Yeah, you're probably right. The copyrightable elements of a photo are things like angle, framing, composition, lighting, etc. -- all of which are not only fixed for mugshots, they are fixed so as to be as minimal and uncreative as possible, to give the clearest and most objective view of the subject matter. And the subject matter itself is the one thing that is definitively not part of a photography copyright.
The question of whether section 105 (the automatic public-domain dedication of government works) applies to state & local governments is not settled -- it's considered unclear, with the copyright office taking no official stance, and allowing registration of state materials based on the "rule of doubt" while waiting for a court to give a definitive answer (if that ever happens, which it might not)
When "doubt" is right there in the copyright office's rule for accepting such registrations, I think "unclear" and/or "fuzzy" are quite accurate depictions of the status of the law
That's now how Kickstarter works. Everyone who pledges gets something in return -- if you get 10 times the money, you have to deliver 10 times as many products. It's not free bonus money. Moreover, most projects have "stretch goals" where they promise upgrades/additional features to what they are offering if the project hits set amounts beyond the goal -- e.g. in a board game I recently backed, the additional money allowed them to add a second side to the board, upgrade certain pieces from cardboard to plastic, etc., all of which meant every single backer got MORE for their money
With a digital good, of course, you can deliver more copies of a product without increasing costs -- which is why digital goods tend to focus even more heavily on stretch goals. The Double Fine Adventure project was increased in scope based on the huge amount of money it made, allowing them to add all sorts of new features to the game.
So basically darryl, everything you said is wrong. The extra money IS used, the creators ARE trying to meet expectations (and often do) and nobody is "pocketing" anything (very few Kickstarter creators walk away with money left over -- in fact, in most cases, unforeseen costs mean they still operate the whole thing on a shoestring budget)
It is by no means our intention to make them annoying. We retain editorial independence on sponsored posts, and it is our goal to make them interesting. The last post we launched in this manner was extremely popular, and got over 3000 votes on Reddit despite being sponsored. As for making them prominent on the page, that's just part of an ongoing evolution of how we present content here -- very few websites of our size still use a pure chronological blogroll, and while we've chosen to retain that style mostly, we also find ourselves badly in need of some flexibility given the amount of content we have and the size of our audience.
We're paying attention to reader feedback on this stuff, and we're certainly sympathetic to the fact that some changes may disrupt certain people's viewing habits -- every change always does. It's an evolving site, and you can expect to see lots of other new stuff appearing over time -- both related to sponsorship packages, and just related to our own content. And so far, the reaction to our new approach sponsored posts (admittedly only an initial reaction, as we haven't done many yet) has been overwhelmingly positive.
So, bear with us. We're listening to people's concerns, and we're working hard to grow the site and to support it by experimenting with some non-traditional sponsorship and advertising packages, rather than just burdening it with banner ads. Nothing is set in stone -- except our commitment to editorial independence and our standards for content.
It's not a bug, actually -- we've started deploying certain posts in "pinned" positions on the front page, to keep them in the spotlight for longer. It's a feature we've wanted for a while, to use both for important news/announcements and as part of sponsorship packages like this one
What do you mean "take"? Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong. But, er, what does that have to do with copyright infringement? Piracy doesn't involve any taking whatsoever...
Re: FUNNIEST is "masnicking" invented by out_of_the_blue
Goddamnit blue, could you please stop being so persistently delusional? My amusement at your antics is starting to give way to pity, and that's way less fun.
Re: Using values for nothing is what Google, Yahoo, AOL, Facebook,
You think Google "adds nothing"? You think Facebook "adds nothing"? And, even more bafflingly, you think they pay for nothing?
What are you, insane? Those sites pay TONNES of money. They employ huge staffs and operate multiple massive server farms -- they have to pay costs of millions or tens of millions of dollars in order to offer these free services.
And, if they add nothing, why do billions of people use them, exactly?
Re: Re: Re: Re: SEE? Works FINE if you create your OWN outside of RIAA.
(FWIW, though it was an idiotic comment on blue's part and fails in any way to speak to your excellent summing up of the issues, Bandcamp is actually a really great service for distributing your music -- check it out)
Re: Innovation to Mike means grifters who didn't produce getting the money.
Wow, I didn't realize that Dotcom didn't do any work. In that case, I think I'm willing to profit off others too. So, what do I have to do here, blue? Close my eyes and wait for the cheques to arrive? It's been nearly a full minute and I'm still not a millionaire... what's going on?
It's stuff like this that just makes you look bad. If you think someone is wrong, then simply say you disagree and explain why ... Stick to his arguments. Stop attacking the man.
While it's true that population has gotten out of hand, and there's a lot of debate as to what the true sustainable population of the globe is, I think it's fair to say that the responsible use of industry and advanced science could sustain a larger population than a purely agrarian society.
If you are arguing for a return to a pre-industrial world then, er, fine... that's your prerogative. You should probably stop worrying about 21st century music business models in that case though -- you've got way way way way bigger fish to fry.
Also, as for the people who died as a result of the shift to an industrial economy, what about all the people who lived? Shall we drop 20 years off our lifespan, and bring back 18th-century infant mortality rates? Also, which 6 out of every 7 human beings on earth, or thereabouts, are you suggesting shouldn't exist? Today's population is only sustainable with the help of industrial practices.
On the post: France Tells Apple To Pay Giant 'You Must Be A Pirate' Tax On iPads
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: France Tells Apple To Pay Giant 'You Must Be A Pirate' Tax On iPads
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: France Tells Apple To Pay Giant 'You Must Be A Pirate' Tax On iPads
Re:
On the post: Utah Sheriff Claims Copyright On Mugshot Photos To Avoid Releasing Them
Re:
On the post: Utah Sheriff Claims Copyright On Mugshot Photos To Avoid Releasing Them
Re: mike is wrong
When "doubt" is right there in the copyright office's rule for accepting such registrations, I think "unclear" and/or "fuzzy" are quite accurate depictions of the status of the law
On the post: More Money, More Problems: The Challenge Of Managing Crowdfunding Success
Re: Perfect pyramid scam
With a digital good, of course, you can deliver more copies of a product without increasing costs -- which is why digital goods tend to focus even more heavily on stretch goals. The Double Fine Adventure project was increased in scope based on the huge amount of money it made, allowing them to add all sorts of new features to the game.
So basically darryl, everything you said is wrong. The extra money IS used, the creators ARE trying to meet expectations (and often do) and nobody is "pocketing" anything (very few Kickstarter creators walk away with money left over -- in fact, in most cases, unforeseen costs mean they still operate the whole thing on a shoestring budget)
On the post: More Money, More Problems: The Challenge Of Managing Crowdfunding Success
Re: Re: Re:
We're paying attention to reader feedback on this stuff, and we're certainly sympathetic to the fact that some changes may disrupt certain people's viewing habits -- every change always does. It's an evolving site, and you can expect to see lots of other new stuff appearing over time -- both related to sponsorship packages, and just related to our own content. And so far, the reaction to our new approach sponsored posts (admittedly only an initial reaction, as we haven't done many yet) has been overwhelmingly positive.
So, bear with us. We're listening to people's concerns, and we're working hard to grow the site and to support it by experimenting with some non-traditional sponsorship and advertising packages, rather than just burdening it with banner ads. Nothing is set in stone -- except our commitment to editorial independence and our standards for content.
On the post: More Money, More Problems: The Challenge Of Managing Crowdfunding Success
Re:
On the post: More Money, More Problems: The Challenge Of Managing Crowdfunding Success
Re: FOR TEN PERCENT "Kickstarter only offers blog-esque updates"!
On the post: Once Again, Convenience Trumps Free, As Few People Pirate Arrested Development
Re: STOP the world! Mike sez: "convenience trumps free"!
Why not just put everything up on Megavideo then, and get revenue that way? Oh wait, the feds shut that down.
On the post: Ima Fish's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re:
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: FUNNIEST is "masnicking" invented by out_of_the_blue
On the post: Ima Fish's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re:
Explaining a joke is like debating a troll. Nobody's that interested and the troll looks stupid.
On the post: Ima Fish's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re: Using values for nothing is what Google, Yahoo, AOL, Facebook,
What are you, insane? Those sites pay TONNES of money. They employ huge staffs and operate multiple massive server farms -- they have to pay costs of millions or tens of millions of dollars in order to offer these free services.
And, if they add nothing, why do billions of people use them, exactly?
On the post: Massive Growth In Independent Musicians & Singers Over The Past Decade
Re: Re: Re: Re: SEE? Works FINE if you create your OWN outside of RIAA.
On the post: The Aftermath Of Napster: Letting Incumbents Veto Innovation Slows Down Innovation Drastically
Re: Re: Re: Innovation to Mike means grifters who didn't produce getting the money.
OK, so where are my millions? I've been sitting here ready to get rich like Dotcom for almost four hours now! I'm still waiting to see some results...
On the post: The Aftermath Of Napster: Letting Incumbents Veto Innovation Slows Down Innovation Drastically
Re: Innovation to Mike means grifters who didn't produce getting the money.
On the post: The Aftermath Of Napster: Letting Incumbents Veto Innovation Slows Down Innovation Drastically
Re:
It's stuff like this that just makes you look bad. If you think someone is wrong, then simply say you disagree and explain why ... Stick to his arguments. Stop attacking the man.
On the post: Jaron Lanier's Ignorance Of History, Basic Economics And Efficiency Is Getting Ridiculous
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Jaron Lanier's Ignorance Of History, Basic Economics And Efficiency Is Getting Ridiculous
Re:
Also, as for the people who died as a result of the shift to an industrial economy, what about all the people who lived? Shall we drop 20 years off our lifespan, and bring back 18th-century infant mortality rates? Also, which 6 out of every 7 human beings on earth, or thereabouts, are you suggesting shouldn't exist? Today's population is only sustainable with the help of industrial practices.
Next >>