Let the CoC up The Kernel. With the resources of the military intelligence agencies likely behind things like CoCs, it's inevitable.

            We may fork. That is the beauty of free software. There is no The Kernel, as in One Kernel to Rule Them All. However, I suspect we'll need to wait several years before we know for sure whether it's a bunch of dog-whistling and hyperventilating or if my COINTELPRO intelligence agency theory is correct.

            I'm still systemd-free. The apocalypse has not happened despite all the endless hyperventilation about that.

            • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday October 02 2018, @03:08PM (2 children)

              by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 02 2018, @03:08PM (#742818) Journal

              We may fork. That is the beauty of free software.

              You may fork but, if ESR is right, you still may suffer if many Linux contributors rescind their copyright, even in a fork without CoC-ing.

              --
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 03 2018, @09:28PM (1 child)

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 03 2018, @09:28PM (#743682)

                Who is ESR?

                • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday October 03 2018, @09:35PM

                  by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday October 03 2018, @09:35PM (#743685) Journal

                  Who is ESR?

                  Does "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" rings any bell?


                  If not, Eric S. Raymond [wikipedia.org]
                  --
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 02 2018, @07:40PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 02 2018, @07:40PM (#743021)

            Copyright will not stop CoC. And even if it did, it isn't a reason to keep it.

    • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Tuesday October 02 2018, @03:41PM

      by Freeman (732) on Tuesday October 02 2018, @03:41PM (#742842) Journal

      Ideally, you would treat the madman, since they're insane and may do any number of harmful things to others. A gun is a "convenient" murder weapon, but I would say a knife is even more convenient. The reason you don't want a madman to have a gun, is the same reason you don't want a madman to have a steak knife. Except with a steak knife, you don't get the obviously loud report that someone just shot a gun.

      --
      Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"