It was pretty easy to imagine it as a pro-SOPA/PIPA response. If they're willing to imagine that all of this money is floating around in the hands of the pirates and file-sharers is it that far to construct a conspiracy where the papers are now brought in as help.
I actually think I could have sold it even better if I said that the pirates are using their money to pay off the EFF.
Now I know where all of that pirate ad-money has been flowing. It's buying media stooges that are willing to believe the FUD that these sensible laws will be abused. Laws that regardless of all the whining and pleading about free expression will actually protect our artists and their ability to make a living with their creations.
Who says that the freetards and pirates out there don't know how to play this game?
Re: Re: For the record, /I'm/ not "comfortable" with SOPA, either.
Bingo!
It's dead horse here, it's been beaten so often:
As a business you have a choice:
- Give people things they want in a way they want it, at a price that makes sense to them
- Limit all of the above in one way or another.
Either choice is up to the business and whether that succeeds or fails is a risk taken by the business. I used to think that IP law just needed some reforming, but with ASCA, PIPA, and SOPA I'm starting to think that these are just laws that subvert the market by giving content creators the real ill-earned entitlement. A belief that they deserve to own something and profit regardless of whether or not they operate as a sensible business, and regardless of the cultural forces that shaped and and inspired their products.
Won't someone think of the children?
If our government doesn't start censoring now, they won't be used to it by the time they grow up! What will happen then?
Though I think we might have to consider this level of connection a one-off deal, big every-once-in-a-while connections are a great point to find the little everyday connections, and a "Make your own Bastion Narrations" service would be cool.
Bastion is a great game, and now I'm even happier that my money seems to have been spent on some good and savvy people.
I know I don't, but some do anyways. It may not apply to all, but in that group there will be a fair number of folks who like the content, but they don't understand the price tag.
Is the solution to this problem really to find exciting new ways to indiscriminately shut down free and legal expression on the internet due to individual bad actors?
Maybe it's about finding new ways to reach your market that you haven't considered before?
Maybe it is about changing the art you create so you can reach the people you want to reach.
It might even be about realizing that your integrity prevents any of the above, and that you have to soldier on, despite the downsides.
All of them are equally valid in my mind, because in the end the artist would never expect that anybody owes him anything for his work. He creates, and its up to consumers to choose what to do about it.
Well, it has become fashionable to turn whatever large, monopolistic entity you disagree with into "BIG ___".
Big Oil
Big Content
Big Pharma
Big Government
Big Mac
I guess I can see where Google's dominance could earn them the monniker, but then again, the title is starting to lose it's meaning to me. The fact that any goof can add Big to the front of something to try and worry me is the kind of FUD that caused me to lose respect for FUD.
In the reality the studios have managed to avoid for years now, people just buy the stuff they intended to buy anyway, and if they want to rent, waiting 28 days is meaningless.
If I were into mixing metaphors, I would say that the market knows The Window Has No Clothes.
Since the whole "Occupy ..." movement started, I've been hearing this as the new bugbear facing our society. I think we should be careful when we tote out "Corporate Personhood" because I think there is room for nuance. The idea isn't that bad really, especially when it comes to financial matters, treating a corporation as a person makes sense when it comes to the books.
I will say that corps donating money doesn't bother me nearly as much as the privacy they're allowed. Corporate personhood definitely doesn't apply when it comes to them giving money to politicians.
Prosecutor: Where were you on the night of January 12th?
Witness: I'm sorry, but I don't believe I was alive to witness any thing on that night.
Customer: Can a have a burger and fries?
Register: I regret to inform you that we do not serve burgers and fries here.
Customer: But it's on the menu.
Register: I regret to inform you that we do not serve burgers and fries here. repeat until the customer leaves
Re: Re: Re: Two words that should sum up this idiocy...
What I find even more telling is that as was mentioned by Someantimalwareguy, the legal progression of IP is starting to follow an oddly similar legal arc to Prohibition. Attempts to strictly legislate an activity that has strong cultural roots, and is fairly natural to boot, leading to a significant population who doesn't see the point in the law, and breaks it at nearly every opportunity, many times out of habit, but also out of sheer contrariness.
Hard times are a great motivator when it comes to people, and unless you've been living under a rock for the past decade, times have been hard for a lot of people for quite a while.
On the post: NY Times & LA Times Both Come Out Against SOPA & PIPA
Re: Re: Amirite guys?
It was pretty easy to imagine it as a pro-SOPA/PIPA response. If they're willing to imagine that all of this money is floating around in the hands of the pirates and file-sharers is it that far to construct a conspiracy where the papers are now brought in as help.
I actually think I could have sold it even better if I said that the pirates are using their money to pay off the EFF.
On the post: NY Times & LA Times Both Come Out Against SOPA & PIPA
Amirite guys?
Who says that the freetards and pirates out there don't know how to play this game?
On the post: When Even The Strongest Copyright Defenders Recognize That SOPA Goes Too Far...
Re: Re: For the record, /I'm/ not "comfortable" with SOPA, either.
It's dead horse here, it's been beaten so often:
As a business you have a choice:
- Give people things they want in a way they want it, at a price that makes sense to them
- Limit all of the above in one way or another.
Either choice is up to the business and whether that succeeds or fails is a risk taken by the business. I used to think that IP law just needed some reforming, but with ASCA, PIPA, and SOPA I'm starting to think that these are just laws that subvert the market by giving content creators the real ill-earned entitlement. A belief that they deserve to own something and profit regardless of whether or not they operate as a sensible business, and regardless of the cultural forces that shaped and and inspired their products.
On the post: Why Does The Government Fear Free Speech?
If our government doesn't start censoring now, they won't be used to it by the time they grow up! What will happen then?
On the post: Why Does The Government Fear Free Speech?
On the post: Software Developer Connects With Fans At The Altar
Bastion is a great game, and now I'm even happier that my money seems to have been spent on some good and savvy people.
On the post: Don't Say YUUUP! Or You Might Get Sued
Oh yeah?
Pac-Wars!
On the post: Everyone Freak Out! Gangs Have Discovered The Internet!
Worst part about gangs online?
On the post: Why All Filmmakers Should Speak Out Against SOPA
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It's not "media piracy", it's "content" piracy.
Is the solution to this problem really to find exciting new ways to indiscriminately shut down free and legal expression on the internet due to individual bad actors?
Maybe it's about finding new ways to reach your market that you haven't considered before?
Maybe it is about changing the art you create so you can reach the people you want to reach.
It might even be about realizing that your integrity prevents any of the above, and that you have to soldier on, despite the downsides.
All of them are equally valid in my mind, because in the end the artist would never expect that anybody owes him anything for his work. He creates, and its up to consumers to choose what to do about it.
On the post: Why All Filmmakers Should Speak Out Against SOPA
Re: haha!
FTFY
On the post: Why All Filmmakers Should Speak Out Against SOPA
Re: Re: Re: It's not "media piracy", it's "content" piracy.
Sorry, they don't.
On the post: Justin Bieber: Senator Klobuchar Should Be Locked Up For Felony Streaming Bill
Re:
Either way, you made me laugh.
On the post: Rep. Blackburn, Co-Sponsor Of E-PARASITE, Explains Why Regulating The Internet Is Terrible
Re: Re: Re:
Big Oil
Big Content
Big Pharma
Big Government
Big Mac
I guess I can see where Google's dominance could earn them the monniker, but then again, the title is starting to lose it's meaning to me. The fact that any goof can add Big to the front of something to try and worry me is the kind of FUD that caused me to lose respect for FUD.
On the post: Warner Bros. Hates Libraries, Wants To Embargo DVD Sales To Libraries For A Month
Re: 28 days is no big deal to me
In the reality the studios have managed to avoid for years now, people just buy the stuff they intended to buy anyway, and if they want to rent, waiting 28 days is meaningless.
If I were into mixing metaphors, I would say that the market knows The Window Has No Clothes.
On the post: E-PARASITE Bill: 'The End Of The Internet As We Know It'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is what I've been saying
Yeah, I'm picking nits.
On the post: Justice Department Wants To Be Able To Lie In Response To Freedom Of Information Requests
Re: The real problem
Since the whole "Occupy ..." movement started, I've been hearing this as the new bugbear facing our society. I think we should be careful when we tote out "Corporate Personhood" because I think there is room for nuance. The idea isn't that bad really, especially when it comes to financial matters, treating a corporation as a person makes sense when it comes to the books.
I will say that corps donating money doesn't bother me nearly as much as the privacy they're allowed. Corporate personhood definitely doesn't apply when it comes to them giving money to politicians.
On the post: Justice Department Wants To Be Able To Lie In Response To Freedom Of Information Requests
Prosecutor: Where were you on the night of January 12th?
Witness: I'm sorry, but I don't believe I was alive to witness any thing on that night.
Customer: Can a have a burger and fries?
Register: I regret to inform you that we do not serve burgers and fries here.
Customer: But it's on the menu.
Register: I regret to inform you that we do not serve burgers and fries here.
repeat until the customer leaves
Lady: Do you have protection?
Guy: No such thing!
On the post: France Continues Mass Processing Of Infringement Accusations: 60 People Get Third Strike Notice... 650,000 Get First Strike
Re: Re: Re: Two words that should sum up this idiocy...
On the post: France Continues Mass Processing Of Infringement Accusations: 60 People Get Third Strike Notice... 650,000 Get First Strike
Re: Two words that should sum up this idiocy...
If not, Prohibition was classic Ken Burns. Quality stuff.
On the post: France Continues Mass Processing Of Infringement Accusations: 60 People Get Third Strike Notice... 650,000 Get First Strike
Re: Re: Re:
Hard times are a great motivator when it comes to people, and unless you've been living under a rock for the past decade, times have been hard for a lot of people for quite a while.
Next >>