I've actually wondered if licences/contracts could influence copyright and vice versa.
GPL / Creative Commons, are more of a reaction to old copyright laws(/practices), and less of an "ideal" solution. (IMHO)
If nothing else, it would be an interesting thought experiment to play around with licences/contracts being null/void (to differing degrees) when it comes to copyright.
If a door is locked, no matter how weak the lock, pushing it open is still breaking and entering.- AC
False comparison, I'll give you that it makes a good image upon reading, and might even be "close" to the situation.
Digital "objects" are not physical "objects", no matter how hard we try to make them (at least until Tron is real... but ehh)
A slightly better example might be a company posting all of their maps on a billboard and handing out a "code word" that could let them see the billboard past the old 90 year old , sitting at the folding table, given the title of "Security" so he can get a paycheck... then one person gives out his/her code word to others....
See... That wasn't so hard... to at least get farther away from physical objects and closer to the real situation
I somehow think that the DRUG MAKER... knows how many pills each pharmacy(or group of them) buys and sells... since they can only get them from the maker in the first place... so this data isn't about aggregate information. So if this data is more about "per pharmacy" or "per zip code" it is more about marketing, or if it is more like what I expect "John. Q. Public got 1 month of twice daily 10mg worth of _insert random drug name_" then this is more about invasion of medical privacy.
Open government and Open...anything... needs to have limits, like private medical records... of... I don't know... _maybe_ just maybe what prescriptions someone is taking.
Big Pharma knows how many pills they are making. Perhaps this should be a sign that Pharma shouldn't be allowed to market to doctors (or anyone else for that matter), there is no reason why pill commercials should be legal, they don't help the overall society, they just make us want more pills.
The original Warner brothers had a history of seeing future trends before they became popular. Making the first "Talkie(s)": movies with audio, is the perfect example of this and is what propelled Warner Bros. studio into being one of the top studios. Perhaps we're seeing some of that forward thinking showing itself again.
Lets also look at what the Open Source community has been doing lately. OSS pushing closed source...etc, etc, etc
However, the results of these and the improvements from one to the other, is impressive.
Giving these tools to the world for free will definitely help work to push down the cost of CGI even further and further.
Perhaps there is a deeper meaning to this only being the Senate Judiciary Committee, perhaps these senaters, including Franken voted this way because from the "Judiciary Point of View" it is "legal" or whatever all criteria they use.
Also, the list that really matters is the final vote IMHO.
Maybe this might be a good time to ask this question, since I see these as possibly related issues.
How can the NFL's saying ==> "This telecast is copyrighted by the NFL for the private use of our audience [and] any other use of this telecast or [of] any pictures, descriptions or accounts of the game without the NFL's consent is prohibited" be legal. I mean specifically, how can an account of a factually true event be prohibited. I understand that re-use of audio or video from their broadcast would be one issue. However, Why can I not say "I sat at home and watched CBS on Sunday at 1PM of the [team XXXX] playing at [team YYYY] and the game was great.... {insert descriptions of most, or all, of the game}... Then, the game ended with a 99 yard kickoff return."
This might be combination of a "publicity rights"{of the teams/players}/"hot news"{desire for only those who pay the NFL to report}/ the inability to copyright facts/etc. Or I could be _way_ off base, but if anyone wants to chime in, I'd appreciate it.
Actually I believe the term you are looking for is "Dependant" not "Child", legal Dependants are MUCH different than children. The venn diagram of the two would have a large portion covered by both, but there would be portions of both not in the union section.
Could Google somehow buy the "threat" away from Motorola and have MS be suing Google instead (I know this would put Google at a disadvantage legally... having to pay up if they lose...), but I'd throw in 10$ if they would throw down and actually have Google have the chance to invalidate those patents
Then the very top reporters (i.e., the ones that Slate would brag about) can be paid $121,250 a year.
That's not a terrible salary in this day and age. For the top people in an important field, it seems a little low to me. You might be able to afford a condo in the Bay Area if you saved up for a few years with that money.
Well thats an interesting Idea you have there... So let us do some other math:
NSF REU program gives out ~1500 "NSF Fellowship" grants each year to graduate students that ends up coming to 30k/year for 3 years, for living expenses. This is suppose to support our fledgling researchers so that they can focus on their studies/research. Whether you agree this is a smart decision or not, (I personally think it should be expanded heavily). Looking at the graduate student model : "slave labor" for 5~7 years while they work on their Dissertation, and then maybe a few more years as a Post-Doc. This and other Fellowship programs are the driving force for funding for graduate students (for PhD) at universities. These grad students are the driving force behind most university research (as work horses at least).
Now I'm not saying that model is perfect for all news sites, but some might try it. My main point is that 30K$/year is enough for a lot of graduate students to fund their lives, and who says that they HAVE to live in the bay area? There are plenty of cities with plenty to offer reporters other than "the bay" area: Cleveland, Detroit, Youngstown, Pittsburg,(any other "Rust belt" city) where 120k$+/year would be much more than would "need". I think people's expectations that everywhere is as expensive as "the bay" or Boston/New York is very unfounded. ONLINE news sites can have ...and here is the secret... "online" news reporters... who might not live where people expect, but can give thoughtful well written/researched commentary on subjects.
There is no one-size-fits-all solution for almost anything, especially media in today's/tomorrow's media. So don't assume that just because you think that some X$ amount isn't enough for some task, that everyone agrees with you.
I have no clue where 'YOU' live, and you have no clue where 'I' live, or that I'm even in the United States when posting this. Just think about that for a minute. I might live in one of those above mentioned cities, or I might have visited them, or I might be an economics student, or an Engineering Professor from UC Berkeley, or I might be a 419 Scammer who likes to post on tech sites in the US when I'm bored.... and thats the point. Online content doesn't discriminate about where it comes from as long as the content itself is of high quality.
Today's definition of "top" probably isn't going to be tomorrow's. Today's top news reporters (if you quantify that on the level of knowledge of the viewers/readers) are Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert
A new study by the Pew Research Study shows that viewers of the Daily Show and the Colbert Report have the highest knowledge of national and international affairs, while Fox News viewers rank nearly dead last
On the post: MPEG-LA Follows Through On Its Promise To Go After Google For Daring To Offer Patent-Free Video
Re:
On the post: Can A Contract Remove Fair Use Rights?
GPL / Creative Commons, are more of a reaction to old copyright laws(/practices), and less of an "ideal" solution. (IMHO)
If nothing else, it would be an interesting thought experiment to play around with licences/contracts being null/void (to differing degrees) when it comes to copyright.
On the post: Why You Should Be Paying Attention To Kevin Smith
CwF = protesting protesters
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-544043
about how he protested Dogma: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QepgKVOVfZ8
On the post: Deep Linking Could Be Infringement In Germany If Website Puts Even Ridiculous Weak Attempts To Block It
Re:
False comparison, I'll give you that it makes a good image upon reading, and might even be "close" to the situation.
Digital "objects" are not physical "objects", no matter how hard we try to make them (at least until Tron is real... but ehh)
A slightly better example might be a company posting all of their maps on a billboard and handing out a "code word" that could let them see the billboard past the old 90 year old , sitting at the folding table, given the title of "Security" so he can get a paycheck... then one person gives out his/her code word to others....
See... That wasn't so hard... to at least get farther away from physical objects and closer to the real situation
On the post: Reddit, Digg, Fark, Slashdot, TechCrunch & Others Sued Over Ridiculous 'Online Press Release' Patent
From the 'Update' on TechCrunch
... seriously... just seriously...
On the post: Free Speech vs. Medical Privacy Hits The Supreme Court
I'm surprised
Open government and Open...anything... needs to have limits, like private medical records... of... I don't know... _maybe_ just maybe what prescriptions someone is taking.
Big Pharma knows how many pills they are making. Perhaps this should be a sign that Pharma shouldn't be allowed to market to doctors (or anyone else for that matter), there is no reason why pill commercials should be legal, they don't help the overall society, they just make us want more pills.
On the post: Warner Bros. Smarter Than The Average Studio? Won't Fight Yogi Bear Parody
On the post: DailyDirt: Bring Out Your Dead... With CGI
Obligitory Blender works
However, the results of these and the improvements from one to the other, is impressive.
Giving these tools to the world for free will definitely help work to push down the cost of CGI even further and further.
Blender's website: http://www.blender.org/
In order of creation:
http://www.elephantsdream.org/
http://www.bigbuckbunny.org/
http://www.sintel.org/
I might be missing some, if so: sorry ahead of time.
On the post: How YouPorn Tries To Hide That It's Spying On Your Browsing History
would this classify as DMCA...
On the post: The 19 Senators Who Voted To Censor The Internet
Re:
Also, the list that really matters is the final vote IMHO.
On the post: Publicity Rights vs. Free Speech Goes To Court
What about
How can the NFL's saying ==> "This telecast is copyrighted by the NFL for the private use of our audience [and] any other use of this telecast or [of] any pictures, descriptions or accounts of the game without the NFL's consent is prohibited" be legal. I mean specifically, how can an account of a factually true event be prohibited. I understand that re-use of audio or video from their broadcast would be one issue. However, Why can I not say "I sat at home and watched CBS on Sunday at 1PM of the [team XXXX] playing at [team YYYY] and the game was great.... {insert descriptions of most, or all, of the game}... Then, the game ended with a 99 yard kickoff return."
This might be combination of a "publicity rights"{of the teams/players}/"hot news"{desire for only those who pay the NFL to report}/ the inability to copyright facts/etc. Or I could be _way_ off base, but if anyone wants to chime in, I'd appreciate it.
On the post: Publicity Rights vs. Free Speech Goes To Court
Re: Free Speech
On the post: Should The Knight Foundation Be Paying For Startups To Put Up Paywalls?
KITT
On the post: Microsoft Sues Motorola For Patent Infringement... Over Android
Google buying the legal threat
On the post: Turns Out People Actually Do Like Smart, Long Form Content Online
Re:
NSF REU program gives out ~1500 "NSF Fellowship" grants each year to graduate students that ends up coming to 30k/year for 3 years, for living expenses. This is suppose to support our fledgling researchers so that they can focus on their studies/research. Whether you agree this is a smart decision or not, (I personally think it should be expanded heavily). Looking at the graduate student model : "slave labor" for 5~7 years while they work on their Dissertation, and then maybe a few more years as a Post-Doc. This and other Fellowship programs are the driving force for funding for graduate students (for PhD) at universities. These grad students are the driving force behind most university research (as work horses at least).
Now I'm not saying that model is perfect for all news sites, but some might try it. My main point is that 30K$/year is enough for a lot of graduate students to fund their lives, and who says that they HAVE to live in the bay area? There are plenty of cities with plenty to offer reporters other than "the bay" area: Cleveland, Detroit, Youngstown, Pittsburg,(any other "Rust belt" city) where 120k$+/year would be much more than would "need". I think people's expectations that everywhere is as expensive as "the bay" or Boston/New York is very unfounded. ONLINE news sites can have ...and here is the secret... "online" news reporters... who might not live where people expect, but can give thoughtful well written/researched commentary on subjects.
There is no one-size-fits-all solution for almost anything, especially media in today's/tomorrow's media. So don't assume that just because you think that some X$ amount isn't enough for some task, that everyone agrees with you.
I have no clue where 'YOU' live, and you have no clue where 'I' live, or that I'm even in the United States when posting this. Just think about that for a minute. I might live in one of those above mentioned cities, or I might have visited them, or I might be an economics student, or an Engineering Professor from UC Berkeley, or I might be a 419 Scammer who likes to post on tech sites in the US when I'm bored.... and thats the point. Online content doesn't discriminate about where it comes from as long as the content itself is of high quality.
Today's definition of "top" probably isn't going to be tomorrow's. Today's top news reporters (if you quantify that on the level of knowledge of the viewers/readers) are Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert </Rant>
Next >>