Re: Re: IF you can't get clear of patents in court, then how
"Patents are nice, but without a product portfolio, a market, connections, and the ability to produce the phones, Motorola wouldn't be a good buy."
HUH??? Google already had one of the largest product portfolio's (Products from HTC, LG, Samsung, AND Motorola), one of the biggest shares of the market, and they already had an ability to produce phones (Nexus series). They gained NONE of that from this purchase. They did gain 14,000+ patents though. Maybe you need to read this post again, because you seem to have missed, well, all of it.
"If I give you my microphone to sing a song and you start talking bad about me, don't I have the right to take my own microphone back?"
Very different situation. If you bought your own microphone to sing a song, and you started talking bad about me, I would NOT have the right to take that microphone away from you... That is more like what went on here.
I agree with you that paying for something you like is fair. I pay for Netflix streaming, Hulu+, and buy some newer movies on Amazon's Video OnDemand offering. If I could subscribe to HBO and/or SHO and get their shows on my Roku, even as much as a week after they aired, I'd happily pay for that. After that point, it becomes a matter of principal to me, and maybe a little bit moral, but not about piracy...
If I'm willing to pay, but they aren't offering me a way to do so that I find reasonable, then I won't pay. If their reasons for not offering it as such are just, like if it really was something difficult to do, then I wouldn't fault them, and I'd likely wait around until I could get it for a fair to me price, or until I forgot about it. I used to wait a few months and buy used games that were only alright, because an alright game is not worth the full asking price to me, though like you said, it's fair to pay for certain things. But, when they aren't offering it to me because they want to drain my pockets via a cable subscription, and then the premium package I would need to get, then it's clear that the only reason I'm not served properly is because they are greedy, and thus, I will not give them any money until they remove their heads from their asses. I'm not going to miss out on Anna Paquin just because of their greed...so then I may or may not pirate it...
Re: "The idea is deceptively logical at the surface."
Your ability to live in the current moment and ignore anything that has happened or been said in any moment other than the current one is down right impressive.
I ditched cable....but I'm not interested in Dish as a replacement either... My Roku gives me everything On Demand with the benefits of DVR, and without the cost. But, thanks for the insight.
I think it's you being too simple minded here. You've ignored what Mike just put in his comment above you, that there are other jobs opened up by the added efficiency. He never implied that all people losing their publishing jobs will be authors, just that if one or two of them had wanted to, they can do so much easier now than before. People packaging books and shipping them and printing them, they can get some jobs packaging Kindles or Nooks and shipping them, and printing instruction sheets. Or they can learn to use a computer and do proofreading and formatting and whatever else they did before on the web. With digital books, there are things that need to be done that never needed to be done with Print books, like system administration on the servers/infrastructure for distribution, website monitoring, digital marketing like Mike mentioned. If the government didn't make it so cheap and easy for Amazon to outsource the Kindle construction, we'd have those jobs as well.
My theory on why productivity is so high while unemployment is as well?? Because people have to work 60-70 hour weeks to do enough work for their company to not get fired and replaced by some cheaper import. People are working harder to keep their jobs, but out of fear of losing them, and nothing more. This doesn't make them better workers. Maybe productivity is up, but I highly doubt a non-biased study would conclude that the quality of work is at an all-time high... And yes, if you think about it, one person working 70 hours in a week gets as much done as two people working 35 hours in a week...the correlation should be blatantly obvious just on that fact alone. Especially when you consider some European companies have 35 hour work week maximums.
You can only watch things on HBO-GO if you have a cable subscription with an HBO package... It's still not an option for us Cord-Cutters, and until I have an option, I either don't watch or pirate anything from HBO that I have interest in...
I was in your boat too, really enjoying all the shows on the premium channels SHO, HBO and Starz... Most regular network shows I liked I found on Hulu, many of which I can actually watch on Hulu+ (and those ones actually get watched, while I miss a few of the non + available ones...). But really, $200/month was flat out unreasonable. I wait a little bit for stuff on Hulu+ with limited commercials - it's better than my old TV plan when you consider paying extra for the DVR and then having to FF through commercials. I wait extra for stuff on Netflix to catch up and what not, with no commercials, it's great. I pay $76/month for what I used to pay over $200 for, counting my internet connection which is the only thing I kept from Comcast, I watch a little less TV, but I hardly ever get stuck watching something I feel stupid for having watched, and if I do start something like that, I stop it, rate it with 2 stars, and remove it from my queue and move on.... The savings has also helped me to order newer shows and movies on Amazon Video OnDemand, which has most of what Netflix and Hulu miss out on...
If only HBO and SHO would offer Roku channels, I'd gladly pay them directly for the content they offer...
They do have respect for what is around them, and they do grasp cause and effect. That is why they remained peaceful as long as they did. It is the rich people, the government lobbyists, and the politicians who do not understand the true effects of their actions, and it is only now that they are getting a taste.
Generation Disrespect at full song indeed, just not the generation you seem to think it is.
Re: Re: Severity doesn't matter at all, certainty does, though
They might realize that if they were caught every time they broke the law, but most repeat offenders get away with one here and there, and think they've learned to outsmart enforcement after the last time they got caught...
If the headline read "If even the death penalty won't stop it... perhaps a different approach is needed" we could apply that to all kinds of things that idiots have tried to get the law to stop over the years. It seems that they've only realized the truth of the statement with Alcohol prohibition. The U.S. needs to stop being so stupid with "piracy" "Imaginary Property" and the failed "Drug War"...
On a side note, to answer your question: So why do politicians and industry folk still think that greater legal threats will make a difference? Industry folk are incredibly stupid and can't look past their bottom line to see what the real problem is, and politicians flat out don't care if it'll make a difference, only if it'll get them paid!
That's what I was thinking too... They must not have felt that their demise was coming fast enough, so they're doing what they hope will help bring it along sooner.
I'm reminded of that Family Guy episode where Brian reads Rush Limbaugh's book and goes all out Republican just because the Democrats are in power. I forget the term Lois used, but it was basically that Brian always took a view opposing the majority, just for the sake of opposing the majority, and it had little, if anything, to do with the actual view.
Well, Mike outlined his point pretty clearly. It sounds very well reasoned, and even includes some outside sources. Do you have anything of value to add to the conversation, or are you just nay-saying for the sake of nay-saying?? Give us some insight into why you think that's what it is. We'll wait.
On the post: Restaurant Refuses To Serve TSA Agents
Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top
On the post: What Google Gets With Motorola Mobility
Re: Re: IF you can't get clear of patents in court, then how
HUH??? Google already had one of the largest product portfolio's (Products from HTC, LG, Samsung, AND Motorola), one of the biggest shares of the market, and they already had an ability to produce phones (Nexus series). They gained NONE of that from this purchase. They did gain 14,000+ patents though. Maybe you need to read this post again, because you seem to have missed, well, all of it.
On the post: New Research: Internet Censorship To Stop Protests... Actually Increases Protests
Re: It should be on a t-shirt
On the post: FCC Investigating Whether BART Cell Service Shut Off Was A Violation Of Federal Law
Re: Cell phone service is a constitutional right?
Very different situation. If you bought your own microphone to sing a song, and you started talking bad about me, I would NOT have the right to take that microphone away from you... That is more like what went on here.
On the post: Will TV Providers Finally Realize That People Really Are Cutting The Cord -- And Not Just Because Of The Economy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Sigh
If I'm willing to pay, but they aren't offering me a way to do so that I find reasonable, then I won't pay. If their reasons for not offering it as such are just, like if it really was something difficult to do, then I wouldn't fault them, and I'd likely wait around until I could get it for a fair to me price, or until I forgot about it. I used to wait a few months and buy used games that were only alright, because an alright game is not worth the full asking price to me, though like you said, it's fair to pay for certain things. But, when they aren't offering it to me because they want to drain my pockets via a cable subscription, and then the premium package I would need to get, then it's clear that the only reason I'm not served properly is because they are greedy, and thus, I will not give them any money until they remove their heads from their asses. I'm not going to miss out on Anna Paquin just because of their greed...so then I may or may not pirate it...
On the post: Journalist Bemoans Fact People Won't Pay For Online Content; Suggests Users Be Forced To Pay For Online Content
Re: "The idea is deceptively logical at the surface."
That is all.
On the post: Will TV Providers Finally Realize That People Really Are Cutting The Cord -- And Not Just Because Of The Economy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Sigh
On the post: Politicians, Innovation & The Paradox Of Job Creation
Re: Re: Re: Of course....
My theory on why productivity is so high while unemployment is as well?? Because people have to work 60-70 hour weeks to do enough work for their company to not get fired and replaced by some cheaper import. People are working harder to keep their jobs, but out of fear of losing them, and nothing more. This doesn't make them better workers. Maybe productivity is up, but I highly doubt a non-biased study would conclude that the quality of work is at an all-time high... And yes, if you think about it, one person working 70 hours in a week gets as much done as two people working 35 hours in a week...the correlation should be blatantly obvious just on that fact alone. Especially when you consider some European companies have 35 hour work week maximums.
On the post: Will TV Providers Finally Realize That People Really Are Cutting The Cord -- And Not Just Because Of The Economy
Re: Re: Sigh
On the post: Will TV Providers Finally Realize That People Really Are Cutting The Cord -- And Not Just Because Of The Economy
Re: Re: Re: Sigh
On the post: Will TV Providers Finally Realize That People Really Are Cutting The Cord -- And Not Just Because Of The Economy
Re: Sigh
If only HBO and SHO would offer Roku channels, I'd gladly pay them directly for the content they offer...
On the post: Politicians, Innovation & The Paradox Of Job Creation
Re: Entertainment and sports are not /productive/ jobs, either.
oh wait, out_of_the_blue? didn't read anyway.
On the post: CoC's 'Victims Of Internet Piracy' Look More Like 'Victims Of Propagandist Exploitation'
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: British MP Calls On RIM To Shut Down Messenger Services To Stop Riots; Because Pissing Off Rioters Calms Them Down?
Re:
Generation Disrespect at full song indeed, just not the generation you seem to think it is.
On the post: SEC Told Pandora To Be More Explicit In Its IPO That Its Business Is Likely Unsustainable Due To Crazy Licensing Rates
Re: Greedy bastards!
On the post: If Even The Death Penalty Won't Stop Infringement... Perhaps A Different Approach Is Needed
Re: Re: Severity doesn't matter at all, certainty does, though
On the post: If Even The Death Penalty Won't Stop Infringement... Perhaps A Different Approach Is Needed
Why the pigeon hole?
On a side note, to answer your question: So why do politicians and industry folk still think that greater legal threats will make a difference? Industry folk are incredibly stupid and can't look past their bottom line to see what the real problem is, and politicians flat out don't care if it'll make a difference, only if it'll get them paid!
On the post: Out With The Old... In With The Older At The RIAA
Re: These moves are a good thing...
On the post: Dear Everyone: Stock Market Problems Are Not Directly Due To S&P Downgrade
Re:
On the post: Dear Everyone: Stock Market Problems Are Not Directly Due To S&P Downgrade
Re:
Next >>