This is what angered me about this story from the very beginning. All the court costs and legal wrangling, all the media hype and misinformation, and all the general waste that went along with this campaign since 2006: ALL of it could have been avoided by proper use of the existing technology.
Someone here pointed out: guys who need their secretaries to print their emails out for them shouldn't be making Internet policy -- or in this case handling a case related to Internet technology.
I think Crosbie has latched on to an important point. Like the persistent use of the word "theft" in place of "infringement" and the purposeful fuzzying of the distinction between physical property and intellectual property... words do matter. The terms used to frame the argument, to "educate" the public, and to create the legislation... all will come back to bite us if we don't force people to examine carefully what they are actually saying -- on both sides of the argument.
(Having said that, I know I personally use the wrong word often when trying to express a point. It might seem pedantic when someone corrects me, but I do appreciate it.)
Wouldn't it be cool if the search for prior art that's done as part of the patent process should allow for instant discussion among inventors? The moderation (fly-on-the-wall style moderation, not "approval" style moderation) would be done by the patent office, with two resulting benefits: the patent office would be educated about how original the filing actually is (because now they are often clueless) and the inventors with the filing would be able to actually stand on the shoulders of giants, while those giants would be given a chance to improve their own ideas.
The patent office would hold a repository of ideas upon which inventors could draw, as opposed to being the keyholders for a series of padlocks put on any particular innovation.
Of course, this would also have to happen in conjunction with some sort of change to the law reflecting non-exclusivity and implementation notions. Ideally, those who execute on an idea are free to profit from it, but everyone else is free to improve upon it.
My thoughts wandered from CwF/RtB to Minecraft's success, and then back to 99 cents as being a pretty nominal cost for an app -- and the whole concept of "demonstrable loss due to piracy".
Never though, did I think that it is Apple's fault for not locking up the apps better. I'd love to hear the opinions about this article from the people on this "list". :-)
I think your argument lacks internal logic. You hint at the danger of unchecked drug use: a guy hitting a speedball in the car next to you. That is a clear and present danger to you as the sober driver on the road.
Then you say that the two wars are nothing alike because drugs are self-destructive (although I think you meant drug users) and file-sharing actually has a victim.
The following two paragraphs are irrelevant, but I wanted to leave them in to embellish the "harm" comparison you made:
I'll concede that with drugs, people ruin their own lives... and there is a often (not always) a huge class distinction between drug users and non-drug users. But let's face it: there's collateral damage (families, drivers on the road, etc.). Yet even when mostly unchecked, drugs were used only by a minority of the population. Even today glue is perfectly legal, but MOST people don't sniff it. We also have the experience of Prohibition to see at least a minor analogy: people still ruin their lives with alcohol today, but the majority of people don't -- and we generally don't have tommyguns mowing down rival gangs to take over a shipment of Canadian Rye Whiskey.
I have no idea, but I believe file-sharers and copyright infringers are still in the minority too. Whose lives are being ruined is debatable: when a studio or a record producer downsizes and lets a bunch of people go, you can be sure they blame "piracy". They would never blame an antiquated business model.
To me, lavi's comparisons about what could happen with the war on file-sharing are less about the effects of the file-sharing itself, than about the unintended consequences of draconian IP enforcement.
In my view, he was just pointing out that the ever-upward spiraling enforcement efforts eventually become counterproductive and detrimental. One can easily draw parallels between the two wars on the "increasing enforcement and punishment" spectrum alone.
Actually... on many sites now if you put a link to a video, it automatically converts to an embed (Facebook for example). So in some ways, watching a video is even more like willful copying than "embedding".
The government is supposed to work for US, not against US.
Let's remember we've been discussing two different cases (Dwyer and Roja) where the US federal government is going after citizens of other countries who have had their days in court and been found not guilty (twice each) under their own country's laws.
I think it a maxim in law that when you press up against the known limits, you're in jeopardy.
They also say ignorance of the law is no excuse. But is it incumbent upon all citizens of the world to know the lines drawn in every country and be sure not to cross -- or according to you even come close to -- any of them? Or is it just U.S. law that everyone needs to be particularly aware of?
Suzanne, you're bringing up really excellent corollaries to Nina's main point. I firmly believe these concepts are not mutually exclusive:
1. Value in culture increases the more it is shared.
2. Diversity improves thinking, language, and culture.
The variety of different cultures out there means that there is "plenty" of culture to go around. If there were only one universal culture, it could possibly improve "navigation" as you said, but it would also not be as rich. Diversity (the collision and intermingling of cultures) brings fresh ideas and thus spins up value. (Example: how do you make a "team" smarter? Add more women. Proven today in this comment thread but also mentioned here: http://bit.ly/iwzH0V )
As each culture increases, there is what I would call "spillover". Popular French words or phrases are used in English: for example laissez-faire, tete-a-tete, and bonbons. Unfortunately I don't speak another language properly, but I know this spillover happens from English to many other cultures too. I've used language as an example, but the same is just as true with art, fashion, and architecture.
And I'll add my kudos to Nina on a truly excellent article too.
In Toronto, when dash mounted cameras were tested, the recording unit was in a sealed and locked box inside the trunk that could not be opened by the officers who were assigned the patrol vehicle. I am not a lawyer, but that was for evidence chain of custody purposes I would assume.
Maybe the lapel cams will have a similar method to avoid tampering or accidental/purposeful loss.
The "pirates buy more music" thing is always a laugh, because it never considered how much music these pirates would buy if they couldn't pirate all that stuff.
Which is funnier? An analysis of today's reality and comparing actual (if estimated) stats and demographics? Or a hypothetical statistic that predicates time travel and a reversal of technology to a previous era? I find the bigger laugh on the latter.
Yes, there will be a chilling effect if this sticks.
In the meantime, we should all be amused at how snookered commenters were by your initial (missing /sarc tag) comment. "My inability to comprehend leads me to conclude..." Probably an excellent way for every shill to preface their comments.
I am not sure I like this new reference to "civil society" as if it is a distinct and identifiable thing. I am seeing it pop up more and more at TechDirt and elsewhere. Equating it to "consumer rights" groups like is done in this article helps just a tiny bit, but I prefer to think of civil society within the old vague context it used to have.
Having said that, third party liability for ISPs is like making the power company responsible for the evils that people do with electricity. I think, given the pretty good track record of the OECD, there must have been enormous pressure put on them to keep some references in the document about governments "clamping down" on the Internet in various ways.
Here's a Pollyanna view courtesy of yours truly: the Internet rose up and became a positive force without governments and the corporate biggies getting their sticky fingers all over it. The Wild West gave rise to a great nation. Something else will come along to unseat all these power-grabbers and authority-abusers (even if it's a popular groundswell from the little people like us).
AC, your answer to a legitimate question is as good as saying "because" without further elaborate. I predict your response to this observation will be "is not."
"country blocking attempts will quite simply STOP WORKING once we finally make the big switch over to IPv6 (which despite the fact that we officially ran out of IPv4 addresses sometime last year, is probably still ages away)."
Sadly one reason it is ages away is not a technical or even a logistical one. It is the political and administrative juggernaut needing to come to terms with things like a replacement for geo-locating. As the other commenter pointed out: they are working on a "solution" to this "problem". The world is now a global village but even in a tiny hamlet there are grumpy neighbors who want to put up huge fences.
Fantastic response, Marcus. I wanted an answer to what I saw as an "injected" scarcity and of course your reasoning is perfectly sound (as usual).
I'm Canadian too and was already annoyed about Pandora (which I thought was pure genius when I had a chance to try it before they blocked it). Now I miss my chance to try what sounds like yet another phenomenal service.
I really believe the **AAs have a spiteful and extremely narrow-minded approach to business. It seems clear to me that if someone invented the radio broadcasting business model today, they would try in earnest to kill it off.
Here is a comment full of speculation and extrapolation (since I really have no facts to back up what I'm saying).
All parties in this video remained so calm it seems like a perfect test case for the law. Neither the police officer nor the woman seemed to be "losing it" which is often a reason (no matter how the situation started or who was in the right) that things escalate and get out of control -- making an arrest inevitable.
I have no idea what the laws are in New York State, but from the way the officer continued to reiterate that he did not feel safe, there must be something on the books that allows police officers to detain someone who (in their opinion and at their discretion) threatens officer safety. Or perhaps the law allows an officer to direct someone to move (for officer safety reasons) even if they are on their own property which would make it a case of her not obeying a lawful police order. Again, this should make a good test case to see just how much discretion and leeway the officers should have.
Another speculative point: Like referees and lifeguards, cops are trained to assert themselves and "stick to their assertions" even if they realize they are wrong and have dug themselves into a hole. That's part of what's going on here.
I was pretty happy with my purchase decision. I hate people who cheat at games and make it very difficult to play "by the rules". However, Sony really has pursued a foolhardy strategy here. From a purely selfish perspective, I truly hope Anonymous or the rest of the hacker community gives them a pass and leaves the Playstation Network alone this time... but I have to agree with everyone else... their actions are absolutely kicking a hornet's nest (or worse).
On the post: Belgian Newspapers 'Give Permission' To Google To Return Them To Search Results
robots.txt
Someone here pointed out: guys who need their secretaries to print their emails out for them shouldn't be making Internet policy -- or in this case handling a case related to Internet technology.
On the post: Rich Fiscus' Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Inalienable versus legislatively created rights
(Having said that, I know I personally use the wrong word often when trying to express a point. It might seem pedantic when someone corrects me, but I do appreciate it.)
On the post: How The Patent System Is Like A Broken Web Cache
Rethinking the Patent Office
The patent office would hold a repository of ideas upon which inventors could draw, as opposed to being the keyholders for a series of padlocks put on any particular innovation.
Of course, this would also have to happen in conjunction with some sort of change to the law reflecting non-exclusivity and implementation notions. Ideally, those who execute on an idea are free to profit from it, but everyone else is free to improve upon it.
On the post: Managing IP Magazine Recognizes That Those Who Are Critical Of Intellectual Property Are Important To The Conversation
Dissenting Voices
My thoughts wandered from CwF/RtB to Minecraft's success, and then back to 99 cents as being a pretty nominal cost for an app -- and the whole concept of "demonstrable loss due to piracy".
Never though, did I think that it is Apple's fault for not locking up the apps better. I'd love to hear the opinions about this article from the people on this "list". :-)
On the post: Feds Response To Rojadirecta Demonstrates How S.978 Can Be Abused To Put People In Jail
Re: Re: Feh
Then you say that the two wars are nothing alike because drugs are self-destructive (although I think you meant drug users) and file-sharing actually has a victim.
The following two paragraphs are irrelevant, but I wanted to leave them in to embellish the "harm" comparison you made:
To me, lavi's comparisons about what could happen with the war on file-sharing are less about the effects of the file-sharing itself, than about the unintended consequences of draconian IP enforcement.
In my view, he was just pointing out that the ever-upward spiraling enforcement efforts eventually become counterproductive and detrimental. One can easily draw parallels between the two wars on the "increasing enforcement and punishment" spectrum alone.
On the post: Feds Response To Rojadirecta Demonstrates How S.978 Can Be Abused To Put People In Jail
Re: Wait a minute...
On the post: Feds Response To Rojadirecta Demonstrates How S.978 Can Be Abused To Put People In Jail
Re: Re: Money changes everything. -- Corrupts.
Let's remember we've been discussing two different cases (Dwyer and Roja) where the US federal government is going after citizens of other countries who have had their days in court and been found not guilty (twice each) under their own country's laws.
They also say ignorance of the law is no excuse. But is it incumbent upon all citizens of the world to know the lines drawn in every country and be sure not to cross -- or according to you even come close to -- any of them? Or is it just U.S. law that everyone needs to be particularly aware of?
On the post: Culture is Anti-Rivalrous
Universal Culture and Diversity
1. Value in culture increases the more it is shared.
2. Diversity improves thinking, language, and culture.
The variety of different cultures out there means that there is "plenty" of culture to go around. If there were only one universal culture, it could possibly improve "navigation" as you said, but it would also not be as rich. Diversity (the collision and intermingling of cultures) brings fresh ideas and thus spins up value. (Example: how do you make a "team" smarter? Add more women. Proven today in this comment thread but also mentioned here: http://bit.ly/iwzH0V )
As each culture increases, there is what I would call "spillover". Popular French words or phrases are used in English: for example laissez-faire, tete-a-tete, and bonbons. Unfortunately I don't speak another language properly, but I know this spillover happens from English to many other cultures too. I've used language as an example, but the same is just as true with art, fashion, and architecture.
And I'll add my kudos to Nina on a truly excellent article too.
On the post: Turns Out Some Police Like Being Filmed While On Duty
Maybe the lapel cams will have a similar method to avoid tampering or accidental/purposeful loss.
On the post: Marketing Music Through Non-Linear Communication: Accepting The Full Reality Of The Digital Age
Re: Re: Re:
Which is funnier? An analysis of today's reality and comparing actual (if estimated) stats and demographics? Or a hypothetical statistic that predicates time travel and a reversal of technology to a previous era? I find the bigger laugh on the latter.
On the post: Wizard Of Oz Court Ruling Suggests Moviemakers Can Reclaim Parts Of The Public Domain And Put It Under Copyright
Re: Re: Re:
In the meantime, we should all be amused at how snookered commenters were by your initial (missing /sarc tag) comment. "My inability to comprehend leads me to conclude..." Probably an excellent way for every shill to preface their comments.
On the post: OECD Supports Making ISPs Copyright Cops
Having said that, third party liability for ISPs is like making the power company responsible for the evils that people do with electricity. I think, given the pretty good track record of the OECD, there must have been enormous pressure put on them to keep some references in the document about governments "clamping down" on the Internet in various ways.
Here's a Pollyanna view courtesy of yours truly: the Internet rose up and became a positive force without governments and the corporate biggies getting their sticky fingers all over it. The Wild West gave rise to a great nation. Something else will come along to unseat all these power-grabbers and authority-abusers (even if it's a popular groundswell from the little people like us).
On the post: Want To Give Righthaven's Backers A Taste Of Their Own Medicine?
Re: Re: Re: Odd question #31567
On the post: Want To Give Righthaven's Backers A Taste Of Their Own Medicine?
Re: Re: Odd question #31567
On the post: That Didn't Take Long: Turntable.fm Blocked To All Non-US Users
IPv6
Sadly one reason it is ages away is not a technical or even a logistical one. It is the political and administrative juggernaut needing to come to terms with things like a replacement for geo-locating. As the other commenter pointed out: they are working on a "solution" to this "problem". The world is now a global village but even in a tiny hamlet there are grumpy neighbors who want to put up huge fences.
On the post: That Didn't Take Long: Turntable.fm Blocked To All Non-US Users
Re: Re: Re: In another universe...
I'm Canadian too and was already annoyed about Pandora (which I thought was pure genius when I had a chance to try it before they blocked it). Now I miss my chance to try what sounds like yet another phenomenal service.
I really believe the **AAs have a spiteful and extremely narrow-minded approach to business. It seems clear to me that if someone invented the radio broadcasting business model today, they would try in earnest to kill it off.
On the post: Woman Charged With 'Obstructing Governmental Administration' For Filming Police From Her Front Yard
All parties in this video remained so calm it seems like a perfect test case for the law. Neither the police officer nor the woman seemed to be "losing it" which is often a reason (no matter how the situation started or who was in the right) that things escalate and get out of control -- making an arrest inevitable.
I have no idea what the laws are in New York State, but from the way the officer continued to reiterate that he did not feel safe, there must be something on the books that allows police officers to detain someone who (in their opinion and at their discretion) threatens officer safety. Or perhaps the law allows an officer to direct someone to move (for officer safety reasons) even if they are on their own property which would make it a case of her not obeying a lawful police order. Again, this should make a good test case to see just how much discretion and leeway the officers should have.
Another speculative point: Like referees and lifeguards, cops are trained to assert themselves and "stick to their assertions" even if they realize they are wrong and have dug themselves into a hole. That's part of what's going on here.
On the post: Apple Goes After Open Source Startup For Daring To Use The Term 'App Store'
Apple-like Store
Red Fruit White Center
AppUpYourStore
In the 1980s I worked for an Apple retailer and they had a training program called Apple C.O.R. (Customer Oriented Retailing).
AppleCore Store
Red Delicious
OK. That was fun.
On the post: Sony Continues Suing People Who Help Others Modify Their PS3s
I own a PS3
On the post: Washington Post Managing Editor Explains Why Focusing On Direct Revenue From Consumers Is Short-Sighted
Re: Sub-Optimal Experiences
Next >>