Zero-Sum Economics
from the right-to-exclude dept
![Zero Sum Economics](http://mimiandeunice.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/ME_422_0SumEconomics-640x199.png)
![Hide This Hide this](https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/topclose.png)
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: economics
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's so funny, I forgot to laugh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
This Ninatoon is about as lame as they come. She attempts to portray something that just isn't real. Nobody excludes anyone from making money. Well, yes, if they are stealing your patent products or re-using your copyrighted content, then yes. But any normal people or company with a product generally isn't excluded from making money.
It's more of the "preaching to the choir" stuff, trying to reinforce a negative stereotype of all things business, patents, and copyright. It's incredibly unrealistic, incredibly silly, and if this reflects Nina's view of things, indicates that she is very much disconnected from the real world.
It's the Tardian version of "better dead than red". Probably made on a computer filled with Chinese parts, just to add a little more irony to the game.
Yup, so funny, I forgot to laugh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
woo! my prediction came true
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
Take Android as an example: Micosoft has made more money out of Android than they made out of their own Phones just because of patents. THEY are leeching off a better product with their patents. And that's just wrong.
You could say "but Microsoft invented the things that Android is using to make money, so they should get a cut" That's just wrong: Microsoft themselves could not compete with Android by implementing their own smartphone OS, so why should they get a cut of the product someone made that is actually better?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
Was Google blocked from making Android?
Was Apply blocked from making whatever their iOS is now?
Microsoft doesn't have to compete if they created the tools used.
Nobody is blocking anyone from any normal legal business. They may have to come up with their own ways to do things, their own products, or license what they need from those who already created it. But there is no block, only in your mind.
Nina is still so peeved off about Sita, that she can't leave it alone years later.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
See Apple vs. Samsung also.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
I'm not necessarily against businesses trying to profit, but basic economics state there is no profit to be made in any field, and companies are screwing the consumer too hard trying to prevent that from happening.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
- righthaven?
- people fighting against orphaned works going to public domain?
Just two quick examples off the top of my head.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
Instead, you have such a strict idea of copyright in your mind that this thought probably never occurred to you. You'd rather complain about what someone else did than to alter the one or two small parts that you are complaining about so that it can be more to your liking.
In light of that, I propose that merely the idea of copyright has caused people to create less. Here we have an artist who wants you to alter her stuff, and yet you'd rather complain that she didn't do it perfectly. She isn't going to come after you for copyright infringement. Quite the opposite. And yet, since you've gotten the idea of copyright so ingrained into your psyche, you aren't going to create anything new and better.
Thanks for once again showing that copyright is a failed concept.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
You just don't get it - the copying isn't the "wrong", it's the lack of respect for the people who actually created the work. Forget the law, forget the courts, forget all of that stuff, it's also an issue of personal morality.
The problem really is that we live in a society right now with few morals. It's an entire generation bent on disrespecting others and pulling a piece and capping anyone that doesn't respect you.
What Nina and the other citizens of the Tardian universe don't understand is that not only are they pushing to change a law, they are pushing to lower moral standards. Once we stop respecting each other, we are in serious trouble. Once one side starts massively disrespecting others, the other side has no choice to join the battle.
The levels of disrespect in Techdirt postings is so high, it's often hard to see the truth hiding behind it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
Or, perhaps, you're referring to the 20-something generation? Well my niece would be more likely to cut on herself than someone else (being in the emo scene, alas) (/sarc, btw).
The 30-somethings? Well, sir, that�s me� and I�ll take personal offense that you are saying all of my mother�s work was a failure and in vain.
I'd love to know how the copyright law and culture are upholding this holy respect you seem to claim exists. Is it perhaps where an artist [sic, my opinion] was accused of pirating his own creation (I'm talking about 50 Cent, btw, in case I lost you) by his own label? Is it in the fans who tribute those they admire and respect... who are respected in return by those very artists... but are threatened and slapped around by corporate entities who own a piece of paper?
Where is this respect you claim should exist?
And you're right... the level of disrespect shown by self-important, holier-than-thou, opinionated ACs who make broad, sweeping generalizations that encompass entire generations is so high that there no longer is any truth.
But hey, why let anything weigh you down from your high-horse? Preach on, brother.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
A generation (probably including your daighters, if they have internet access and like music) who cannot be bothered to respect the work of others.
Go walk down your street and check out the graffiti, the garbage missing the can, the cars driving by with too loud exhaust systems and even louder MP3 players. Go to the mall and see people pushing and shoving, fighting over parking spaces (and I mean actual fist fights), the amounts of shoplifting, and so on that goes on. Pay a visit to the washroom to check out the teens smoking a blunt and pissing on the toilet seats.
On your way home, don't cut anyone off, road rage could get you killed. Don't walk down the wrong street wearing the wrong disrespectful color... there is so much non-respect going on, it's almost painful.
What happens with culture is the same thing. We have entire generations who act like armed thugs, are vigilantes (thanks to anonymous and 4chan), and think that anything and everything is theirs without restriction.
So yeah, get your head out of the sand and go check out the real world. You might understand that a "little bit of piracy" is just another symptom of a very sick society.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
You come on here blathering about a lack of respect in this world and don't even pause to look in the mirror. Maybe if you take a second to do so, you'll see yourself as part of the problem. After figuring that out, maybe you can tell me who the hell you are to make such judgmental accusations, oh ye hypocrite.
I do 'stick my head outside'... and it's quite clear from the sand. I go around armed in public to defend myself from a lot what's out there. But I don't go around screaming about how everyone is evil and out to get me. I give people a chance to prove that they're better than the negative that makes the news. I sure as hell don't accuse them of evil until they've individually proven they deserve it. Much like you yourself do now.
Take your broad, cynical generalizations and go preach them to a brick wall. Yes, there's some really bad stuff in the world. But not everything in the world is bad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
Do you pirate? Oh wait, "file share", because we can't even accept the moral reality that you are getting something for nothing, without permission. That whole pile of logic is incredibly disrespectful.
You don't have to be guilty of a crime to be disrespectful. You just have to be disrespectful. That you walk around armed is pretty already a solid step in that direction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
Radical Skid already pointed out that all the things you're attributing to the 'new generation' is ancient in some cases, so I'll let his stand. That point being (in case you suffer from a case of "oh god, talk about not getting it") is that there have ALWAYS been places where you cannot go safely for fear of gangs... gangs who think they own the street (sorry, but the Crips & Bloods, MS13, Latin Kings... they've been around longer than the last 10 years).
And, for the record, you did accuse me and mine of being immoral thieves and thugs...
Do you want to back pedal further and say I misinterpreted that?
And you know what? I did just download copies of the Harry Potter books after seeing the recent movie. Because I own all the originals and didn't feel justified in paying for additional copies to place on my Nook (that I didn't have when I got the books). I wanted to read them again, but now I use a Nook.
And how is me going around armed to defend myself disrespectful? If you come to me and put a gun in my face and demand my wallet, am I supposed to �respect� you and give up without a fight?
Perhaps you have a misinformed image of me that you think my pants are on the ground and my glock is tucked away under my gang-colored hoodie that I wear in 100+deg weather. I'm actually a 32yo, slightly over-weight, white man with a wife & two daughters who drives a Scion XB (with factory radio, for the record). I own two pistols in full compliance of my local laws, and I am properly licensed to carry them on my person (no, not both at the same time). I work in Learning & Development for a major insurance company, and was actually trying to join my local police force as a new career, but they stopped hiring due to budget reasons.
So... again... I say that if you choose to judge me personally with your cynical eye that can see nothing but doom & gloom, go fuck yourself. But go do it quietly where I don't have to even acknowledge you exist.
You blame entire groups of people based on the actions of a few and act defensive and �misinterpreted� when others point out that you yourself are the problem based on your own actions. Again, for the final time, go look in the mirror.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
Graffiti has been common in any urban area since at least Roman times.
the garbage missing the can
Of course, there was no litter prior to the current generation.
the cars driving by with too loud exhaust systems and even louder MP3 players.
Low-restriction exhausts were introdueced in the 1940s, and car radios are even older than that. Hardly the current generation.
Go to the mall and see people pushing and shoving, fighting over parking spaces (and I mean actual fist fights), the amounts of shoplifting, and so on that goes on.
Which would have just as easily happened in any open-air market in London in the 1600s.
Pay a visit to the washroom to check out the teens smoking a blunt and pissing on the toilet seats.
Marijuana is new, apparently. As is poor bathroom etiquette.
On your way home, don't cut anyone off, road rage could get you killed.
"Road rage" has existed as long as the automobile, which itself is not an invention of the current generation.
Don't walk down the wrong street wearing the wrong disrespectful color
Sounds a bit like the Edo period in Japan, no? Again, not the current generation.
Here it is, as bluntly as possible: You just sound like another short-sighted, under-informed elderly individual who pines for a rose-colored past that never existed anywhere but in his own mind. Just as people griped about declining moral standards when women starting showing their ankles 100 years ago. Time marches on, but people fundamentally don't change.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
No rose colored glasses, there are too many places in these here United States were you are no longer safe to walk after dark, where taking your girlfriend to a bar for a drink can lead to your death (attacked by guys who hit on her at the bar), or where you private property is suppose to be the "canvas" for graffiti "artists", most of whom failed basic penmanship, let alone know art.
Disrespect runs deep and wide. The ones who usually can't see it are the ones most guilty of it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
I do it all the time, when you start doing those things you stop littering, also those other rude people good for nothing, thieves come help for some reason and they too don't litter and funny they bring coffee, tea and sandwiches for everyone without being asked to do so, more importantly nobody gets angry with others that litter.
I set the example and they followed for some reason, I never asked anybody to do anything, I never got mad with others that didn't help or littered.
And they do the same thing now, and that also created a new perspective about what the streets are. The people who go out and clean don't litter, the people who go out and help fix things probably will never help break them.
But you wouldn't understand something like this, you would get the part where everybody should go out, but you would try to compel others to do so and that is where things go wrong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
I don't need permission or blessing to share a song or video with anyone, I don't need permission to copy it or pass it along to whomever I wish to.
Just as I don't need your permission to sing, talk or walk.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
I couldn't have made my point about you more clearly.
But how about this one:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
Such places existed in the United States 100 years ago, as well. My point is that it's not a probably only endemic to the current generation, as you're stating.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
As for your morals argument, copyright is immoral. Or are you of the opinion that it's moral to outlaw sharing works with others? Do you think it's immoral for people to take a work and alter it or spread it? If we're talking about taking credit where it's not due, that's not the purpose of copyright. That's where plagiarism comes into play. And as I've shown above, the only people who are successful at passing off the work of others as their own are the ones who are the biggest proponents of copyright.
The other day I read a book aloud to a group of kids at my daughters birthday party. Call me immoral if you want, but there's no way I'm going to pay for a public performance license for that. And screw the people who think they have a copyright on the song Happy Birthday. We sang it in front of dozens of people, but I'll never pay them for their performance royalty. Do you think I'm being immoral now?
Your misunderstanding of copyright's purpose astounds me. Copyright wasn't made for moral reasons. It wasn't made for reasons of respect. It was simply a tool to promote the progress. Yet every where we turn it has failed on that account. I want my 200+ years of progress back. Can you give it to us? Who's being the immoral one now?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
I'm reminded of the story of a man who took a few fish and loaves of bread and copied them to share them with a multitude of people. According to what you've written, he was an immoral thief for having done so.
If that's really what you think of Jesus, then I think it is you who actually has the "personal morality" problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not just somethign to flatten your clothes with
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Nice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Nice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Nice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Because you forgot a step. Going to Congress to have laws passed forcing people to pay for your government granted monopolies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Isn't industry accounting great?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Exclude everyone else, so they have no money to spend-- on your 'thing'.
Only someone without a clue would think that the only way you can make money is by denying others making money, and that the REAL way for people to make money is to ensure there are lots of other people making money (to spend !!)..
Nina, you just dont get it..
(again, you need to stick to something you are good at,,, whatever that is?)...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Exclude everyone else, so they have no money to spend-- on your 'thing'.
FUCK i missed that one, i'll have to add it to my "InB4" list
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Exclude everyone else, so they have no money to spend-- on your 'thing'.
The first entry should be "Saying 'Mike Masnick, you are a tool' when Mike is not the author", because that one is just too common.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Exclude everyone else, so they have no money to spend-- on your 'thing'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Exclude everyone else, so they have no money to spend-- on your 'thing'.
You just described the entire publishing industry. That is exactly what they do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Exclude everyone else, so they have no money to spend-- on your 'thing'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Exclude everyone else, so they have no money to spend-- on your 'thing'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Exclude everyone else, so they have no money to spend-- on your 'thing'.
Darryl: not even once.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Exclude everyone else, so they have no money to spend-- on your 'thing'.
"the REAL way for people to make money is to ensure there are lots of other people making money"
THAT was EXACTLY the point of this comic. And it's the entertainment industry with their gov't granted monopolies who are trying to stomp out the competition and keep others from making the money they wish to make, and you're right, they are clueless about how it really works.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Was it supposed to be funny ???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Charge Eunice with assault .....
BTW: it's under the subheading "economics" not 'humour'/'humor'...
So no one expects it to be funny, and Nina has lived up to that expectation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Charge Eunice with assault .....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Charge Eunice with assault .....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Charge Eunice with assault .....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The sad thing...
For those born with greed,
There will never be such thing
As enough money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The sad thing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I understand it...
I can see exactly what she is getting at. Its not 'funny', but it is amusing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I understand it...
Basically, it's like Techdirt is her security blanket, a support group that keeps encouraging her to keep up the "good fight". But in the mean time, her talents (and she has some, that is for sure) are wasted on the proverbial peeing into the wind.
It's really too bad, I would love to see what she could do if (a) she came up with a fully original idea, and (b) actually put her efforts on it, rather than on some mindless replication of others past efforts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I understand it...
Carry on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Fourth Frame
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's reserved to those who are kicked.
I'm curious, Nina: who in the world were you picturing as asking the question?
Now, had the last strip been a payout to Congress and governments of the world...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Every struggling artist/musician/photographer/writer who thinks copyright (which is only a right to exclude, not a right to get paid) will make them money.
And Lewis Hyde, who asserts over and over in Common As Air, "If there is no way to exclude, then there is no way to make money" (p. 55) Which may explain why that book, and his excellent older book The Gift, remain under restrictive copyrights, and why Hyde supports IP monopolies as long as they're "limited." Common As Air contains a lot of excellent history and philosophical inquiry, but its vision is muddied by that unquestioned, false assumption which is presented as an axiom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Thanks for the reply and now, I'm laughing. Really. Context makes a big difference when I see the characters as Apple and Samsung.
:P
@Hyde... indeed. >:(
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's my stab at it....
Excluding others,
Should insure insane profits!
Why are we bankrupt?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
mine mine mine mine mine
mine mine mine mine mine mine mine
mine mine mine not yours
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Let's see....
mine mine mine not yours
dirty pirates steal what's mine
mine mine mine pay up
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
this is our content:
stolen fairly and squarely.
steal it and we'll sue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Updated
To correct for some of the trolls:
There's only one way to make money...
Exclude everyone else from making money without first paying you for the right to try and make money.
Why am I not Richer?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Of Course You Are Rich
[ link to this | view in chronology ]