Post Your Amusements!

[Fetzie]

They're not exactly unique in that aspect. It's how we got the titan constructs to help us in Ulduar, for one.

(But, technically speaking, Lei Shi is killed in the raid. Just not by us. )

Oh man.. I missed that bit? is that part of the intro to Sha?

She sacrifices herself to create the safe-zone to ward us from the fear spell.

[benebarba]

They're not exactly unique in that aspect. It's how we got the titan constructs to help us in Ulduar, for one.

(But, technically speaking, Lei Shi is killed in the raid. Just not by us. )

Oh man.. I missed that bit? is that part of the intro to Sha?

She sacrifices herself to create the safe-zone to ward us from the fear spell.

I'll have to watch for that... since this was LFR, not surprisingly the fight and everything was started before I'd finished walking onto the platform.

[KysenMurrin]

Yeah, soon as you finish her fight, she runs up and attacks the Sha of Fear.

[Klaudandus]

I feel bad for our australian friends
http://www.news.com.au/national/tea-par ... 6537489379

[Zalaria]

I feel bad for our australian friends
http://www.news.com.au/national/tea-par ... 6537489379

"[...] also claims gay marriage could lead to Muslim polygamy."

That makes my head hurt.

[Klaudandus]

My alt got the 4 pc bonus before my main... slightly amused about it.

[Nooska]

I feel bad for our australian friends
http://www.news.com.au/national/tea-par ... 6537489379

"[...] also claims gay marriage could lead to Muslim polygamy."

That makes my head hurt.

Yes.. because muslim polygamy (which stems from sharia and traditions as old as Abraham) is very tolerant of gay marriages..?

[Amirya]

Glyph of Confession on a newly returned player who doesn't know what it does, and couldn't figure out why she kept confessing to things that were making us give her a hard time.

That was really fun, though lol

[bldavis]

i couldnt stop laughing at that...
GUYS WTF I DIDNT DO ANYTHING!

WHAT THE HELL!

OMG WHAT IS GOING ON!

all while someone was giving her shit about her "confessions"
though i am glad you finally broke down and told her

[Nikachelle]

Just got my corporate laptop upgraded to 2 gigs of ram.

[Sagara]

Wow. I remember installing 2 Gigs of Ram on laptops back in 2009.

Well, to be honest, there are still ~ 1/3 of our desktops running on 512 megas.

I think I haven't facepalmed enough at my boss today.

[Nikachelle]

Wow. I remember installing 2 Gigs of Ram on laptops back in 2009.

Well, to be honest, there are still ~ 1/3 of our desktops running on 512 megas.

I think I haven't facepalmed enough at my boss today.

I think I had 1.5 before. And my co-worker beside me only had 1 gig. Can be kind of painful when you've got about 8-10 windows open.

[halabar]

So.. Instagram...

Working as only a subsidiary of Facebook (or perhaps Netflix) could, they first rolled out what they characterized as a simplification of their ToS, but of course allowed themselves vast new powers, and then pulled back when everyone revolted, except they really didn't pull back. Based on their new wording, which still isn't final, you still could see your images in ads, without compensation.

The best course seems to be to go back to Flickr if you really are a photographer, or start using something like Pick or Twitter if you are just sharing photos of your breakfast...

Will be interesting and amusing to see how it plays out.

[Nooska]

What I don't get, is how these big companies can get this stuff through their legal departments, when they operate internationally.
ToS cannot in most european law I've read (including danish) in anyway take away your rights to material you hold the copyright to, and you are the only one that is allowed to earn money, unless specifically* sold to others.

Unless such a contract specifically exists, not only is all earnings from selling the use of your work forfeit to you, you are entitled to compensatory damages in a punitive amount. Doing it comercially and systemically is an aggrevating circumstance.

*Specifically meaning a specific contract describing the sold work, and which rights specifically are transferred and which aren't.

Yeah, I don't see how these companies get it through their legal departments - its lawsuits waiting to happen, and as soon as the first settlement/verdict hhits the news, everyone will want thier piece - meaning its a bankruptcy more than likely.

[Klaudandus]

A lady has a grievance against our dept, but always calls and bitches that her pc never works and that our techs never show up.

Maybe we would show up and offer service if we didnt have a grievance against the dept as a whole in the first place.

[benebarba]

Yeah, I don't see how these companies get it through their legal departments - its lawsuits waiting to happen, and as soon as the first settlement/verdict hhits the news, everyone will want thier piece - meaning its a bankruptcy more than likely.

In the US, by and large, it's all down to time, money and fear: making any potential claimants afraid of the size of the of your legal warchest, and betting that they won't have the money or time to pursue it to its end.

In such civil cases, our legal and IP system is notoriously broken.

[Nooska]

Aye, in europe (at least denmark) you can't do that as much - ogh and there are national organisations that will take on the copyright holders claims if they feel it is a case where principles might be at stake.

[Flex]

What I don't get, is how these big companies can get this stuff through their legal departments, when they operate internationally.
ToS cannot in most european law I've read (including danish) in anyway take away your rights to material you hold the copyright to, and you are the only one that is allowed to earn money, unless specifically* sold to others.

ToS never really take away your rights, you're granting other people rights to use your stuff. Some ToS seem wonky on first glance, like all cloud storage services have a term about you granting them the right to duplicate and copy, which sounds bad until you realize that they mean they need to copy the file among their servers.

Here's a decent rundown of the new ToS and how they're actually more limited than the old ones: http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/18/3780 ... eally-mean

[halabar]

Aye, in europe (at least denmark) you can't do that as much - ogh and there are national organisations that will take on the copyright holders claims if they feel it is a case where principles might be at stake.

The organizations here that do that are terribly one-sided.. (i.e. the oxymoron of the ACLU).

What does work here is class-action lawsuits, but those are typically resolved in favor of the attorneys running them.

[benebarba]

What I don't get, is how these big companies can get this stuff through their legal departments, when they operate internationally.
ToS cannot in most european law I've read (including danish) in anyway take away your rights to material you hold the copyright to, and you are the only one that is allowed to earn money, unless specifically* sold to others.

ToS never really take away your rights, you're granting other people rights to use your stuff. Some ToS seem wonky on first glance, like all cloud storage services have a term about you granting them the right to duplicate and copy, which sounds bad until you realize that they mean they need to copy the file among their servers.

Right, and there are a number of similar important clauses... I think most take issue with when that article is not longer used to cover necessary use due to infrastructure or technology, and instead result in 'we're gonna sell it to other parties too'.

I recall seeing something from some recent round of Facebook or Instagram TOS updates that said something like "we retain the rights until the user deletes the account, except when the content had been shared with others and they retain a copy" ... which *could* mean they never have to reliquish the granted rights since they can't really prove that a copy doesn't remain in someone's cache, or they specifically define the terms to exclude that type of copy.

[Nooska]

In at least 4 european countries EULAs and TOS are null and void for legal contentions -which these companies should also have legal teams telling them.
Even if some terms are valid, unless the terms as a whole are valid, the whole thing is null and void, unless exceptions have been made for void terms.

In general, the legal side of it here is "if you put in stuff thats not legal, all your stuff is gone - caveat venditor - you are the one with the money and knowledge beforehand to know what should and shouldn't be said or agreed upon.

[Nooska]

That alst one is a part of the system - if you share a photo, and I then share it, then it doesn't disappear from my timeline because you delete it.

[Shoju]

So.. Instagram...

Working as only a subsidiary of Facebook (or perhaps Netflix) could, they first rolled out what they characterized as a simplification of their ToS, but of course allowed themselves vast new powers, and then pulled back when everyone revolted, except they really didn't pull back. Based on their new wording, which still isn't final, you still could see your images in ads, without compensation.

The best course seems to be to go back to Flickr if you really are a photographer, or start using something like Pick or Twitter if you are just sharing photos of your breakfast...

Will be interesting and amusing to see how it plays out.

It's already played out. They backed down on the language.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-575598 ... ur-photos/

They realized when they lost a substantial % of users and accounts in a 24 hour period. The revolt was quick, fast, and noticeable. I follow ~300 people on my "non personal" instagram account, and lost somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 people in the wake of the announcement. Professionals, journalists, artists. All gone.

[benebarba]

That alst one is a part of the system - if you share a photo, and I then share it, then it doesn't disappear from my timeline because you delete it.

Correct - which is its intended function (perhaps not all like it, but I can see it). However, legal wording is picky for a reason: a certain amount of vague wording *could* (I'm talking tin-foil hat here, but bear with me) allow for situations that the end-user may not have considered.

Really it's always been this way: simply asking you to say you understand a contract and then signing it means jack all about if you *actually understood it*... it's why contract law is a thing.

[Flex]

'we're gonna sell it to other parties too'.

Instagram has no ability, and you grant them no right to, sell your pictures. What it does say is that your pictures may show up in the stream of a sponsored party, i.e. the New York Yankees sponsoring a page and showing many Instagram pictures of Yankee Stadium from many different users.