"snarled up in local customs for more than 3 months"
Local customs!
Maybe the caterer should have been told off to pay all the local expedited clearance fees.
33029 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
There are two separate questions here:
1. Is the output of a program copyrightable?
2. If so who owns he copyright?
We can work from a more familiar example.
1. A compiled binary program is widely accepted as being copyrightable. If that were to be overturned the entire packaged software industry is in trouble. The binaries are the output of a compiler or maybe a linker so the output of a program is copyrightable.
2. Who owns the copyright of the compiler/linker output? That's fairly clear (but see below); it's primarily the owner(s) of the copyright of the source code that was fed into it.
We have to go round that loop again in that the source code itself will be the output of one or more editing programs. The ownership of that might be a bit more complicated but the legal principles are well enough established. It could be whoever was pounding the keys. However where that was done in the course of employment then it will normally be the employer. This is all established stuff, you just have to look at the context.
There's something of a complicating factor in that the vendor of the compiling system may have provided utility libraries which are linked in as may some third parties. Their ownership (established as above) and the terms on which they're provided may also have to be taken into account. Again, this is all old stuff.
If we now transfer this to the AI situation it should become fairly clear.
1. The image is the output of a program and, as we've established, subject to copyright.
2. On the analogy above the output must be owned by the owner(s) of the input. The inputs appear to be the selected description and the training data. The description seems to have been provided by the operator but who owns the training data? Is this provided by the operator or is it owned by one or more additional parties and if so under what conditions?
Having thought this through I'm wondering if these attempts to credit authorship to the AI are aimed at getting round thorny questions relating to the provenance of the training data.
The complaints with injets is that if they're used intermittently the ink dries up and they have to replace the cartridge(s) at considerable expense. For that situation a laser is less trouble, it doesn't have that particular problem and in the long term may well be cheaper. IOW the use case may better met by switching and the best advice is to switch and point out that hanging on to the inkjet is the sunk cost fallacy in action.
"May be" because if there isn't enough printer use then the better option might be to take the work to a print shop or a friend with a laser printer or whatever.
The browser situation is easier - just install several. Apart from anything else the trackers don't get the whole story.
"in a US address really represents a US post office"
In the UK "city" has a very specific legal meaning in that it denotes somewhere with a royal charter. It doesn't even have to be a very big place.
In Royal Mail parlance - or at least in terms of the field name in PAF - the equivalent term would be "Post town". I don't expect the US to actually use UK terminology but they could at least think that their S/W might be used where their norms don't apply and try for a neutral term.
But it's worse than that. I've seen it used in genealogical S/W where the historical context could well pre-date the US postal service so even for a US location it would be an anachronism. It's not adherence to some standard, it's just lack of thought.
As to street numbers "preferred" doesn't mean anything. S/W needs to be able to accept the actual format of the real data without preferences or assumptions. If you can't do that you run into trouble. I had major problem getting a parcel delivered from the German vendor whose site didn't accept non-numeric addresses, not helped by DPD insisting that my address is at some single location at the geographic centre of the post code and I get the impression that their drivers aren't even allowed to deviate from that even if it's wrong.
This.
It may well be that the product doesn't do what the user's trying to do or it does it in a different way*. The first step in problem solving is to work out what the problem is. (The zeroth step is to identify that you have a problem.)
*Example - although I eventually discovered the answer without askingt: The recent addition of mail to Vivaldi clearly shows custom folders on the UI but no obvious way to set them up. It turns out that something which is a click away on TBird can't be done at all in Vivaldi. The "custom folders" just reflect those, if any, which are set up on the server.
"recipient; delivery address; city..."
Just stop there. That gets carried over to the UK. A lot of UK citizens may live in a city but many don't.
Then there's an assumption that every house has a number. I've run into that trying to order stuff online where with a site refusing to accept an address without one.
"unable to parse the spaces out of a credit card number"
Add to that - surprise, surprise - DVLA. The V11 has a 16 digit number in groups of 4. The web application accepts a maximum of 16 characters. It doesn't matter whether they can parse spaces or not, there isn't room for them.
It can be frustrating to try to report it to the S/W's bug reporting site and find it gets marked as a duplicate of bug xxxxxxx which has been confirmed, then discovered that there are numerous other duplicates and either/or it hasn't been been assigned to a dev/someone has diagnosed the problem,written an tested a patch and it's still not been incorporated.
A lot of companies now employ social media staff. They're probably graduates in media studies (probably be now there are social media studies) and thus enjoy higher status amongst manglement that those unspeakable techie types on user support and development. Unwittingly they've created a mechanism to make them have to actually respond to the customers they've ignored for so long.
"Many requests have clearly made no effort to determine if the same issue has been reported before"
This is not necessarily as straightforward as you might think. The words which user Z uses to describe the problem are not necessarily the same as those used by users A to Y so all those questions are missed. User Y had much the same problem, as did user X...
And FAQs are apt to be, in reality, QWFPETA
Questions We Found Particularly Easy To Answer. or even QWTFAWWRPMWTM
"making everything the same colour, having no consistency between different parts of the app, and my personal favourite the pop-under window."
Throw in maximum white space as well. If you only have a few controls on the page it should be possible to see all of them without going full screen and scrolling.
A long time ago, when round pin sockets were still lingering in older UK houses I had a unversal plug. There was a slider adjacent to the flex entry point which would uncover different sets of holes in the plug face to let different sets of pins fall through - I think the selected pins could be rotated to lock them into place.
It was very clever except for one detail. It didn't have a conventional cable clamp, maybe it would have got in the way of the slider. It had plastic fitting which just clamped round the cable with a self tapper so that pulling the cable would have jammed the fitting up against the side of the plug and held it firm that way. The self tapper was so positioned that it could easily bridge the line and neutral....
"a Peterbilt of printing"
I think that needs explaining for those of us on this side of the pond although I suppose the sentiment can be grasped.
For the wider point I haven't seen any such problems with my Brother printer. It accepts 3rd party cartridges without complaint.