When people while about getting 'removed from friends list' like Google, YouTube, Facebook, Yahoo, MSN networks...
If it is free, they can do this anytime they like. Your proper answer is to set up your own server and do it yourself. I guess taking it public and getting responses from individuals in that company is your response. Still doesn't mean you shouldn't set up shop in your own right.
It's yet another sudoku game. No matter how good it is, or looks, you compete with the multitude of free sudoku games out there.
Try something more vertical niche, and hunker down. A fill-in-the-blank game is not super-profit worthy. Even Rovio took a decade before they hit it with Angry Birds.
This argument goes towards the DMCA, as well as what is considered under the CFAA..
"Intentionally accessing a computer without authorization to obtain: ....Information from any protected computer."
What does 'without authorization' mean, and what does 'protected' mean?
Does without authorization mean you violate a click-through license? Or is there some nebulous authentication chit you are handed? Is it a felony to fake your name on a website demanding your name?
And with that keyword 'protected', how do we know it is indeed protected? What steps one must take to protect, and what steps one must go through to understand that it is indeed protected computer/data?
In other words, we are all felons-on-standby. The laws are so vague as to entrap all by default.
"So by your judgement, all these folks could be sacked and nothing of value would be lost?"
I would argue that value would be gained by sacking these people (and organizations).
Most of the money they (and other journals) uses is dependent on excessive licensing fees charged to universities. The universities turn around and add that to each person's tuition.
And all the work the journal publishes WAS owned by the students of the very university, until the journal demands transfer of copyright to the journal... So they can sell them back work at 1000X the profit.
By definition, they are parasites. What we need is a good anti-parasitic medicine.
Since I do not follow the EULA/license agreement for each website, and I send a handshake requesting files over a webserver, I am in violation of federal law for unauthorized computer usage.
You mean all the work the grad students do when they write the content.... And all the work other grad students do when they typeset it? Sure. Apologist.
A mail server and website combination is cheap to build. Your only cost is bandwidth.
The only real cost is bandwidth. That's when you have the schools host these cheap servers. "instead of 15 million USD, we want to colo. Deal?"
And to completely trounce your idea, publishing is easy for journals. It's called "load page and press print". There's hardly any reason to print tomes that can easily loaded ip on a web page as needed. And if you need a bound book, go to lulu or other JIT publisher.
And trite sayings don't mean they are correct, either.
The social contract in the constitution was to grant people with limited exclusivity for works they created. Patents have roughly stayed within that parameter (with exception to patent abuses on design and software).
For copyright, it was originally 17 years, extendable another 17 years. Works released in 1981 (my date of birth) will expire in 120 years. I will be dead before they are in public domain.
The social contract was 'reneogiated' by campaign donations, without input from the people. The supreme court found that forever extensions the way congress is implementing them as 'constitutional' and it was Congress's problem.
So yes, I believe that should open up the debate on piracy as a legitimate solution.
You could get frowny faces from HR with comments like "Can you start the server Kernelang, Gus?"
Yeah. That was bad. I'll go back to lurking.