The best possible solution can be found here as its a combination of fast neutron reactors that will run off current waste and help produce startup fuel for LFTRs that we will use to generate the bulk of our energy. http://energyfromthorium.com/2010/03/29/kirk-sorensen-teac2-talk/
If we looked into the right types of reactors there is no reason we could not have all three. Liquid Thorium Fluoride Reactors (also known as Molten Salt Reactors) have the ability to make massive amounts of energy using a element that is far more common than Uranium (we dig it up and do nothing with it when we mine for other rare earths) and does not have the waste thats hazardous for tens of thousands of years issue that other fission reactors have.
It would be awesome if we could get more interest in these projects as its not new tech but nobody was interested in it back in the 60's because it does not make Plutonium and at the time we wanted more for weapons.
Yes, this is why a notice and notice system would be MUCH better than the current notice and takedown system we currently have in the US as it would give everyone much greater protection against abuses and attempts at censorship like this.
As it stands right now almost anyone can submit a DMCA takedown and the service provider will pull the content without checking for fear of losing their safe harbors, even if its obvious fair use or does not even belong to whoever sent the DMCA takedown.
Mike has noted in the past where a news channel was sending takedowns to youtube about a group that was using news clips for commentary on the news cast itself. In this case by the time they were able to petition to get the content back up it was days later and the videos were almost useless at that point due to the nature of the content being breaking news and needing the quick exposure. While a false DMCA takedown can be reversed sometimes by the time you can get the content back up its is not worth near as much at that point and they have succeeded in censoring you.
Oh yeah. One amusing post script? This whole thing comes just a couple weeks after a judge ordered TLC (owned by Discovery) to change the name of the show Cake Boss, for infringing on a software company's trademarks. So the company should know how it feels to be on the receiving end of a trademark threat. Too bad that rather than deal with it in a nice manner, it simply sent out its legal sharks.
Seems to me if they were smart they could of learned something from this and gone and done the "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." approach but instead went by the "Somebody was an asshat to me so I will be asshat to others." approach instead.
So wait, a person shares 2 dozen songs and gets whacked with $80 thousand in damages per song (yes later reduced to $2250) where the Sunday Times get off with just $0.19 PER CD?!? What kind of sense does this make?
But I go fishing with my fighter jet all the time, how was I supposed to know this was some cheap ripoff (other than the multimillion price difference)?
One thing I think its important to consider is that while $3.99 is not that much cash who wants to pay that up front to look at this sheet music only to find out they can't preform it? What if they have to do this a half dozen times before they finally find something that does fit their abilities?
At that point you have two choices, you download (illegally) copies for free to check them out or move to use work that is in the public and can be used for free. Honestly I would prefer the second option and let the artist that would lock up their works rot in obscurity but they have to realize they really are not losing sales to downloads when things are getting used for non-profit things like a simple talent show when they would not of been a sale anyways and do end up acting as a form of advertising.
I in some ways compare this to a bunch of my friends who have downloaded hacked versions of Photoshop when the silly image editing they do could be done just as easily in Gimp legitimately for free but they would never spend money on something to do simple image editing anyways. Even all the illegal uses of Photoshop simply reinforce its market dominance and public mindshare. Everyone I know that actually uses Photoshop to make money is more than willing to pay the (to me the rather outrageous) cost for it because they do know exactly how valuable it is.
Thank you for saying that better than i ever could.
My only point of disagreement would be trademark law where it at least serves some purpose but has lately expanded to allow things that trademark law was never supposed to do.
Mike has reported on this in the past (sorry, cant find an exact link to a story right now) where new music startups have either gone under or never got off the ground due to the RIAA demanding large licensing rates up front that they cant pay but had they of been able to do a percentage of revenue model then they would of at least had a chance to get going and as they grow so does the RIAA. Instead they deny the market the chance and the public is left with fewer options and this benefits nobody.
I would think even minuscule revenue for the RIAA is better than none at all but if they would rather continue running themselves into the ground then so be it.
Also, these contracts do not last until the end of the earth, they can be negotiated to only last a few years.
Instead, the RIAA argued that songwriters/publishers should receive a percentage of revenue. This one really makes me laugh. For years, various digital music startups have tried to license music from the RIAA -- and all of them go to the RIAA with a "percentage of revenue" offer. In every single case the RIAA turns them down, demanding huge upfront fees and guarantees on revenue. Funny that when it's their own money on the line, suddenly a percentage of revenue is the preferred option.
Here is the quote in context, read through that whole paragraph again and think on it.
Seems to me its almost exactly the same thing. Every time a startup tried to negotiate rates with the RIAA to a percentage model they say no in order to crush a startup with burdensome fees before they can even get off the ground. Now that the RIAA sees its profits dropping its all in favor of a percentage model that will allow it to pay less when it earns less but thinks this is not OK for anyone else.
So i would say Mike is right on point on this one.
That may be true that CEO's do not like getting email from the riff-raff but the polite thing to do is not to threaten a customer with a C&D but to JUST IGNORE THE EMAIL.
From what i remember it was you get half credit for a correct answer but not showing your work in most of my classes when i was in school but it could depend on the teacher.
On the post: SF Entertainment Commission Says Attending Any Gathering Of 100 Or More People Means You Lose All Privacy Rights
Demolition man come true
On the post: Why Do Some People Have A Mythical Standard Of 'Newness' To Determine What Qualifies As Art?
Re:
So which is it, a pure copy or a new work with cutouts added to it? It can't be both at the same time.
On the post: Crossing Paths: Published Author Goes Self-Published, As Self-Published Author Considers Big Publishing Deal
Always greener on the other side.
On the post: DailyDirt: If Only We Had A 'Mr. Fusion' Generator Handy...
Re: The real problem with nuclear power is that we are using a military solution to a commercial problem.
The best possible solution can be found here as its a combination of fast neutron reactors that will run off current waste and help produce startup fuel for LFTRs that we will use to generate the bulk of our energy.
http://energyfromthorium.com/2010/03/29/kirk-sorensen-teac2-talk/
On the post: DailyDirt: Cold Fusion Sounds Like A Free Lunch (There Ain't No Such Thing)
Re: Re: Nah, I'll take all 3
On the post: DailyDirt: Cold Fusion Sounds Like A Free Lunch (There Ain't No Such Thing)
Nah, I'll take all 3
If we looked into the right types of reactors there is no reason we could not have all three. Liquid Thorium Fluoride Reactors (also known as Molten Salt Reactors) have the ability to make massive amounts of energy using a element that is far more common than Uranium (we dig it up and do nothing with it when we mine for other rare earths) and does not have the waste thats hazardous for tens of thousands of years issue that other fission reactors have.
It would be awesome if we could get more interest in these projects as its not new tech but nobody was interested in it back in the 60's because it does not make Plutonium and at the time we wanted more for weapons.
Find out more on the basics of the plan at http://energyfromthorium.com/2010/03/29/kirk-sorensen-teac2-talk/
On the post: ACTA Negotiators Refuse To Set Up More Timely Meeting For Consumer Advocates
Transparency
On the post: German Anti-Piracy Group Issues Takedown Over Video It Had No Rights To
Re:
As it stands right now almost anyone can submit a DMCA takedown and the service provider will pull the content without checking for fear of losing their safe harbors, even if its obvious fair use or does not even belong to whoever sent the DMCA takedown.
Mike has noted in the past where a news channel was sending takedowns to youtube about a group that was using news clips for commentary on the news cast itself. In this case by the time they were able to petition to get the content back up it was days later and the videos were almost useless at that point due to the nature of the content being breaking news and needing the quick exposure. While a false DMCA takedown can be reversed sometimes by the time you can get the content back up its is not worth near as much at that point and they have succeeded in censoring you.
On the post: Discovery Channel Ignores Repeated Twitter Questions, Sends Content-Free Statement
Seems to me if they were smart they could of learned something from this and gone and done the "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." approach but instead went by the "Somebody was an asshat to me so I will be asshat to others." approach instead.
On the post: Rupert Murdoch, Pirate? Gave Away Jimi Hendrix CD Without Clearing The Rights
This makes my head hurt.
On the post: The Intellectually Dishonest Claims Of Those Fighting Against Open Access To Federally Funded Research
Re: Huh?
On the post: Would A Moron In A Hurry Confuse Military Equipment With A Bamboo Fishing Rod?
Jet Fisher.
On the post: Newspaper Has 'Stories Worth Sharing'.... Hidden Behind The Paywall
Re:
On the post: Teenager And Composer Argue Over File Sharing
Re: Re: Illegal is Illegal
At that point you have two choices, you download (illegally) copies for free to check them out or move to use work that is in the public and can be used for free. Honestly I would prefer the second option and let the artist that would lock up their works rot in obscurity but they have to realize they really are not losing sales to downloads when things are getting used for non-profit things like a simple talent show when they would not of been a sale anyways and do end up acting as a form of advertising.
I in some ways compare this to a bunch of my friends who have downloaded hacked versions of Photoshop when the silly image editing they do could be done just as easily in Gimp legitimately for free but they would never spend money on something to do simple image editing anyways. Even all the illegal uses of Photoshop simply reinforce its market dominance and public mindshare. Everyone I know that actually uses Photoshop to make money is more than willing to pay the (to me the rather outrageous) cost for it because they do know exactly how valuable it is.
On the post: As Google Voice Opens For All... It's Hit With Patent Infringement Claims
Re: ...Ok, that's it, I'm convinced now...
My only point of disagreement would be trademark law where it at least serves some purpose but has lately expanded to allow things that trademark law was never supposed to do.
On the post: As The RIAA Lobbies For More Royalties For Itself, It's Fighting (And Losing) Over Having To Pay Royalties To Songwriters
Re: Re: Re:
I would think even minuscule revenue for the RIAA is better than none at all but if they would rather continue running themselves into the ground then so be it.
Also, these contracts do not last until the end of the earth, they can be negotiated to only last a few years.
On the post: As The RIAA Lobbies For More Royalties For Itself, It's Fighting (And Losing) Over Having To Pay Royalties To Songwriters
Re:
Here is the quote in context, read through that whole paragraph again and think on it.
Seems to me its almost exactly the same thing. Every time a startup tried to negotiate rates with the RIAA to a percentage model they say no in order to crush a startup with burdensome fees before they can even get off the ground. Now that the RIAA sees its profits dropping its all in favor of a percentage model that will allow it to pay less when it earns less but thinks this is not OK for anyone else.
So i would say Mike is right on point on this one.
On the post: Did AT&T Really Threaten A Customer With Legal Action For Emailing Feedback To CEO? [Updated]
Re:
On the post: Planet Money Crew Merges T-Shirts And Journalism
Re: Sale at Shirwin-Williams for lead/arsenic free paint!
On the post: No Surprise: MPAA Wouldn't Reveal Data On How It Came Up With Bogus 'Piracy' Numbers
Re:
Next >>