"What other industry creates a product and allows someone else to give it away, endlessly?"
Apparently the biotech industry. Ask the good folks at Monsanto. Although they make you sign a contract not to use the endless self replications of one of their products.
Fuck it. I've given up fighting the IP industries. Since they feel that every new physical medium requires a new purchase, I give up. I agree with them. So I will now purchase all my content on whatever new physical medium they come up with.
But just like with patents, the internet is magical. So I'm considering everything digital as public domain. So as long as I keep my content consumption on the interwebs, its free.
Note to the industry: No need to apologize for DRM, I'll work around it myself.
Ok this is more confusing than usual. Monsanto has farmers sign a contract. So how exactly is this a case of patent infringement? Seems like the farmer knew what he signed and played by the rules. Monsanto didn't like the loophole, so they sued, but I can't figure out how its patent infringement.
Shouldn't Monsanto be suing the plants, since they are doing all the replicating of patented product?
That solution sounds good until you look at all of the collateral damage/chaos that would follow.
The only way to move all porn to the .xxx TLD would be through some sort of government regulation, and if that ever passed you can bet that the content industries would demand .movie .music .news and any other dot that they thought they could control. They would claim to be the only creators of real content and exercise the strictest control over their TLDs and seek to prohibit content on any non regulated TLDs.
In other words they would try to force the web to mirror plastic disc selling. And that's just the simplistic version.
That solution sounds good until you look at all of the collateral damage/chaos that would follow.
The only way to move all porn to the .xxx TLD would be through some sort of government regulation, and if that ever passed you can bet that the content industries would demand .movie .music .news and any other dot that they thought they could control. They would claim to be the only creators of real content and exercise the strictest control over their TLDs and seek to prohibit content on any non regulated TLDs.
In other words they would try to force the web to mirror plastic disc selling. And that's just the simplistic version.
I guess I stay confused. The content industry bitches about Google "stealing" its revenue all the time.
Google doesn't offer content, with the exception of YouTube, but that isn't Google content. Google makes the bulk of its revenue on ads. Most people have learned that one of the best business models on the net is ad revenue. Get the eyes, and sell them.
Hollywood studios have the most awesome back catalogue of content ever, but they want us all to pay per view and that just isn't going to happen. Ok the thing that confuses me most is...
Why won't the studios just get together and offer up their entire back catalogue on a site that charges $1 per month to subscribe AND rakes in ad revenue, as I can imagine that the page views would be in the billions in no time?
Yes I know the answer is that they feel that no one would go to the movies any more, and while I agree there would be a small drop at the box office, I imagine that the revenue spike from subscriptions and ads would greatly offset any losses in box office sales and DVD rental.
You would think they would love being able to hide all the additional revenue on movies and never having to worry about paying out royalties ever again.
"If a particular business model can not find a way to be consistent with free and open communication between the citizens of this planet, that business model needs to be abandoned."
OR just patent that business model as fast as possible and beg the government to provide proper protection. This method pays better.
Wow. I guess I don't use the interwebs enough. It would seem that there were quite a few people involved in the "invention" of the telephone and it appears that some of them knew of each others work.
All this history and no one has figured out that a 5 year patent is more than enough of a head start.
Yeah yeah yeah it's an offensive lyric. Why hasn't anyone in Congress thought to add an exception to the double jeopardy rule which would void that protection in the case of confession.
Murderers bragging about their crimes after getting away with it, is far more offensive than crude sexual metaphors.
Re: It's no secret that politicians aren't always in sync with the truth, but this is significantly more blatant a misrepresentation than is normal.
"By advocating for developing countries to disregard the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) through issuing compulsory licenses to gain access to Global Fund grants, we are abusing the system."
- Sen. Orrin Hatch
It's abuse because that is not using the system how it was intended and its just plain wrong.
Now ask the good senator how he feels about tax loopholes for the wealthy and see if he responds the same.
I need to fax over the text of the 8th Amendment someone in Washington D.C.
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
There is nothing wrong with this case. This is the perfect case to go to the Supreme Court for violation of the 8th Amendment. Because if piracy is as widespread as everyone says it is, then there are A LOT of people who should be fined more than 5x their annual income for infractions that occur daily.
"Many innovative and wonderful music-related products are made by CEA members. But many of these products have no purpose without music." -David Isralite.
Please support that quote with facts. I double dare you. Because I can't think of a single electronic device that I own that has no purpose without music.
It's confusing, because people seem to lack basic reading comprehension skills.
"The view that Google is equivalent to talking on a telephone is simply false."
Umm yeah it is false, but then no one said that. What was said is that the internet is a communications platform like the telephone system is a communications platform and that Google is not the internet. Yet somehow your reading comprehension involved seeing Google and telephone as analogous. smh
As for the leap to liability because they got paid. Think gun manufacturers.
On the post: Facebook Apparently Doesn't Believe Anyone Over 100 Could Use The Service, 104 Year Old Has To Lie
For the children
On the post: Bestselling Author Of Children's Books Accuses Public Libraries Of Stealing His Paychecks
Challenge accepted
Apparently the biotech industry. Ask the good folks at Monsanto. Although they make you sign a contract not to use the endless self replications of one of their products.
On the post: The Next eBook Evolution: Pay As You Read eBooks
Public Domain
But just like with patents, the internet is magical. So I'm considering everything digital as public domain. So as long as I keep my content consumption on the interwebs, its free.
Note to the industry: No need to apologize for DRM, I'll work around it myself.
On the post: Supreme Court Set To Hear Case On Whether Or Not Planting Legally Purchased Seeds Infringes On Monsanto Patent
WOW
Shouldn't Monsanto be suing the plants, since they are doing all the replicating of patented product?
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Solution
The only way to move all porn to the .xxx TLD would be through some sort of government regulation, and if that ever passed you can bet that the content industries would demand .movie .music .news and any other dot that they thought they could control. They would claim to be the only creators of real content and exercise the strictest control over their TLDs and seek to prohibit content on any non regulated TLDs.
In other words they would try to force the web to mirror plastic disc selling. And that's just the simplistic version.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Solution
The only way to move all porn to the .xxx TLD would be through some sort of government regulation, and if that ever passed you can bet that the content industries would demand .movie .music .news and any other dot that they thought they could control. They would claim to be the only creators of real content and exercise the strictest control over their TLDs and seek to prohibit content on any non regulated TLDs.
In other words they would try to force the web to mirror plastic disc selling. And that's just the simplistic version.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Wow
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re:
Google doesn't offer content, with the exception of YouTube, but that isn't Google content. Google makes the bulk of its revenue on ads. Most people have learned that one of the best business models on the net is ad revenue. Get the eyes, and sell them.
Hollywood studios have the most awesome back catalogue of content ever, but they want us all to pay per view and that just isn't going to happen. Ok the thing that confuses me most is...
Why won't the studios just get together and offer up their entire back catalogue on a site that charges $1 per month to subscribe AND rakes in ad revenue, as I can imagine that the page views would be in the billions in no time?
Yes I know the answer is that they feel that no one would go to the movies any more, and while I agree there would be a small drop at the box office, I imagine that the revenue spike from subscriptions and ads would greatly offset any losses in box office sales and DVD rental.
You would think they would love being able to hide all the additional revenue on movies and never having to worry about paying out royalties ever again.
On the post: Chris Dodd Sounding Like A Broken Recording Industry
Re: OR....
OR just patent that business model as fast as possible and beg the government to provide proper protection. This method pays better.
On the post: Cracked Pokes Fun At Simultaneous Invention
Re: Telephone
All this history and no one has figured out that a 5 year patent is more than enough of a head start.
On the post: 'Offensive Lyric' Prompts Epic Records To Attempt The Impossible: 'Erase' The Track From The Web
We all seem to have missed the real issue
Murderers bragging about their crimes after getting away with it, is far more offensive than crude sexual metaphors.
On the post: Bizarre 'Attribution' Troll Bullies Twitter Users Into Compliance With Baseless Legal Threats
Re:
Sue me, bitches.
On the post: Senator Hatch Says Global Fund Advocating For Generic Drugs To Solve Healthcare Crises Is Abusing Funds
Re: It's no secret that politicians aren't always in sync with the truth, but this is significantly more blatant a misrepresentation than is normal.
- Sen. Orrin Hatch
It's abuse because that is not using the system how it was intended and its just plain wrong.
Now ask the good senator how he feels about tax loopholes for the wealthy and see if he responds the same.
On the post: Cybersecurity Executive Order Actually Respects Some Privacy; So Do We Actually Need CISPA Any More?
why?
Because the gub'ment killz terrists. Anyone who tries to take our guns is a commie. We need ta protect the chilluns.
On the post: Obama Administration, Once Again, Says $222,000 For Sharing 24 Songs Is Perfectly Reasonable
Re: Re: Uh, that's why it's called punishment
I'm no legal scholar, but it doesn't take a law degree or a PhD in economics to figure out that $220k is far more than the defendant could repay.
On the post: Florida Lawmakers Try To Stop Subsidizing Videogames; Send That Money To Hollywood Instead
Re:
On the post: Obama Administration, Once Again, Says $222,000 For Sharing 24 Songs Is Perfectly Reasonable
Re: Re: Uh, that's why it's called punishment
You can get a YEAR in JAIL for stealing 2 CDs. It's just music.
On the post: Obama Administration, Once Again, Says $222,000 For Sharing 24 Songs Is Perfectly Reasonable
Re: Could I borrow someone's fax machine?
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
There is nothing wrong with this case. This is the perfect case to go to the Supreme Court for violation of the 8th Amendment. Because if piracy is as widespread as everyone says it is, then there are A LOT of people who should be fined more than 5x their annual income for infractions that occur daily.
On the post: Music Publishers: We Need Strong Copyright Laws Because We Don't Like The Consumer Electronics Association
Can you say HUBRIS???
"Many innovative and wonderful music-related products are made by CEA members. But many of these products have no purpose without music." -David Isralite.
Please support that quote with facts. I double dare you. Because I can't think of a single electronic device that I own that has no purpose without music.
On the post: Aussie Court Realizes That Google Is Not Responsible For Content In Google Ads
Re: Ok now I see why this is so confusing
"The view that Google is equivalent to talking on a telephone is simply false."
Umm yeah it is false, but then no one said that. What was said is that the internet is a communications platform like the telephone system is a communications platform and that Google is not the internet. Yet somehow your reading comprehension involved seeing Google and telephone as analogous. smh
As for the leap to liability because they got paid. Think gun manufacturers.
Next >>