Runkle posted a good analysis about this a few months ago.
The crux is that Klein says his content is being re-streamed live - with no, or barely any, transformative additions by the re-streamers - explicitly in order to deny him some monetisation, and so don't qualify as "reaction" content or "fair use." This assertion appears to have some merit.
Ultimately, rule 1 should apply to both sides: Don't be a dick.
The Saudi regime has been known to dismember journalists, so game reviewers should think twice before awarding low marks for future EA products.
...management stop seeing IT as a cost to be cut at every opportunity and are made to take responsibility for the subsequent failures, nothing will change.
...I should have included this.
You're technically correct - the best kind of correct.
...how's the pig?
There's a reason that every time you see a Taliban big wig they're carrying an AK or PK over their shoulder. It's not that they want to look tough, its the fact the guy standing right behind them is already measuring the crown to see how well it fits.
Nah, in that context it's all about projecting a macho, alpha-status image, which they have to do to maintain dominance and position. It's the hubris that prevents them realising they've no chance of actually deploying their symbol of authority AK/PK before they get a pesh-kabz in the kidney.
With Xi and Putin, I think everyone is just waiting for them to shuffle off naturally although I wouldn't be surprised if they had an unfortunate accident.
Well, in Putin's Russia, involuntary defenestration counts as "natural causes."
Neither Putin nor Xi are medi[c]al experts. They are uneducated fools discussing something they know very little about. They think they are knowledgeable but are not.
Well, it's a good job that they're not both megalomaniacal dictators with the entire resources of their respective nations at their beck and call, and a brutal security apparatus to enforce their whims and desires irrespective of their grounding in objective reality.
Oh, wait...
...use the "small claims court" process to recover your legal fees - one claim for each successful defence.
IMNAL, but how about filing counter-suits for each failed DMCA take-down attempt, citing "tortious interference" or "restraint of trade"?
At the very least, it should be possible to question their adherence to the "good faith" requirement, especially if discovery reveals the degree of automation in their DMCA process.
Hell, having "...successfully fought thousands of these" suggests there's no good faith in the process whatsoever (quelle surprise!).
...that otherwise-identical content is being treated differently just based on the sender?
I suspect not...
How is it even POSSIBLE to have cruise control not work properly?
By adding a proximity/range sensor to stop inattentive drivers rear-ending a slowing/stopped car ahead.
Mercedes added "RADAR-controlled cruise control" to some cars years ago, and it worked very well, because they did what it took - time/money/people - to get it right.
I suspect that other implementations suffer from cheapest-possible components and inept implementation, perhaps even using the parking sensors to double as long-distance range-finders.
Forgive the pedantry, but GPS does not know speed limits, it just provides location - to varying degrees of accuracy.
Speed limits are part of the mapping data loaded into the SatNav/in-car computer/etc, and can be inaccurate, incomplete or just out-of-date - sometimes all three.
GPS is sufficiently accurate to determine which country you're in, and so whether the signage is in mph or kph.
It is sometimes insufficiently accurate to determine whether you're on a 70mph road or the 20mph road than runs parallel to it, which can be mildly irritating when your SatNav routing keeps recalculating as it switches between the two, but is massively dangerous if it's connected to your brakes.
Map-based speed limits are also problematic if, for example, a municipality drops a limit from 30mph to 20mph between updates.
Ultimately, all this shit should be advisory in nature. It should not take control away from the driver, as it is not - and can never be sufficiently reliable.
And yes, I know some will say "Well, people are not sufficiently reliable either!" which is true enough, but people are also required to take responsibility for their actions (or inactions). Abrogating responsibility for control of a vehicle in favour of flaky pseudo-automation is not a good idea.
"I want to be part of the peer review!"
"OK, you need to go to Kansas City."
"Is that where they're doing the review?"
"No, that's the back of the line..."
Cobol programmers are down in the dumps.
