Procyon

Thanks Imba. Well, I don't know you, but as we are talking about smoking, I feel I need to ask you this: have you ever seen anyone dying of emphysema? I had a neighboor I liked very much. When he was 60-something, he was diagnosed with emphysema. It was a painful, slow death, that lasted two years. His doctor said had he not smoked, he would live more 20 years given his good health. But his lungs were black. I hope you decide to stop smoking while you're young and have a long, happy life.

Imba: problem with smoking is that ONE cigarrette can annoy 100 people in a bar - as a owner of one, I am witness to that. Drinking is a big problem too, but one glass of Mojito affects only the patron who bought it. You can't compare both.

It sounds early acid house.

As usual, NF's remixes make good tracks superb ones. I am ultra curious to hear God's Tears.

Samples, so we can bitch about them?

I read about the case in Japan, and it was a commission of 3 judges who barely understood technology and relied on manuals. Not a deep discussion as in US, where a panel decided.

Drosophila, the "feel" in this case is very similar, if not the jury wouldn't have found it. Plus, there's that funny episode when Samsung lawyers could not tell an iPad from their Note, in court. Our lounge bar is a good example of how patents work: if another bar opens with the same deco, that's not illegal. But with the same deco and 1/3 of the original menu, then it makes a legal case. Mind you, half of our dishes were created by us. So, if this 1/3 includes ONE of our exclusive dishes, then I will ask the other bar to pay us 1 billion dollars . Actually we need to do this to franchise our business, which we are doing (hopefully) from 2014 on.

Here it is: www.espaco-bangkok.webs.com We live in Bauru, a city in the middle of State of Sao Paulo. If passing by, come to visit us.

Alright, I misunderstood you. But arguments similar to yours have been used in other sites. The steering wheel example: when it was created it was not patented, there was no such thing at the time. Nowadays, no one can patent a steering wheel, but can patent an original mechanism that makes it steer a car via a wireless connection, say, from the back seat. It would be a steering wheel, but with some specifications that would make it unique. In other words: the outer appearance would be exactly the same, but the sofwares involved would be original - exactly what Samsung did when copying Apple. Last, almost everything we use in our daily lives are patented, we just don't know that: even the fonts used in certain computers are. You know, me and my bf are registering the format of our lounge bar, even that will be patented. The lawyer made clear to us that if someone copies some unique elements of the bar, it's enough for us to sue.

@ion1zed: for once, I agree with you. With the first part of your post. Apple valuing one trillion dollars is a magic of Wall Street, not a booking account fact from Cupertino. Even Jobs was angry at estimates from WS, for he was aware of the bubble problem that affects everything that is considered "hype". As for the value of iDevices, this is something that it is up to the costumer to decide: Apple, just like any other company is free to decide if its product can be priced at 10 dollars or 1000 dollars. No one is forced to buy it, there are cheaper versions of similar products in the market. I personally think they are expensive, but I feel comfortable paying what they ask for an iPhone of a MacBook. I don't even look at cheaper alternatives. Reason why? Because I like them, they work great for me. So, it's not a problem created by Apple, it is not even a problem actually. Again, the square with round corners was a strategy created by Samsung lawyers to detour from the most important aspect of the litigation: Samsung copied what is called "the feel" of iDevices, which included among other things the outer appearance of iPhone. If Apple was suing Samsung for this aspect solely (the square with round corners), it would lose the battle in seconds, it was ridiculous. But the battle was about the softwares, where the real money was invested, AND as a side reinforcement to their argument the outer apparance, which gave, overall, a similarity to iPhones so great it could be callled a copy. This photo is this article speaks for itself: http://www.whatsonxiamen.com/tech1044.html As for patents, you are fantasizing a little bit: what you see in movies can not be patented until the technology is created, and proven to work: take beaming away, a la Star Trek: you may see it in the big screen, but no company can patent that. The day it is created, then someone may patent it, and any other company that make use of the technology without permission or paying royalties will surely be sued by the company that owns the rights to it. Holograms is a tech that every company is investing millions to develop it right now, but no one could create it to work satisfactorily. thus it does not belong to anyone so far. But the day it is patented, and an Y company is sued for using the technology without legal rights, it may not argue "oh, but the technology was seen in Star Wars years before the X company patented it". The thieve company is then mixing fantasy with reality. Fantasy costs nothing (despite movies cost hundreds of millions of dollars to be shot), reality does cost. If your argument was valid, then you would get rich by patenting time-travelling, light sabers, the Death Star design, the blood of Alien, the Predator bending light technology...

@ioni1zed: Apple will be valued at 1 trillion dollars next year. Samsung and Apple are disputing a market that is worth billions of dollars. So, a patent, as simple as it looks like is worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Read the papers, it will give you a clear idea of how expensive the smartphone technology is. Samsung has patented more than 500 techs in 2012, Apple more than 300. Do you still think patents are kids games?

A beautiful sad techno track, it was the soundtrack to the darkest time of my life. Camillo-Analogical (TEEX 1994)

You guys are just boiling beyond reason: 1. The very creator of Android OS, Google Inc, warned Samsung more than once that they were creating devices that were copies of iPads and iPhones. But Samsung deliberately ignored the warn - its lawyers told the company that a rule against in court would be cheaper than the overall profit from the copycats. 2. You guys should read the legal papers before omitting your opinion: it's not at all about a square with rounded corners (this is a distraction to the lay misinformed public). Samsung copied more than 6 technologies that cost hundreds of millions to Apple to acquire, such as the pinching over images to make it larger - without asking for permission. If this is not "robbery", then we need a new word for that action. 3. Just this week a Seoul court found both Apple and Samsung guilty in the same legal battle. A Samsung fanboy would expect that a Korean court would rule against Apple solely, but the infrigement is so clear that even the Korean judge couldn't pretend it was not there. 4. Overall, Samsung has been found guilty in most courts around the world, or have been the receiver of harsh legal comments "it looks like and iPad, but not as cool" - a proof that it has indeed xeroxed Apple to minimum details. 5. Customers should be happy in the end: now Samsung will be forced to create it's own innovative, intelligent design instead of copying other companies. Customers will benefit from that, will be happier knowing that they are using a technology that is not seen as a sub-product copied from Apple. Last, I wanted to bring this article to see the reaction of some here who call MP3 ripping off a crime of piracy, but - strangely - defend Samsung ripping off Apple. One rule, two measures...?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/24/us-apple-samsung-trial-idUSBRE87N13V20120824 The bitter taste of plagiarism.

Will Transwave finally show something new? It is been years since they announced new tracks.

Happy Birthday NF !! Downloading now. Excuse my prying, but how old are you? . . . (1 minute later: you're 28, I visited your profile)

That is not accurate. As a DJ I have put people to dance to new and old Goa here in Brazil. It is a matter of bass and kick, MWNN style makes people dance with enthusiasm. AP, Chi-ad, MFG...I have seen psy-trance tracks sending people to the bar. It is not a matter of style, but of music with power bass and kicks. Wanna have your tracks being played more and get positive feedback from DJs ? Then stop making soft goa for the small crowd and make Goa with full on elements.

@radi: take it easy man. I am one who didn't have the time to listen to ur track. Don't assume so hastly that people are ignoring you or your work.

Well, that's exactly why I asked him to elaborate further. Calling somebody else "wrong and confused" because of an opinion emitted, without explaining the reason why does not make a point.

I watched again "An American Werewolf in London", the scene in the marsh still scares me a lot. I have friends who like vampires, zombie, etc...movies. I feel a little bit interested in werewolves. Watched the sequel too "...in Paris", and the party scene is quite horrendous, IMO. But the movie that scared me big time was the French "The Brotherhood of the Wolf", the scenes are really horrific, and knowing that the movie was based on real facts made me scare of the night for some time. (A funny episode: I once was taking a subway with a friend in Sao Paulo. The station was completely desert and the tunnel was dark and silent. Then I said: doesn't it look like the scene of the werewolf attack in London subway? He got angry at me for saying that, then decided to pay a taxi instead of waiting for the train...)

Great text. However as Wikipedia is usually the first source of info these days, a mention that early electronic Goa was born out of England House wave and Detroit Techno would make it more colorful.

@mona: can you elaborate on why you think he is confused and wrong? For I don't agree 100% with him, but his opinion has some ground.

I tried to play Filteria some times at our lounge, but it just didn't work. I even twitched the Bass control in our sound system to see if there was something that could make tracks "stronger", to no avail. Here's what people really like to hear here. A full-on track, but with lots of goa atmospherics Hypnocoustics - Ashtamangala http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAtdSnQ2nfo And the neogoa style of Nova Fractal is huge success here, people have even asked where they can get his tracks. Of course, I have directed them to the online services.

I read 17 years ago in ID "goa trance is good at one thing, and excels at this thing: to make you dance, hard". This is one of the best definitions of goa trance ever: it is dance music, and should put people to dance. Some neo-goa artists should venture a little bit more in the full-goa territory, they would be more appreciated there.

In the end, the 500 police officers were a fantasy of a crazy brain - people are saying there were only a couple of POs just like every year, they busted some really heavy drug dealers that had placards with prices, how-to-get-there maps and what not. Not a smart market strategy, in a strict country like Hungary.