The average dude fabricates something six times a day-that's twice as often as women-and with #LiesMenTellWomen trending on Twitter right now, some dudes are being called out. To try to get why guys are so crafty, we reached out to male relationship experts. Here are the most common whoppers men tell their girlfriends and wives-and what the real deal is behind each.
By Robin Hilmantel
Lie # 10: "I'm Stuck in Traffic"
"He figures it's much easier to just say this than to try to explain the real reason he's running late," says John Amodeo, author of The Authentic Heart. "Remember, men aren't as good at communicating as women are." The funny thing is, a guy will toss this line out even if what held him up is perfectly legitimate. Still, you shouldn't let it slide - it's a lie nonetheless.
Lie # 9: "It Wasn't That Expensive"
"Men like toys, and they don't like sensing your disapproval, even if you don't share a bank account," Amodeo says. He could also be dropping this fib to try to prove he's responsible with money, says Barton Goldsmith, author of Emotional Fitness for Intimacy. "He doesn't want you to think that if you do share funds down the line, he's going to blow them all on things like plasma TVs."
Related: 10 Ways to Get Over an Ex
Lie # 8: "I'm on My Way"
Guys usually throw you this line when you're making them meet you at some event they don't want to attend - like, say, your family reunion. He's stalling, but he's also being pouty. Consider: He can't exactly refuse to go without enduring serious repercussions from you, and he can't very well throw a temper tantrum in front of your pop-pop. So saying this and then showing up late is his way of gaining a wee amount of control.
Lie # 7:"I Didn't Have Too Much to Drink"
This lie could point to a serious problem - and we're not just talking about your relationship. If he says it often he could have an alcohol issue, Goldsmith says. You need to talk to him about how concerned you are, but watch the timing. "That's definitely a conversation you need to have when he's sober," Amodeo adds.
Related: 9 Relationship Screw-Ups to Avoid on Twitter
Lie # 6: "Sorry, I Missed Your Call,"
Lie # 5: "My Battery Died," and
Lie # 4: "I Had No Signal"
These three lines all mean the same thing: I screened your call. Why? "Often men will feed you these lies because they're afraid to tell you to back off a bit, that they need a little alone time," Amodeo says. You might want to ease up on the checking in and let him miss you more.
Lie # 3: "No, Your Butt Doesn't Look Big in That"
Look, if you assail him with the question in the first place, you're really just asking to be thrown this all-purpose mollifier. "Every guy has a buddy who's told him, 'I answered this question wrong once, and my girlfriend wouldn't have sex with me for a year,' " Goldsmith says. This is the one safe response he knows, so there's no way he's going to risk the worst by straying from it. If you want an honest opinion, go ask one of your girls instead.
Related: 9 Cheap Dates You Have to Try
Lie # 2:"This Will Be My Last Beer"
Our experts say this man-lie delivered over the phone means he wants to get you off ASAP so he can spend more time with his buddies. The thing is, even if he says it three times in a night, each time he believes it, Goldsmith says. It's like when you vow this will be your last cookie…five times in a row.
Lie # 1: "Nothing's Wrong, I'm Fine"
A whopping 52 percent of men have told their girlfriend this line. According to experts, this go-to fib is all about avoiding drama and protecting male pride. Men know they're not as good with articulating what's happening or how they're feeling, so it's easier for them to just keep you out of the situation. Next time he uses this line, give him a couple days and then ask him again if he is still bummed…and why. By then he may have figured things out.
Read more at Cosmopolitan.com!
Friday, July 20, 2012
A New Form of DRM: A Legal and Pragmatic Solution for Protection of E-Books
The first obvious question is, would publishers see major losses due to copying and distributing of ebooks that do not have DRM?
Many would argue no. First, DRM is easily cracked. Anyone bent on making a copy and sending it to a third-party will do so regardless of DRM. Second, Apple has demonstrated that publishers don’t need DRM. When iTunes first launched, all files contained DRM. Sometime in the past few years Apple quietly dropped DRM. Rather than diminishing, the market for music through legitimate channels continues to climb.
Thus, there is a good argument that the ebook publishing world can go “non-DRM” without suffering any major losses. Pottormore is famously doing so. In January of this year, Anobii CEO Matteo Berlucchi gave a speech at Digital Book World suggesting that major book publishers should abandon the use DRM.
On the other hand, publishers have a legitimate concern for how they might protect works from copying en masse by counterfeiters or distribution through resale, rental or other aftermarkets. In order to protect their works in this class of infringement, publishers will need to rely on the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”). In order to rely on the DMCA, the publisher must have either technology that is circumvented or copyright management information that is removed. And therein lies my solution.
A Legal Solution
What ebook publishers really want to prevent is large-scale file sharing. This is not stopped by DRM. In fact, DRM is futile against large scale file sharing. So, ebook publishers should look for enforcement mechanisms against the intermediaries of large scale file sharing.
There are legal mechanisms for permitting enforcement against used ebook stores, as well as other forms of sharing, renting and reselling of ebooks. The solution that I propose is to use a combination of the existing DMCA rules in order to give a level of protection that is minimally necessary to enforce against used ebook stores, resellers and rental markets.
Publishers need not be afraid of stepping outside of book reader software and devices. In fact, the insistence on heavy DRM by publishers has unwittingly given Amazon power over the ebook market that publishers now regret. Customized DRM on Kindle devices creates a closed system that locks readers in to one retailer, which is potentially far more dangerous to the ebook publishing industry than the threat of piracy, in my opinion. We can free ebooks from DRM software and corresponding hardware and use existing legal mechanisms for enforcement against the worst copyright breakers.
The solution proposed is to create ebooks (in ePub or even PDF) with a watermark randomly placed throughout the book (visible and invisible). The watermark would contain the personal information of the customer who purchased the ebook and a warning not to resell, or distribute the book in any way. The user who purchases such a book will agree to terms and conditions (i.e. a “clickwrap”) that prohibit copying and distribution, as well as a statement that the consumer’s personal information will be prominently displayed on the book as a deterrent from distributing or copying in violation of the agreement.
The point of making a watermark that shows the user’s personal information is to create a disincentive for the user to pass the book along to unknown third parties, deputizing the user to act as a gatekeeper, protecting the book from wrongful distribution. If a file-sharing service or ebook reseller removed the watermark, it could be a violation of the DMCA Section 1201.
The watermark of the personal information could also have the publisher’s serial number embedded. Doing this creates an additional remedy under the DMCA Section 1202, which prohibits the removal of “publisher information” such as serial numbers. (Hat-tip to Cory Verner, who came up with this part of the mechanism. Verner is president of eChristian, Inc., an Escondido, Calif.-based Christian audio-book retailer. He has filed a patent application for the idea.)
The DMCA provides a variety of protections for digital works, such as Section 1201, which prohibits the “circumvention” of “a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.” The DMCA also prohibits the removal of copyright management information (“CMI”) under Section 1202, which includes the work’s title, author, and the copyright owner, as well as certain other “publisher information.”
What makes this “DRM” unique is that the removal of the watermark would likely violate the DMCA’s prohibition on circumventing a technological measure as well as the removal of “publisher information.” While the case law is not clear that this would be considered a circumvention, I present a novel rationale for applying Section 1201 of the DMCA to removal of a watermark.
In previous cases, technologies that are “passive” are generally not considered to “prevent access” under Section 1201. However, I believe that making the user an active participant in the protection of the book, the technology does not operate as a “pass through” the way a username and password would. But, the technology deputizes the user as the means of preventing access to the work by unauthorized third-parties.
This solution will not prevent a user from sharing a book with the user’s family or close friends. But publishers probably don’t want to sue their customers for sharing ebooks with their aunt or sister. Traditional printed books are often shared with family and friends. What ebook publishers need is a way to distribute ebooks with as little hassle as possible, while ensuring that the publisher can sue pirates and stop ebook resale, rental and large scale sharing.
To accomplish this, we don’t need heavy DRM, but something lighter. Why not use a form of DRM that lets the market grow, and reap the rewards of the next technological revolution as the ebook wave brings a massive new volume of sales and sweeps printed books to the side?
Thus, I propose using personal information as a deterrent against wrongful distribution of the book. We can deputize our customers to prevent wrongful distribution. The customer agrees not to distribute the book. If they do, the next reader will see the personal information of the original owner placed throughout the book, both visibly and invisibly. As such, not many users will violate their agreement because they will not want to have their personal information shared with unknown third-parties. Further, if they strip the information, they’re in clear violation of the DMCA.
Readers might “share” book with family and friends who already have their personal information; but they would have been free to do that with a non-digital book in the printed book business. The watermark is likely to confine file sharing to the close family; those with whom the original purchaser has a personal relationship, which is the very type of person with whom paper books are typically shared.
These are the abridged version of my conclusions. I will be publishing a much longer, more detailed piece on the topic titled Digital Rights Management Lite: Freeing ebooks from Reader Devices and Software. Can Digital Visible Watermarks in ebooks Qualify for Anti-circumvention Protection under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act? (Virginia Journal of Law & Technology, volume 17, Issue 2 (Summer 2012, forthcoming).
About Dana Robinson
Dana Robinson is a partner with Techlaw LLP, an intellectual property law firm in San Diego, where he handles copyright, trademark and new media. He is adjunct professor of law at the University of San Diego School of Law.Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Monday, July 16, 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)