"What SOPA will do is to make it easy for big companies to outright kill innovative noninfringing startups on the net. It's very clear from their actions as well as their words that the **AAs are terrified that they are losing control of the distribution channel. SOPA is a powerful tool to let them forcibly take control of the internet as such a channel."
I suspect you are dead on in your analysis of this. The people who want this are so paranoid that someone is going to get something without their getting a big chunk of money for it, that they would - so to speak - burn the entire barn (the Internet) to the ground to get rid of a few pesky rats.
An analogy--RIAA is like a factory trying to squeeze more output from their rickety old steam engine by tying down the pressure relief valve and stoking up the fire some more. Sooner or later that overfired, overpressured steam engine is going to blow to kingdom come and their business with it.
If they'd replace that rickety steam engine with electric motors they'd find things would run a lot more smoothly, but they're too stingy to put out the money to change.
This sounds rather a bit like the music I used to listen to on 78 RPM records when I was growing up. A lot nicer than the hideous noises that pass for music nowadays. They can keep their copyrights on their so-called music and the music too, I don't need or want any part of it.
I think all this IP maximalist nonsense is a prime symptom of bureaucratic overstuffing--too many bureaucrats with not enough to do. The result of this is they spend all their time making up all these inane regulations and laws that are going to end up strangling our country to death. I think we should fire 90 percent of them and tell the rest to get busy doing something useful.
Disclosure is part of the bargain of a patent. The patentee gets a 17 year monopoly on his invention in return for disclosing how his invention works and how to build it. After the patent expires the invention becomes public domain and anyone may produce and sell their own version of the invention. If the patentee refuses to disclose or so obfuscates his disclosure that no one can figure it out, then he essentially gives himself a permanent monopoly. Happens a lot with software patents.
Failure to disclose is kind of like if I send a mail order company X amount of money for a quality brand name hair clipper they advertised and they send me instead of the clipper a pair of cheap scissors. I bargained with them for a certain item at a certain price, sent them what they asked for (my end of the bargain) and they broke their end of the bargain by sending me a cheap substitute for what they promised me.
If I recall correctly the disclosure part of the bargain is written into patent law the same as the 17 year monopoly granted to the patentee. If the patentee substitutes an obfuscated disclosure no one can make heads or tails of, is this not the same as the mail order company sending a customer a cheap substitute for the item he ordered?
I guess the next big thing for patent trolls will be getting patents on all our genes, then suing us for infringing their patents.
[/sarcasm]
Seriously, I think the motive for all this patenting of human genes is just pure greed. I suspect the people who do this are much more concerned about lining their own pockets than they are about helping anyone improve their health.
Politicians? What do you expect? Most politicians are lawyers too, so why wouldn't they pass laws to give fellow lawyers more business? The whole system is corrupt.
I made a prediction some years ago that the whole patent system would one day dissolve in a sea of uncontrolled litigation. It looks now like we're headed in that direction and well on the way.
I thought he wanted $70 a copy, I wouldn't give him 70 cents for it. Or even seven cents. And anybody who did buy it would have to be crazy to pay that kind of a price for it.
The current attitude of a lot of copyright holders seems to be that no one should get any use or enjoyment out of their work unless they get a big chunk of money up front, and they're going to sue anybody who even thinks about trying.
And yes the term of copyright is idiotically too long, potentially well over 100 years (life of the author plus 70 years), and gets extended another 20 years every time the copyright on Mickey Mouse is about to expire. A return to the original 14 year term with an optional 14 year extension would seem about right to me. I suspect the useful life of all but the greatest of works is around 10 years, and after that most are probably forgotten. For companies like Disney that have something special they want copyright forever, perhaps a law granting them extensions on just their special copyright with an ever increasing fee for each successive extension ($10, $1000, $100,000...) would be more appropriate than extending the term on all copyrights just for the benefit of that one particular party.
If someone has a method and apparatus for obtaining proper photographs of paintings, they are free to apply for a patent on it.
True, but they can't extend that patent to every possible method or apparatus or way of taking photographs of paintings, which is what a lot of patent trolls try to do with their patents.
On the post: Sandia National Labs: DNS Filtering In SOPA/PIPA Won't Stop Piracy, But Will Hurt Online Security
Re: Like this
On the post: Sandia National Labs: DNS Filtering In SOPA/PIPA Won't Stop Piracy, But Will Hurt Online Security
Re: Re:
I suspect you are dead on in your analysis of this. The people who want this are so paranoid that someone is going to get something without their getting a big chunk of money for it, that they would - so to speak - burn the entire barn (the Internet) to the ground to get rid of a few pesky rats.
Stupid.
On the post: Radio Is Killing Music
Re:
If they'd replace that rickety steam engine with electric motors they'd find things would run a lot more smoothly, but they're too stingy to put out the money to change.
So it is with the record industry.
On the post: Radio Is Killing Music
Re:
On the post: Radio Is Killing Music
On the post: The First Recorded Evidence Of A Prank Phone Call: 1884 Phone Calls Summoning Undertakers
Re:
On the post: The First Recorded Evidence Of A Prank Phone Call: 1884 Phone Calls Summoning Undertakers
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Better be careful who you pick a fight with, *you* might be the one who gets laid out flat on the ground, knocked out cold!
On the post: The First Recorded Evidence Of A Prank Phone Call: 1884 Phone Calls Summoning Undertakers
Re: Re: Re: Re:
If it doesn't fit just throw it in the byte bucket and forget it. It it offends you I'd say you got hit right in the bullseye.
On the post: The First Recorded Evidence Of A Prank Phone Call: 1884 Phone Calls Summoning Undertakers
Re: Re:
Maybe we should have a trolling contest to see who can out-troll who. Go to it, guys!
On the post: The First Recorded Evidence Of A Prank Phone Call: 1884 Phone Calls Summoning Undertakers
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Chosen Reject's Favorite Techdirt Stories Of The Week
too many bureaucrats...
On the post: US Copyright Office Still Out Of Touch; Supports PROTECT IP/E-PARASITE & Felony Streaming Bills
Re: copyright
On the post: US Copyright Office Still Out Of Touch; Supports PROTECT IP/E-PARASITE & Felony Streaming Bills
Re: Re:
On the post: Deadly Monopolies: New Book Explores How Patenting Genes Has Made Us Less Healthy
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Failure to disclose is kind of like if I send a mail order company X amount of money for a quality brand name hair clipper they advertised and they send me instead of the clipper a pair of cheap scissors. I bargained with them for a certain item at a certain price, sent them what they asked for (my end of the bargain) and they broke their end of the bargain by sending me a cheap substitute for what they promised me.
If I recall correctly the disclosure part of the bargain is written into patent law the same as the 17 year monopoly granted to the patentee. If the patentee substitutes an obfuscated disclosure no one can make heads or tails of, is this not the same as the mail order company sending a customer a cheap substitute for the item he ordered?
On the post: Deadly Monopolies: New Book Explores How Patenting Genes Has Made Us Less Healthy
Patenting genes
[/sarcasm]
Seriously, I think the motive for all this patenting of human genes is just pure greed. I suspect the people who do this are much more concerned about lining their own pockets than they are about helping anyone improve their health.
On the post: New Patent Reform Law Already A Good Thing... For Patent Attorneys
Patent reform
I made a prediction some years ago that the whole patent system would one day dissolve in a sea of uncontrolled litigation. It looks now like we're headed in that direction and well on the way.
On the post: DailyDirt: Rockets In Small, Medium And Large
Monster Rocket
Oh, they probably will. They have a long history of doing that.
On the post: Unfortunate: Novelist Joins Lawsuit Against Libraries; Would Apparently Prefer His Book Rot In Obscurity
Re: Traditional Publishers model
On the post: Unfortunate: Novelist Joins Lawsuit Against Libraries; Would Apparently Prefer His Book Rot In Obscurity
Re: Re: Re:
And yes the term of copyright is idiotically too long, potentially well over 100 years (life of the author plus 70 years), and gets extended another 20 years every time the copyright on Mickey Mouse is about to expire. A return to the original 14 year term with an optional 14 year extension would seem about right to me. I suspect the useful life of all but the greatest of works is around 10 years, and after that most are probably forgotten. For companies like Disney that have something special they want copyright forever, perhaps a law granting them extensions on just their special copyright with an ever increasing fee for each successive extension ($10, $1000, $100,000...) would be more appropriate than extending the term on all copyrights just for the benefit of that one particular party.
On the post: Can You Infringe On Da Vinci? Judge Seems To Think So
Re: Re:
True, but they can't extend that patent to every possible method or apparatus or way of taking photographs of paintings, which is what a lot of patent trolls try to do with their patents.
Next >>