The Giving Tree... In The Age Of DRM
from the well,-that-was-quick dept
It appears that xkcd has decided to do a modern update on the Shel Silverstein classic, The Giving Tree, in the age of DRM: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: drm, giving tree, sharing, shel silverstein, xkcd
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
; (
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ; (
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ; (
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: ; (
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: ; (
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ; (
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ; (
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ; (
HAVE ME!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ; (
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'd tap that ass...
http://www.xkcd.com/398/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm not troubled. It only took me a few minutes to find a torrent that included a copy of "The Giving Tree".
Empires will rise and fall, technology will march ever onwards, but human nature will never change. Even the threat of death isn't enough to stop people from being people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That gets you nasty locked up DRM on one side, and torrent sites on the other.
The freetards need to realize they are as much a cause of the problem as a solution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on Sep 27th, 2011 @ 5:43am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Sep 27th, 2011 @ 5:43am
If you want any rights, you have to stop struggling and just bite the pillow like a good boy. Then maybe we will grant you some small portion of what you foolishly thought was yours by nature.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Sep 27th, 2011 @ 5:43am
" the only right is the right for Big Content to make money"
BULLSHIT! TOTAL FUCKING BULLSHIT!
The only right is that those who create something have control over it. They have the right to sell it, to market it, and to distribute it as they see fit. That is the only "right".
Do you think you have the right to force someone to give you something they create just because you want it, regardless if they want to or not? Why does everything have to be on your terms only?
Sorry, you are the type of fuckhead that makes it very hard for progress to happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Sep 27th, 2011 @ 5:43am
Everything else is up for negotiation and thus is not a right, but a privilege.
Every good capitalist should know as much.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Sep 27th, 2011 @ 5:43am
Yes. That's the way copyright was designed to work. An author gets a LIMITED time to profit from their work before they're forced to give up their rights and the work becomes public domain. Now that copyrights last for the entire life of the author, plus another 70-90 years, they may as well be unlimited. Nothing created in my lifetime will ever become public domain. Nothing that Disney has ever created is public domain, despite the fact that many of their highest grossing films were based on public domain stories, for which Disney didn't pay a single cent.
Why does everything have to be on your terms only?
Conversely, why does everything have to be strictly on the corporations' terms? They want vastly extended copyright lengths, they get them. They want region restrictions on video, they get them. They want (legal) streaming video prevented from being offered to the public, they get it. They want the government to pass disproportionately severe laws for copyright infringement, they get them. They want law enforcement agencies to take resources away from investigating more serious crimes and go after people who are only hurting their profit margin, they get it.
If the corporations had their way, every DVD/Blu-Ray player would have an internet connection so that the parent company could be notified every time you played a disc and they could bill you for it.
What am I saying? If the corporations had their way, home video wouldn't even exist!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Sep 27th, 2011 @ 5:43am
If you choose the latter option anyway, that's your problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Sep 27th, 2011 @ 5:43am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Sep 27th, 2011 @ 5:43am
In some backward countries I am not allowed to move my CD collection to my iPod, or my paperbook collection to my kindle, or my DVD collection to my GalaxyTab.
I can sit on my legally bought computer, use a legally purchased software development tool, and the code I write totally on my own can be infringing.
Now, of course some rights are above my rights to do whatever I want with my stuff. For example, I can not take my GalaxyTab and hack at someone's neck with the thin bit. That would violate that persons right to Life.
So it's really a question of how you rank rights. I think that Copyright should be a bit lower on the list. You think it's just fine.
The fact is, that currently Copyright is ranked above such things as Privacy, parts of Property rights and of course Free Speech. And by the looks of it, the ambition from certain parties is to push Copyright even further up the list.
Progress, sadly, occurs in spite of Copyright, not because of it.
And don't be sorry, I thoroughly enjoy being me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Sep 27th, 2011 @ 5:43am
The rest of your post is just the usual Tardian crap that surfaces here. Copyright doesn't rank above free speech, I am not even sure what scale you are using. Progress occurs regardless of your actions, small that they are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Sep 27th, 2011 @ 5:43am
If you can't see how twisted that is, I dont know what to say.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
why should i respect something that doesn't respect me?
coprights, patents, DRM... none of these are respectful in any way at all to anyone except those want control and/or cash
this free "tard" is smart enough to realize that the opposites of control & free-flow is nearly impossible to balance properly
a proper balance between the two would mean that the control half is free-flowing enough to not really be controlled anymore and the free-flow half would be controlled enough to ... not really be free-flowing anymore
i wouldn't really be satisfied with that sort of thing as a "freetard" it's just not "free" enough for me
and i know that the "copytarded" side wouldn't really satisfied either, there simply wouldn't be enough control for them
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
no amount of giving in, balancing or compromise will acquire those interests, they just opposite and that's pretty much what it comes down to, either there's a clear winner someday or the fight continues on
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Apparently tard you aren't smart enough to understand where the content comes from, and why you are busy shooting yourself in the foot. The idea of "free info no matter what" pretty much takes the business model out of making content.
Enjoy Sita Sings the Blues again....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Reality changes, either your company adapts or it dies. Thats capitalism.
You are a talented farmer. One day the sun has a cosmic quantum hiccup and carrots will no longer grow.
Would you find a different way to profit from your farming talents, like say potatoes or beets, or would you try to fix it with legislation?
There is the Internet. It came and the world changed. It will kill businesses. Dozens. Hundreds.
Just like the priting press, the automated weaving machine, the electrical refridgerator and countless other breakthroughs since mankind discovered fire.
Adapt or die. Stop slowing the rest of us down.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The big red herring.
"Content" is a derivative of the commons and of 10 thousand years of combined human experience and effort.
"Consumption" is really a side show. The really important thing is that future generations are free to create without some old crank like Heinlein trying to hijack them and leech off of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The entertainment companies aren't interested in "balance". They want all the control, period. For example, look at the DVD standard and region codes. Region codes aren't designed to stop people from making copies, they're designed to stop people from playing 100% legally purchased movies in a different region. How is that in any way, fair or balanced? What about the HDCP part of the HDMI standard? Pirates just use a computer to rip the movie straight off the disc, while average consumers are limited to only using hardware approved by the entertainment industry. Is that fair?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Let's talk balance. Copyright started out as opt-in for 14 years with a possible extension of another 14. A relative few works were copyrighted to begin with, and of those only a small portion extended. Copyright is now opt-out if you can and lasts 70 years plus the life of the author, or 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation in some cases.
There has been only one direction for copyright. Our great great grandparents tried to oblige your ilk with a balance, and since then you and your ilk have done nothing but rob, steal, plunder, and pillage your way to an imbalance in your favor. And then you have the audacity to suggest we're not being reasonable?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Seriously, I'm yet to have someone suggest to me what possible advantage DRM can have for me that a non-DRMed product can not equally have, other than for a 3rd party to exercise control over me.
Why the hell should I respect that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]