Wes
Charles

Kevin Eddie

Best book ever written?

Moon People by Dale M. Courtney

Moon People by Dale M. Courtney

  1. Wesblog
    Lui
    02/07/2009 at 7:13 pm Permalink

    they had me at 45-year-old Single man ha

Hi Stranger, leave a comment:

Faris the pub crawl

Team Claire earned 535 points.

Team Claire earned 535 points.

Hi Stranger, leave a comment:

Apple approves porn for iPhone

Adolescent boys with access to their parent’s credit cards may have reason to celebrate today. Apple has finally allowed pornography, or at least nudity, into the iTunes App Store.

hottestgirlsapp1Hottest Girls has the distinguished privilege of being the first application approved for sale in the iTunes App Store that contains nudity. The Hottest Girls app is not new, but as of today, photos of topless women join the application’s “2200+ sexy bikini babes and lingerie models.”

Of course, porn has long been accessible on the iPhone through its Internet browser, but this marks the first time Apple has sanctioned images of naked women for the popular device.

The change in Apple’s porn policy is likely a result of expanded parental controls in the new iPhone 3.0 OS software.  Age restrictions can now be set to prevent mature downloads from the App Store.

According to a Gizmodo article that seemed oddly excited by this news:

This is not just an application that downloads softcore content from the Web, bypassing Apple’s censorship. There is no censorship here, as this is truly an Apple approved app “rated 17+” for “frequent/intense sexual content or nudity” and “frequent/intense mature/suggestive theme.”

The editors at Wired.com took the Hottest Girls app for a test drive and were underwhelmed. “The application itself is terrible,” writes Wired’s tester, “but you can be sure that there will be more, and better, very soon.”

Personally, I couldn’t care less about the Hottest Girls app, but I am curious to see if pornography will lead to an explosion of lucrative app sales for Apple. Porn, and the many dollars it generates, has been a driving force for new technology for decades.

How do you feel about Apple’s decision to allow nudity into the app store? And what, if anything, will this do for the iPhone?

Posted by:

Hi Stranger, leave a comment:

Keep being awesome

3642661392_893103fda0_o1

  1. Wesblog
    Kevin
    24/06/2009 at 3:55 am Permalink

    I think Matt actually could use a carnivore support group. Stay strong my friend.

Hi Stranger, leave a comment:

Downloading mom fined $80,000 per song

24 cases of copyright infringement will cost a Minnesota woman $1.9 million, a jury has decided.

24 cases of copyright infringement will cost a Minnesota woman $1.9 million, a jury has decided.

After deliberating for only a few hours, the jury in Jammie Thomas-Rasset’s federal retrial found the 32-year-old Minnesota mother liable for willfully infringing the copyrights of 24 songs she downloaded off the Web and awarded record labels $1.92 million.

Thomas-Rasset stood accused of using the file-sharing service KaZaA to download and share music illegally after RIAA investigators at MediaSentry linked several complete song downloads to Thomas-Rasset’s computer. While the RIAA initially offered to settle the case for $5,000, Thomas-Rasset insisted she had never heard of KaZaA and decided to fight the charges in court.

The RIAA has sued thousands in its legal campaign against file sharing, but, according to her attorneys, Jammie Thomas-Rasset’s case was the first such copyright infringement case to go to trial in the United States. When faced with the astronomical penalties detailed in the Copyright Act, from $750 to $150,000 per infringement, most of those sued accepted settlements from the RIAA for only a few thousand dollars.

Despite a vigorous defense from lawyers Kiwi Camara and Joe Sibley and tearful testimony by Jamie Thomas-Rasset, the jury concluded that she willfully infringed on 24 copyrights and awarded labels $80,000 per infringement.

While I was not particularly shocked by the guilty verdict, the jury’s decision to award damages of $1.92 million is rather mind-blowing. The financial ruin this fine will likely cause Ms. Thomas-Rasset is substantially greater than the criminal penalties she might have faced had she stolen the physical CDs.

How do you feel about the verdict? Should the civil penalties outlined in the Copyright Act apply to private citizens who are not downloading and distributing copyrighted material for financial gain?

And before I plow through dozens of comments declaring, “If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime,” consider lawyer Joe Sibley’s closing arguments to the jury, paraphrased here:

If the labels can sue Thomas-Rasset, they can sue any of you. “This could happen to any of us.” If a kid, or a friend’s kid, downloads some songs on a computer at home, any person could just as easily be on trial with the same evidence against them.

Ars Technica provided excellent coverage of the four-day trial:

Posted by:

  1. Wesblog
    Kate Savage
    28/06/2009 at 12:14 pm Permalink

    Sex, drugs and rock and roll.

    We’re already terrified of the first two, it’s about time there’s fear mongering for the third.

Hi Stranger, leave a comment:

 Page 1 of 107  1  2  3  4  5 » ...  Last » 
prev posts