Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 17 Dec 2009 @ 3:02pm
Re: Re: Re: Yay!
I do agree that 1 year would solve many problems with the infinite years we're working towards now, but would you argue that there is 0 harm done in granting even a 1 year monopoly? If there is harm, can we ask the question, is it needed? As some others have said ...
"It's called First Mover Advantage. No copyright needed."
And I'd argue there's a few other factors besides first mover in there too, such as the social ones that have been discussed here a bit recently.
Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 17 Dec 2009 @ 1:12pm
Re: drm business model thing
I think I'm going to start a line of lead shoes.
Hello Mr. Exec, you wouldn't want to go outside without these lead shoes, you might float away. It's dangerous to go outside without them, they enable you to go outside.
No, you aren't going to float away without lead shoes. No, DRM doesn't actually stop piracy.
Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 16 Dec 2009 @ 5:23pm
Re: Re: Re: To be fair....
"How is it a problem to push your license fees and royalties to the maximum extent possible, if that is what your company does for money?"
I would counter with "How is it a problem to rape and pillage poor farmers if your company is an army that's authorized to do so?". Now of course that's quite absurd, and an unfair comparison by any measure, but the point I mean to make is just because something is legal doesn't mean it's a good idea, even if you've signed up with a company that does that.
When did personal responsibility get thrown out the door? Just because it's legal, or because someone else might do it if you don't, doesn't mean you should or it's "a good thing".
There's business reasons not too, and I would argue there are moral reasons not too.
Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 16 Dec 2009 @ 5:11pm
Re: Re: Re:
You hear bits and pieces, and you repeat some of them back, so I've got some hope still.
That's right, promotional value is part of it. There's a lot of other factors to consider too. It's not as cut and dried as "He took our stuff, fuck him". One of the other factors is how this reaction makes the studios look. Another one of the other factors is that "downloads != lost sales". Another one of the other factors is the impossibility of stopping it. There's an inevitability factor to contend with; as soon as you make something visible to that many people, it's going to get captured with current technology, and that problem is only going to worsen over the next few years.
Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 16 Dec 2009 @ 4:57pm
And our response to this?
"Monsanto's business strategies and licensing agreements are being investigated by the U.S. Department of Justice and at least two state attorneys general, who are trying to determine if the practices violate U.S. antitrust laws. "
Of course Monsanto has abused the law here, and they should be rightfully blamed for doing so, but what can enforcement do when the law is on Monsanto's side? This is an excellent opportunity to show the extreme badness in granting at least 1 type of patent, and the horrible effects of that. One can only hope that the attention on this matter reaches the only logical conclusion of invaliding such poorly thought through patent validation.
I mean, what else can the DOJ or an AG do besides toot their own horn? and why would they bring up an investigation to only do that ... oh ... crap ...
Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 16 Dec 2009 @ 12:15pm
Re: To be fair....
It's disingenuous to say the "real" problem is the law, or the "real" problem is the people abusing/misusing it. Both are problems, and to say one isn't a problem because the other is the real one is counter productive.
Even if there's a case here, which is questionable, that doesn't mean this isn't also an abuse or misuse.
Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 15 Dec 2009 @ 5:21pm
Re: Re: Worse than I thought
"I equally expect that various industry lawyers will start blogging more attack pieces on Techdirt again shortly."
Even if something could be accurately described as an attack piece, I don't think it makes you look good to call it that. Any exposure from such attacks can probably be a good thing, especially if your responses to them are more reasoned and calm and collected than the attacks themselves (which they often are). And of course, the few readers of that industry lawyers blog are exactly the sort I'd think would be perfect to get exposure with. And I don't mean to focus on just that phrase, it's the overall tone I'm criticizing, and that phrase is just a good example of it.
You're a smart guy Mike, please take my criticism as such.
Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 15 Dec 2009 @ 3:52pm
Re:
I like this nation you speak of. Don't like the way the government is run? Shut up and try and vote again in 4 years. Sounds great, peace and quiet, no one complaining or nothing. Damn hippies.
Why should we have a discussion about oil prices that doesn't include Tesla or Brammo? Or a piracy discussion that doesn't include the head of Sirius/XM or Pandora?
Let's just pretend these dern upstarts don't exist and tax/fine them out of existence, keep things the way they are cause that's the way they are. You can't change anything so just give up and shut up.
Now of course Espinel and Kappos would be included in anything like this, but seriously, my point is not one independent thought across the bunch. No John Riccitiello's or John P. Holdren's who even attempt to recognize the value of dissenting thought.
Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 15 Dec 2009 @ 11:45am
To those who would defend the value of the idea of Bratz
These ideas are not wholly unique or wholly original. They are not infinitely more valuable than every other idea that's thought of and used every single day.
Everyone has ideas and a lot of those help make things happen, make products better and make the world turn. Most people use their idea, take credit for it, progress, and then use more ideas to keep moving themselves (and others) forward. These ideas are not necessarily unique, or wholly original, but they add something to the conversation and make things better. A new ad campaign, a new pamphlet more clearly showing how to install DSL, a new report gathering combined information about your customers that allows a new improved sales process. These are ideas, they happen all the time, and if we patented and copyrighted and "protected" every single one, we'd never get anywhere.
Those who file patents and file suit are the exceptions. The leeches on the underbelly of society slowing the progress of mankind and I hope that they have no illusions otherwise. It's not just a drain on society as a whole, it's bad for every individual too. It slows the leech down too, and it's sad to see when there's so much more potential there.
Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 15 Dec 2009 @ 11:18am
Re:
"the rest of it would never have happened. You just have to look at cause and effect to see that it's pretty much a no brainer."
I can't imagine that someone who speaks as lucidly as you do actually takes that seriously. That's like saying without the idea of a small plastic doll, none of these companies would exist, so they should hand over all their assets to whomever decided to make a plastic doll first.
All of the time and money spent on Bratz to take it from an idea into an actual product is worth less than the original concept? It's not even like saying that our society values the unique idea. It's saying that idea x to make a big headed doll is worth a billion times more than idea y to market dolls on nickelodeon or idea z to make dolls out of some resin composite to save money. There's a lot of "ideas" that go into making a product, why would you place so much value on idea x and not on y and z?
Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 15 Dec 2009 @ 9:50am
Re: Re: Re:
My sarcasm meter is pretty weak, but I'm pretty sure that's a joke. In all seriousness though, that is what's needed to solve the real cause of these issues. We need something to keep attorneys busy that doesn't involve suing people. Perhaps some sort of large ball of string ...
Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 14 Dec 2009 @ 2:49pm
A thought
There may be some that find a lot of value in seeing your uncensored story submissions. Of course there's some value in keeping that information to yourself, and there's probably several serious problems with just throwing up a feed of it. It may encourage a heck of a lot of spam/abuse, and discourage those who enjoy the current anonymity of the submission process (perhaps the biggest reason not to do this).
But, I just thought I'd point out that at least one person is interested anyways, and I'm a bit curious if any others are.
Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 11 Dec 2009 @ 4:05pm
The linked article says it all
And by that, I mean this:
P.S. I have a rule against publishing Facebook photos ... but Gawker doesn't.
You have a rule against it? And what did that accomplish? Nothing, because someone else can and will distribute it.
Stuff your "friends" can see can get distributed pretty darn easily. Once it's out there, it's out there, the previous privacy settings in facebook were an illusion. I think the new settings are an excellent step forward towards more openness about what level privacy you actually have. They aren't there yet, but they just took a giant step forward, and I applaud their forward thinking in this matter.
To Ron Livingston, Vicki Stewart, Jeremy Piven, Jeff Aronson, Ruth Zafrin, Lily Allen and the ~200 other people mentioned for defamation suits in the last 6 months on this site:
I'm sorry no one taught you how to deal with name calling when you were younger, but that's not our fault. Grow up, or get out of modern society and stop mucking up things for the rest of us. This is no longer funny or interesting or beneficial to anyone involved. You're parasitic and the world would be a better place without you.
I think you underestimate the laziness of the average consumer of these products. The brick and mortar rental stores are dying because of the huge overhead of retail space and all the costs associated with that. An unmanned electronic kiosk doesn't have that problem. I don't think Redbox or this 6 cent deal will fail due to not bringing enough money to cover the current costs of the operation. However, they might fail due to having to pay exorbitant fees to Hollywood, or due to their currently limited selections.
Did you sign a contract that says "AT&T will provide me with plan X that includes unlimited" or a contract that says "AT&T will provide me with 'service'"?
I'm going to rip at least a few managers a new one if they do it of course, and I'm sure I'm not the *only* one. Not sure what the actual terms of my agreement was though.
Even a year still creates a lot of the same problems. There are costs inherit in the system, and reducing the length of a patent decreases those costs but does not eliminate them. A lot of this comes back too "Do those costs of the monopoly outweigh the benefits of the incentive?" I think the answer is clearly "no" and the best evidence for that is:
1) How patents are more often used in reality, to sue independently developed systems of a competitor, than to make money for an inventor. Those that make money today still have to build a business around the idea, and the patent itself doesn't provide that.
2) Ideas are built on top of ideas, to an extreme degree. Granting a monopoly on an idea greatly inhibits not just others copying that idea, but building on it/making it better/using it as part of something else. Even a 1 year term is an extreme cost in an idea that's used in an idea within in an idea within an idea ... etc etc...
On the post: Is It Really Such A Problem If People Sell Your Works? Or Is It Just Free Market Research?
Re: Re: Re: Yay!
"It's called First Mover Advantage. No copyright needed."
And I'd argue there's a few other factors besides first mover in there too, such as the social ones that have been discussed here a bit recently.
On the post: Sony Ebook Boss: DRM Needs To Stay And Ebooks Should Cost More Than $10
Re: drm business model thing
Hello Mr. Exec, you wouldn't want to go outside without these lead shoes, you might float away. It's dangerous to go outside without them, they enable you to go outside.
No, you aren't going to float away without lead shoes. No, DRM doesn't actually stop piracy.
On the post: Does Google Need Permission From Philip K. Dick's Estate For The Nexus One?
Re: Re: Re: To be fair....
I would counter with "How is it a problem to rape and pillage poor farmers if your company is an army that's authorized to do so?". Now of course that's quite absurd, and an unfair comparison by any measure, but the point I mean to make is just because something is legal doesn't mean it's a good idea, even if you've signed up with a company that does that.
When did personal responsibility get thrown out the door? Just because it's legal, or because someone else might do it if you don't, doesn't mean you should or it's "a good thing".
There's business reasons not too, and I would argue there are moral reasons not too.
On the post: FBI Arrests Wolverine Leaker; Don't You Feel Safer Now?
Re: Re: Re:
That's right, promotional value is part of it. There's a lot of other factors to consider too. It's not as cut and dried as "He took our stuff, fuck him". One of the other factors is how this reaction makes the studios look. Another one of the other factors is that "downloads != lost sales". Another one of the other factors is the impossibility of stopping it. There's an inevitability factor to contend with; as soon as you make something visible to that many people, it's going to get captured with current technology, and that problem is only going to worsen over the next few years.
On the post: How Monsanto Used Gene Patents To Corner The Market In Seeds
Re: Food inc.
Which will we choose? God I hope we're not that stupid.
On the post: How Monsanto Used Gene Patents To Corner The Market In Seeds
And our response to this?
Of course Monsanto has abused the law here, and they should be rightfully blamed for doing so, but what can enforcement do when the law is on Monsanto's side? This is an excellent opportunity to show the extreme badness in granting at least 1 type of patent, and the horrible effects of that. One can only hope that the attention on this matter reaches the only logical conclusion of invaliding such poorly thought through patent validation.
I mean, what else can the DOJ or an AG do besides toot their own horn? and why would they bring up an investigation to only do that ... oh ... crap ...
On the post: Does Google Need Permission From Philip K. Dick's Estate For The Nexus One?
Re: To be fair....
Even if there's a case here, which is questionable, that doesn't mean this isn't also an abuse or misuse.
On the post: Openness? Transparency? Not When Biden Gets To Hang With Entertainment Industry Lobbyists: Press Kicked Out
Re: Re: Worse than I thought
Even if something could be accurately described as an attack piece, I don't think it makes you look good to call it that. Any exposure from such attacks can probably be a good thing, especially if your responses to them are more reasoned and calm and collected than the attacks themselves (which they often are). And of course, the few readers of that industry lawyers blog are exactly the sort I'd think would be perfect to get exposure with. And I don't mean to focus on just that phrase, it's the overall tone I'm criticizing, and that phrase is just a good example of it.
You're a smart guy Mike, please take my criticism as such.
On the post: Openness? Transparency? Not When Biden Gets To Hang With Entertainment Industry Lobbyists: Press Kicked Out
Re:
Why should we have a discussion about oil prices that doesn't include Tesla or Brammo? Or a piracy discussion that doesn't include the head of Sirius/XM or Pandora?
Let's just pretend these dern upstarts don't exist and tax/fine them out of existence, keep things the way they are cause that's the way they are. You can't change anything so just give up and shut up.
On the post: Openness? Transparency? Not When Biden Gets To Hang With Entertainment Industry Lobbyists: Press Kicked Out
Worse than I thought
RIAA's Mitch Bainwol
Patent Office's David Kappos
MPAA's Dan Glickman
WMG's Edgar Bronfman Jr
Our IP Czar Victoria Espinel
Now of course Espinel and Kappos would be included in anything like this, but seriously, my point is not one independent thought across the bunch. No John Riccitiello's or John P. Holdren's who even attempt to recognize the value of dissenting thought.
On the post: Judges May Reconsider Handing All Bratz Dolls Over To Mattel
To those who would defend the value of the idea of Bratz
Everyone has ideas and a lot of those help make things happen, make products better and make the world turn. Most people use their idea, take credit for it, progress, and then use more ideas to keep moving themselves (and others) forward. These ideas are not necessarily unique, or wholly original, but they add something to the conversation and make things better. A new ad campaign, a new pamphlet more clearly showing how to install DSL, a new report gathering combined information about your customers that allows a new improved sales process. These are ideas, they happen all the time, and if we patented and copyrighted and "protected" every single one, we'd never get anywhere.
Those who file patents and file suit are the exceptions. The leeches on the underbelly of society slowing the progress of mankind and I hope that they have no illusions otherwise. It's not just a drain on society as a whole, it's bad for every individual too. It slows the leech down too, and it's sad to see when there's so much more potential there.
On the post: Judges May Reconsider Handing All Bratz Dolls Over To Mattel
Re:
I can't imagine that someone who speaks as lucidly as you do actually takes that seriously. That's like saying without the idea of a small plastic doll, none of these companies would exist, so they should hand over all their assets to whomever decided to make a plastic doll first.
All of the time and money spent on Bratz to take it from an idea into an actual product is worth less than the original concept? It's not even like saying that our society values the unique idea. It's saying that idea x to make a big headed doll is worth a billion times more than idea y to market dolls on nickelodeon or idea z to make dolls out of some resin composite to save money. There's a lot of "ideas" that go into making a product, why would you place so much value on idea x and not on y and z?
On the post: North Face Didn't Get The Message; Sues South Butt
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Submitting Post Ideas Or News To Techdirt
A thought
But, I just thought I'd point out that at least one person is interested anyways, and I'm a bit curious if any others are.
On the post: Zuckerberg Eats His Openness Dog Food; De-Privatizes His Own Profile
The linked article says it all
P.S. I have a rule against publishing Facebook photos ... but Gawker doesn't.
You have a rule against it? And what did that accomplish? Nothing, because someone else can and will distribute it.
Stuff your "friends" can see can get distributed pretty darn easily. Once it's out there, it's out there, the previous privacy settings in facebook were an illusion. I think the new settings are an excellent step forward towards more openness about what level privacy you actually have. They aren't there yet, but they just took a giant step forward, and I applaud their forward thinking in this matter.
On the post: Increasing Concern Of UK's Draconian Libel Laws And How They're Abused
Well ...
I'm sorry no one taught you how to deal with name calling when you were younger, but that's not our fault. Grow up, or get out of modern society and stop mucking up things for the rest of us. This is no longer funny or interesting or beneficial to anyone involved. You're parasitic and the world would be a better place without you.
Sincerely,
The rest of us
On the post: The Creator's Dilemma On Others Making Money Off Your Content
Re: Lobo Santo's Ugly Cat and moore850
On the post: If Hollywood Is Upset About $1/Day Movie Rentals, How Do They Feel About 6 Cents Per Hour Rentals?
Re: Re:
On the post: AT&T's Bait And Switch On iPhone Unlimited Service: We Screwed Up, So Now You Have To Pay More
Re: Re: Re: Frakin' frakers!
I'm going to rip at least a few managers a new one if they do it of course, and I'm sure I'm not the *only* one. Not sure what the actual terms of my agreement was though.
On the post: Editorial On Why The Patent System Should Be Abolished
Re: Re: What's the Alternative?
1) How patents are more often used in reality, to sue independently developed systems of a competitor, than to make money for an inventor. Those that make money today still have to build a business around the idea, and the patent itself doesn't provide that.
2) Ideas are built on top of ideas, to an extreme degree. Granting a monopoly on an idea greatly inhibits not just others copying that idea, but building on it/making it better/using it as part of something else. Even a 1 year term is an extreme cost in an idea that's used in an idea within in an idea within an idea ... etc etc...
Next >>