111–120 of 126 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can I ask you why you're near homeless? It's because you find hard to find a job?, or you've accumulated debt you're struggling to exinct? I'm from Italy too but I'm a student and I'm curious: what are the troubles a hacker has in Italy? — assuming you worked in tech. I know it's rude to ask, I understand if you don't mind to answer. :)
Thanks, I'll write to you soon. edit: :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Project: Originating and maintaining organization USD: Pixar OpenSubdiv: Pixar jss-api-gem: Pixar Munki: WDAS Reposado: WDAS SeExpr: WDAS Ptex: WDAS Partio: WDAS Dynamica: WDAS BRDF Explorer: WDAS OpenEXR: ILM Alembic: ILM and Sony Imageworks So which one of these is not a Disney project, considering they all originated from and are maintained by Disney engineers?
Alembic was originally Sony's thing, which ILM started using in their early Katana days because their own file format wasn't good enough for use with Katana (random access and lazy loading). Sony gave it to ILM to start using, and then open-sourced it. I'd quibble that while ILM and Pixar employees are technically now Disney employees, it's not as if they work for Walt Disney Animation Studios directly, so it's not a…
ILM and Pixar are very much Disney employees though, as in employees of the wider Walt Disney Company (which this page is for; the specific page for WDAS is here [1]). If you get a Silver Pass and your pay comes from TWDC's bank account, I'm pretty sure you are a Disney employee. WDAS, Pixar, and ILM are all just individual subsidiaries under the wider TWDC umbrella.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The purpose of copyright law is only to "promote the arts and sciences". Note that it doesn't say anything about the individual creator. There are two factors determining how much value a society can derive from the body of art created within: the amount and the distribution. (ignoring "quality" because it's unaffected by the following). The quantity created and the distribution it gets are somewhat conflicting goals…
I think that the 70 years thing is also to dis-incentivize killing the creator to cash in on his work a mere 10 years later. Though 70 years is overkill even in this regard, I doubt anyone would wait say, 20-30 years, for such a plan.
I think you'd be hard pressed to find any instances of people committing murder for IP reasons.
I as really hoping all the projects would be named after Disney characters, because it would be fun to say, "I think we should run Mickey, but we may need to fork Donald to make it work in our environment".
I hope Disney does more of this! They're a tech company in a lot of ways. I believe they're using Rails for their site (which would make it amongst the biggest Rails sites in the world) and I hope they release some Rails stuff too!
I work there, and am on the Disney Open Source Committee! We also just open sourced a hybrid public/private blockchain platform "Dragonchain" with some interesting features. https://github.com/dragonchain/dragonchain Architecture document: https://dragonchain.github.io/doc/DragonchainArchitecture.pd... Code is newly released, and rough around the edges. We're working to get the docs up to par and some Docker containe…
architecture document 404s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dunno, I prefer to eat duck over dog or mouse. ;)
jedberg, we deserve the down votes (-4 for me. a personal record!). These are the kind of comments that have come to dominate slashdot - a formerly awesome site. Sorry HN, I couldn't help it this time. Now back to the higher quality discourse.
I as really hoping all the projects would be named after Disney characters, because it would be fun to say, "I think we should run Mickey, but we may need to fork Donald to make it work in our environment".
No thanks, Disney has already done enough to fuck over the public domain via copyright. We don't need them using trademarks to fuck over developers too. Besides, I doubt their lawyers would want them to dilute their trademarks like that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Copyright is limited. It's just that the Mickey Mouse collective is constantly getting laws passed that push back how far away "limited" is. It's more like a pay-as-you-go scheme for unlimited copyright while skirting around the US constitution. And of course, because Disney has enough money they can also convince Congress to apply the law changes retroactively.
The content Mickey Mouse has been in is copyrighted. Mickey Mouse himself is trademarked. So you /may/ be able to reuse Steamboat Willie for whatever purposes you wish (assuming Disney Legal doesn't get Copyright extended), but you'll probably never get Mickey Mouse as a symbol to work with.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Copyright is limited. It's just that the Mickey Mouse collective is constantly getting laws passed that push back how far away "limited" is. It's more like a pay-as-you-go scheme for unlimited copyright while skirting around the US constitution. And of course, because Disney has enough money they can also convince Congress to apply the law changes retroactively.
Yeah, I don't know what was more offensive: extending copyright YET AGAIN or doing so retroactively to save Steamboat Willie. I vowed to boycott Disney, but Pixar got subsumed into the evil empire and I gave up.