Could be an interesting discussion. Sadly most of the pro-copyright people/maximalists that come here, want to stay "anonymous". It would be nice to have them announce who they are and what their vested interest is, perhaps in one of the weekly posts from the community.
Re: Re: Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
Out_of_the_blue probably reckons himself a modern day Don Quixote. Batting at windmills. (except then without reusing someone else's works, of course, because that's stuff from the devil)
I'll have you know that outside the US, the Kindle isn't really selling all that well. Mostly because of the poor selection of books in other languages (other than English).
In most European countries, the Sony e-reader is the most-sold reader device.
I don't own an e-reader anymore, (I have an Android phone and tablet with fbreader, kindle and kobo apps) and I still don't trust anything that Sony makes, but I'm a minority in this. Most of my friends who own an e-reader own a Sony one. Mostly because it's affordable, and most bookstores in Europe offer books that can be read on Sony e-readers without any hassles, because of the epub default (with adobe DRM).
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Does make a point, though
The phone book undoubtedly has numbers of pot dealers. Just not labeled as such.
You know that J. Smith, 12 example avenue, Example city is a pot dealer. You look up his phone number in the phone book of Example city. You dial the number and order some pot.
Is the phone book now liable for you and the dealer breaking the law? I don't think so.
But that's what Google does now.
You are looking for song Q, you go on Google and search for Q. You find a link to a website that offers Q for download, and you download Q.
Google is not responsible for you potentially breaking copyright law in that situation, neither is Google responsible for the website potentially breaking copyright law.
Google can't magically know that that offering of Q is legal or not. Just the same way that the phone book can't magically know that J. Smith is a pot dealer.
I think this case can't be compared to physical goods at all.
I know of no store that replaces your goods when you lose your bought item.
It's an added service that B$N offers, which is a nice thing.
While I do agree that it's stupid to tie it to a credit card, instead it should have been tied to the account.
But why should B$N keep offering the free download access if the client has lost access to said library?
Of course, in this case, the client can't help it that a credit card has an expiration date. But the client could've made his own backup copy of his library as well.
Who's duty is it to maintain the library of the client? The client or Barnes & Noble?
Patent the act of trying to extort other companies from their money through costly and unnecessary lawsuits, and you can rake in the dough by applying your patent to these patent trolls.
You mean giving people a choice before sic-ing the lawyers onto them? Surely, you jest!
You're serious? Hah, it will never work. If you treat people with respect you will get trod on, and be pissed all over your dead desecrated corpse by these people. A firm hand is what they need. Tough love with the iron fist. Like in the good old days.
On the post: Was An Advertisement In Vogue The Inspiration For The Star Wars Opening Crawls?
Re:
On the post: $274 Million Raised Via Kickstarter In 2012
For instance, 83 million USD for games alone. 53 million for films & videos. 34 million for music. Three of the most pirated categories.
On the post: Danish Court Orders Spanish Site Blocked Because It Uses Trademarked English Word 'Home' As Part Of Its Name
We need more tech-aware justice systems in the world
On the post: Disney Freaks Out Over Patents That May Mean It Can't Keep 3Ding Old Movies
Re: Re: Let 3D die...
On the post: Disney Freaks Out Over Patents That May Mean It Can't Keep 3Ding Old Movies
Re:
On the post: Disney Freaks Out Over Patents That May Mean It Can't Keep 3Ding Old Movies
Re:
On the post: Techdirt 2012: The Numbers.
Re: reason not to come here
But where do you see these IP-logs mentioned in the text?
On the post: Techdirt 2012: The Numbers.
Re: Re:
On the post: Techdirt 2012: The Numbers.
Re: They like me they really really like me...
On the post: Techdirt 2012: The Numbers.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think it was the lifetime supply of cyanide pills that helped.
On the post: Choose Your Own Hamlet Becomes The Largest Publishing Project On Kickstarter, Thanks To The Public Domain
Re: Re: Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
On the post: Sony's New German Ebookstore Features Thousands Of DRM-Free Books
In most European countries, the Sony e-reader is the most-sold reader device.
I don't own an e-reader anymore, (I have an Android phone and tablet with fbreader, kindle and kobo apps) and I still don't trust anything that Sony makes, but I'm a minority in this. Most of my friends who own an e-reader own a Sony one. Mostly because it's affordable, and most bookstores in Europe offer books that can be read on Sony e-readers without any hassles, because of the epub default (with adobe DRM).
On the post: TorrentFreak Pulls The Switcheroo On Copyright Troll That Cited Them In Threat Letters
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Does make a point, though
You know that J. Smith, 12 example avenue, Example city is a pot dealer. You look up his phone number in the phone book of Example city. You dial the number and order some pot.
Is the phone book now liable for you and the dealer breaking the law? I don't think so.
But that's what Google does now.
You are looking for song Q, you go on Google and search for Q. You find a link to a website that offers Q for download, and you download Q.
Google is not responsible for you potentially breaking copyright law in that situation, neither is Google responsible for the website potentially breaking copyright law.
Google can't magically know that that offering of Q is legal or not. Just the same way that the phone book can't magically know that J. Smith is a pot dealer.
On the post: TorrentFreak Pulls The Switcheroo On Copyright Troll That Cited Them In Threat Letters
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Does make a point, though
I wish I could bash this message into your thick skull, or wherever your brains are.
On the post: Barnes & Noble Decides That Purchased Ebooks Are Only Yours Until Your Credit Card Expires
I know of no store that replaces your goods when you lose your bought item.
It's an added service that B$N offers, which is a nice thing.
While I do agree that it's stupid to tie it to a credit card, instead it should have been tied to the account.
But why should B$N keep offering the free download access if the client has lost access to said library?
Of course, in this case, the client can't help it that a credit card has an expiration date. But the client could've made his own backup copy of his library as well.
Who's duty is it to maintain the library of the client? The client or Barnes & Noble?
On the post: Barnes & Noble Decides That Purchased Ebooks Are Only Yours Until Your Credit Card Expires
Re:
Buy to rent is not my idea of good investment.
On the post: Company Sues Kickstarter Over 3D Printer Patent, Maligns 'Hackers And Makers'
Re: Re:
On the post: President Obama Is Not Impressed With Your Right To Modify His Photos
Re: Re: Re: If we're going to cite IP cases here
On the post: Micro-Stock Photo Agency Prefers Converting Customers To Cracking Down On Infringers
Asking? It'll never work.
You're serious? Hah, it will never work. If you treat people with respect you will get trod on, and be pissed all over your dead desecrated corpse by these people. A firm hand is what they need. Tough love with the iron fist. Like in the good old days.
[/s]
On the post: Don't Let Retraction Distract From The Simple Fact: GOP Copyright Policy Brief Was Brilliant
Re: Re: Re:
Next >>