Earlier this year I decided to move away from streaming platforms and rebuild my local music collection and serve it out over Plex. Plex supports last.fm so everything gets recorded there.
I also use the following docker containers on my home server:
This allows me to share my last.fm input to both a local scrobbler (Koito) and to listenbrainz - I figured having this data in multiple locations makes it a bit more safe.
Honestly between last.fm and listenbrainz I find myself exploring more on listenbrainz - even though most of it's users don't really fit the same listening profile I do.
If you want something that doesn't require a docker container to run but still supports multiple targets, I'm maintaining a small linux daemon for that: https://github.com/mariusor/mpris-scrobbler
for my use case I think the docker container is better solution. I listen on several different devices so having plexamp send everything to last.fm and use that as the "source of truth" and then the docker container monitors last.fm and resends that info to other targets makes a bit more sense - this way I never have to make sure I have something running on my listening device.
Is that what is happening? My understanding of Termination of Transfer is that it keeps you from being able to make a sequel to your video game using the characters you licensed from me, but that the game you have already created you can continue to sell.
What the termination allows me to do as the creator of that character in this analogy is say - charcircuit isn't doing anything with my character for 35 years - I'm going to take back control and maybe do something myself with it or license it to someone else to do something with...
I don't think you are correct here. From the FAQ [0] on the website linked by the post:
“Derivative works” exception – although a successful termination causes all of the rights to revert, this will not affect exploitation of derivative works created during the lifetime of the agreement, even after that agreement has been terminated. Once the agreement has been terminated, the grantee (see the glossary) may continue after termination to utilize “derivative works prepared under authority of the grant before its termination…[consistent with] the term of the grant” (to quote from the U.S. Copyright Act). This means that if, for example, an author granted a company a 50-year exclusive license to create a movie based on the author’s novel, that company can continue to use and exploit the movie even after the author successfully terminates the exclusive license. The company may not prepare a new movie based on the novel; it may only continue to use the existing movie that it created when the exclusive license was still current.
Thank you, I was wrong. This does seem more reasonable. But it would be nice if minor changes were still allowed. For example patching security issues of a video game should be allowed.
I wish this were further up in the comments. Most people seem to be assuming that you get all the marbles back.
Imagine the chaos if someone were able to say ‘whoops, all those books you bought are no longer sellable!’.
Imagine if Alan Cox took back all the bits of Linux he wrote and decided they were no longer to be licensed under the GPL!
…although maybe it’s only a matter of time before that second thing happens somewhere? “The company may not prepare a new movie based on the novel; it may only continue to use the existing movie that it created when the exclusive license was still current” seems problematic for open source software (or commercial software! What if the original authors of the FAT file system decided to try to start getting royalties from new derivative works?…)
Under the U.S. Copyright Act, copyrighted works that qualify as “works made for hire” are subject to special rules that govern who becomes the first owner of copyright in a work. For regular works, the person who creates the work becomes the first owner of copyright. However, for “works made for hire” either the employer or person who commissioned the work becomes the first owner of copyright. Neither of these transfers of rights from the author to the employer or commissioning party, which occur by operation of the Copyright Act, nor any subsequent agreements entered into by the employer or commissioning party in relation to the work, may be challenged by the author or their family members.
There’s a whole lot more nuance there, but notably “A contribution to a collective work” is allowed to be a work for hire.
Yeah, if you license something to use in your game then that item comes with a license term. You did not buy it and you do not own it. If you did buy it instead of license it, you would be free to do whatever you wanted with it forever. But you didnt buy it, you licensed its use.
> When Zork arrived, it didn’t just ask players to win; it asked them to imagine. There were no graphics, no joystick, and no soundtrack, only words on a screen and the player’s curiosity. Yet those words built worlds more vivid than most games of their time. What made that possible wasn’t just clever writing, it was clever engineering.
GOG is hardly a toy and is the platform I look to purchase tons of games on instead of Steam (which I really like) and definitely over Epic (which I've never even installed)
Only drm free steam games. The ones with the steam drm require steam client to be running to launch (steam itself can be in offline mode but it still needs to be running)
Games using things like steam input might also require steam to be running so there is some drm free games that might not run also. Some of those will if you move them outside the steam folder / rename Steam.exe. If you leave them in the steam folder the game will start steam for you if when you launch it.
I was going to ask about wine support. Anyone tried in Bottles (wine distribution)? I've had better luck with Bottles than plain Wine with other software. Hoping to try soon.
In the article [0] (also posted on HackerNews [1]) they share a link to page, which is a guide how to run new Affinity (v3) using Wine/Bottles combo [2].
The idea that you don’t need an app to charge is, in my view, highly dependent on the region. I follow several YouTube channels where people document long EV road trips to showcase how the charging infrastructure is evolving. While things have definitely improved over the past couple of years, using non-Tesla charging stations still often involves:
- Charging speeds that fall short of what's advertised
- A requirement to use an app for payment (even if no account setup is needed)
- Chargers that are out of service but not flagged as such in the system
Oh, I hadn't thought of it that way, but I bet you're right! I bet denser areas got chargers earlier, so they're stuck on the stupid-app-based model that was popular 5 years ago. Where I am in the upper midwest, the rollout has been happening only over the last couple years (e.g. several of the chargers I stopped at last month are not even on Google Maps streetview yet), so the chargers are in better shape and just have standard card readers now.
I also use the following docker containers on my home server:
Multi-Scrobbler: https://hub.docker.com/r/foxxmd/multi-scrobbler Koito: https://koito.io/guides/installation/
This allows me to share my last.fm input to both a local scrobbler (Koito) and to listenbrainz - I figured having this data in multiple locations makes it a bit more safe.
Honestly between last.fm and listenbrainz I find myself exploring more on listenbrainz - even though most of it's users don't really fit the same listening profile I do.
reply