Some countries even explicitly allow you to break DRM to make a backup copy of your physical media.
To pick one country, Germany for example: There it’s called the “right to make a security copy”. Paragraph 69d (nice) of the copyright law states:
The creation of a backup copy by a person authorised to use the programme may not be prohibited by contract if it is necessary to ensure future use.
That means physical copies have, legally speaking, an endless shelf life.
I’m not defending Israel, I’m really not. All I’m saying is that the Israeli war crimes fall under the jurisdiction of the ICC and ICJ. You don’t need a dedicated tribunal to prosecute them. The same is true for Russia, except for this one crime that they definitely committed and Israel maybe didn’t commit. This one crime and only this crime needs a dedicated tribunal. That doesn’t make the other crimes any less serviere. It just means that the international community made a mistake and forgot one war crime when setting up the international courts.
Well, the ICC and ICJ are more than capable of handling most war crimes, including the ones committed by Israel. This tribunal would exist to fill a hole in the jurisdictions of the international courts: To prosecute the crime of aggression. Russia attacked first. It’s incredibly clear cut. Israel and Gaza is more complicated. Here we got a circle of escalating violence. That makes it a lot harder to prosecute them for this specific crime.
M365 can be used with other 2fa apps. But organisations can force the use of Microsoft Authenticator
Sort of… It’s a different company that bought the name years ago when the old Atari went bankrupt. Technically it’s a French publisher formerly known as Infogrames.
Blizzard’s position is that the subscription is for the use of the client as well as their server. A private server allows you to play without an active subscription, thus piracy.
The way I see it there are two possible reasons:
And they’ve been successful with that strategy (for now)
Regardless, the Protect Our Games Act did not make it out of this stage of the legislative process. With four aye votes, three noes, and four abstentions, it failed to accrue the majority of ayes necessary to pass. Nevertheless, it has been granted a reconsideration, so it’s not the end.
Depends on what the goal was.
Germany doesn’t but French McD has
There used to be/probably still is a Subreddit called “Linux for Noobs” that could act as inspiration
Elmo’s, diegeticaly (as in “in universe”), canonically (as in officially) three and a half years old. So if he was mentioned, it would have been as a victim.
There are even solutions that automate a lot of the configuration for such a setup. I’m using Pangolin for example:https://github.com/fosrl/pangolin
But you could set up something like this manually if you want more flexibility (pangolin is based on traefic rather than Nginx)
It’s not really about fair use because European law doesn’t really have that as a concept. I’m talking about contract law, since licenses are contracts. Now, I’m not a lawyer and shit gets complicated real fast but basically EU law states that contracts need to be fair. Unfair clauses are invalid (again really simplifying here). SKG argues that this is the case for games.
And in doing so we are making the AI even better at pretending it’s human, necessitating even more hoops in the future
And this is how you handle realising that you just posted stupid shit. You keep the the stupid shit but you also acknowledge your mistake in an edit.
Good job accidentally modeling good behaviour
OK, I’ll bite.
Even Value has tried to argue that Steam is a subscription service and that you don’t own Steam games but rather licenses to games on Steam.
If you open a printed, physical book, you’ll likely see something like this printed on the first page: “copyright [author name], all rights reserved”. If the book was printed in the last year, it might also include language explicitly forbidding AI training and other forms of data mining.
If you look at the back of the packaging of physical movie releases (so for example a DVD or Bluray case) you’ll find find something like “this movie has only been licensed for personal used. Public exhibition is not permitted”
Because media has always been licenced. The question therefore is less about license vs ownership and instead about what makes a fair license. SKG argues, that the licensing as it currently exists is deeply unfair. Unfair enough that it possibly already violates EU law. That’s what the lawsuit in France is about.
A group could take SWTOR, add content, and have people donate/pay for it despite the IP holder not wanting their IP used that way.
Not really. The game has, as you yourself noted, been licensed to you. The granted rights don’t include commercial activity. Publishers could even put the videogame equivalent of the language from the movie cases into their licenses to spell that out.
*citizens, not users
The film went to streaming on the 15th of August 2025. OP had a typo in their date.
https://screenrant.com/superman-2025-movie-vod-release-date-confirmed-james-gunn/