To my mind, nobody wants this to get to this supreme court, because the outcome could be anything someone is willing to pay for. But it's going to wind up there eventually. If it does get there under this administration the most likely outcome is something beneficial to AI service providers, quite possibly allowing GenAI to wash away copyrights. But will it do so enough to allow someone else to copyright the result, or will it be basically uncopyrightable and therefore (in the case of code or other, similar output like instructions) protectable only with secrecy? That would be an interesting outcome.

Right, they're arguing that they should be allowed to knowingly sell products which produce radio interference which affects FCC-licensed use there, devices with a public safety interest no less. Also, if their lack of shielding is affecting AM radio, then it's almost certainly affecting other things as well. That was a weird argument.

But the whole thing is weird all over for the reasons stated. Getting the radio signal into the car isn't expensive or difficult. Practically any one of us could do it with an off the shelf module which costs twenty bucks with e-tail costs and profit baked in. They're already shielding the PCB in the antenna. It's got to cost them a few dollars per unit at the absolute most to add AM even if they put a whole receiver in there. Their arguments are crappy even from a distance.

The detective is paid to maintain the status quo first and think second, like every other cop, except that he's actually paid to think at some point.

It's AGPL, not just GPL

We had a small resurgence in some workers cleaning cabins, they switched protocol to using liquid before cleaning to trap dust from feces. It's never really contained.

No. Trump was overleveraged and the last bank that would do business with him was Deutsche Bank until he made whatever deal they made with the Russians... Pedo Jr. and Eric both told us they were banking with Russia.

I doubt this very, very heavily. If it were so they would have told us so already as their excuse. These days the typical radio antenna is an amplified module mounted to the roof, this is now cheap and it gives better reception without the sticking-up aerial or with just a short one.

Can a person apply a license to code they don't have the copyright to? The answer is no. This code is either infected with a mishmash of copyright from its original sources, or it's not copyrightable at all, and courts haven't decided which but they are both bad.

It has basically functional mass transit, but last time I lived there my commute was 15 minutes by car or 1 hour and 15 minutes by two buses linked by subway. I could probably have walked faster. Now I would dread parking in either neighborhood but then it was feasible.

This is an incredibly short sighted argument for someone calling someone else short sighted. Someone might need updates while evacuating, and their car's radio will have better reception than the portable they are using inside of the car. AM radios work OK inside of cars, but still not as well as a car stereo using the external antenna. It's easier to use and hear while driving. It's a small addition to the cost. Yes, people should have a portable radio for emergencies. Having the car stereo pick up the AM broadcasts is still also useful in emergencies.

In a real emergency, it is usually worthless, unless maybe it has an FM radio receiver. FM isn't worthless in an incident, it's just not as useful as AM.

AM is good for sending out information during a disaster which includes power outage, when the cellular network will crater whether it's affected by the outages or not. And it will be, because some sites' generators won't work, or they don't have much fuel to begin with. Everyone can have solar and hand crank generators for their phones and still have them be worthless.

Classic Slopdot, I got modded down for my comment while he's using Claude to "write" the code.

Is this what Claude told you to put in your comment?

He said, while failing to understand that it's for controlling our use of our computers. Eyeroll all day.

If the user has no control over it, then it's for the control of the user.

The idea as presented as being in the user's benefit is that the user can control it, but applications cannot.