no-one exclaims that the whole profession is defunct. It's just these rotten apples that deserve to be picked out and thrown away. I just hope that that will happen.
Well because of the totally misguided notion that without patents nothing gets invented. These people have started to believe in their own lies, and now we are reaping the misery what they've been sowning for years.
Perhaps it's time for a redefinition: IP is not intellectual property, but rather imaginary property.
So predictable. Even though this legislation doesn't do ANYTHING against child porn (as it still gets made and distributed). These sick fucks that call themselves politicians don't deserve our respect and should be tried on grounds of facilitating child pornography.
Okay, I'm convinced, these laws are ZOMBIE-laws, how many times we fight it down, it still gets up for some more asswhoopage... I propose that we shoot this legislation through the head next time.
Or otherwise I'd like to see a three strikes law for legislation.
I keep coming to a point of why do we even bother.
These crooks will still be able to push through legislation that's not by the people nor for the people, only to prop up prehistoric businessmodels.
We've seen multiple attempts at getting software patent laws in the EU (they even tried to push it through an agricultural committee).
We've seen multiple attempts at getting horrible copyright laws that only serves corporate interests that have nothing to do with "helping the artists", the latest one being ACTA.
And I have the distinct feeling that we are losing the war.
Yes, we should keep on fighting this legislation, but every blow we deliver them, sets them back one step, only to have them get two steps forward again a few months later.
I'm more for global civil disobedience. To heck with the corporate copyright holders, if they don't want to understand the changing market, they have no right to my money. I'd rather spend my hard-earned money on movies and artists who do get it, than spend it on acts that think they are entitled to their money, as if it's a foregone conclusion.
So, because this Holden Caulfield character is so wellknown around the world (except he isn't, Catcher in the Rye isn't exactly on booklists in my neck of the woods, before Conspiracy Theory, I had never heard of the book), you can't write a story based on him?
How about a story that references CitR?
How about a lesser known character?
How about you just happen to use a name, someone else also used in a different novel? And they just happen to have the same occupation, or something.
Where do you draw the line?
So by using the term "truthiness" I am infringing on Stephen Colbert's copyright?
...
How's that dictionary coming, Websters?
...
While on the whole I agree with you, I don't agree with the notion that you can copyright a single word. A work on its own, yes, parts of the work, perhaps -that depends on context whether its protected by copyright or not- but not single words. Because where would it end?
I saw Avatar in the cinema in 3d, and it was a snorefest for me. Well, at least the friend who I took to that movie literally fell asleep about halfway.
The 3D aspect gave me a headache, the plot was non-existant, and I felt I had been robbed. (22 euros for 2 tickets for a movie not worth half that in my eyes) Sure impressively made, but visually attractiveness does not a movie make.
I'd be just as happy to watch it on my non-3d-tv with a beer in my hand.
Indeed TLWiki owned the copyright of the Fansub that got removed and got DMCA'ed by the Japanese game maker. And you are absolutely right in that the Japanese Game Maker should not have sent that DMCA request...
What's that? You didn't mean that? You meant the opposite? Oh but your subject line disagrees with you.
Next time, improve your reading skills, layperson.
But I agree, they shouldn't embed it in the video, but offer the subtitle as a textfile (like most subs should IMHO, I'm looking at you, foreign persons who make fansubs for NCIS, and then offer it embedded in the video file)
My keyboard sues F5 networks, for infringing on its use of F5. My keyboard clearly has prior art. (yes, I know, prior art has nothing to do with it, but names aren't patentable either.)
So, what you are saying that even though the medium allows for infinite copies, the content that's on that medium is scarce? That I don't follow.
Let's say for example that Hulu only offers one episode of one series at the moment.
If the content is scarce, how is it possible that both Person A and Person B can watch that episode from that website?
Yes, content creators should be paid for their work, but as the distribution reaches infinity, you only have to set a very low price.
Look, all Hulu has to do is offer a simplified easy way of watching content, because despite what you might think, piracy isn't that easy, though it's getting there. But you have to find the content, hope it's the right content, risk viruses, hope that you have the right codecs, the right unpacking tools, hope that enough people are sharing it. etc etc etc.
For a low price* lots of people are willing to forgo the piracy route, in favour of the more legal way.
Sure, not everyone, but large parts of the populous is more than willing to pay for content if it was reasonably priced*
you know, you could use the "reply to this comment" link underneath each comment. Because the reference numbers get lost if a reader selected the "threaded view". So the @1, and @2 lose their meaning. Just a tip. If you use that link, your comment will appear, for threaded viewers, underneath the comment you are replying to.
Combine the @#-reference for all I care, but please, use that link.
On the post: Students Who Caught Gym Teacher Stealing Money From Lockers May Get Punished
Re: Now wait a minute...
On the post: Canadian Writers Guild Wants 'You Must Be A Criminal' Tax On Both Distribution And Storage Of Content
Either levies and legal filesharing, or criminalize filesharing but don't collect any fees.
On the post: Why Does The US Gov't Get To Patent Research Paid For By Public Tax Dollars?
Perhaps it's time for a redefinition: IP is not intellectual property, but rather imaginary property.
On the post: It's Baaaaaack: Canadian DMCA Bill Expected Next Month
Re: ...and right on cue...
On the post: It's Baaaaaack: Canadian DMCA Bill Expected Next Month
zombie law
Or otherwise I'd like to see a three strikes law for legislation.
On the post: Guy Sues Google Because It Points To Articles He Claims Are Defamatory
On the post: Could Cybercrime Treaty Already Push Through Some Of The Worst Of ACTA?
These crooks will still be able to push through legislation that's not by the people nor for the people, only to prop up prehistoric businessmodels.
We've seen multiple attempts at getting software patent laws in the EU (they even tried to push it through an agricultural committee).
We've seen multiple attempts at getting horrible copyright laws that only serves corporate interests that have nothing to do with "helping the artists", the latest one being ACTA.
And I have the distinct feeling that we are losing the war.
Yes, we should keep on fighting this legislation, but every blow we deliver them, sets them back one step, only to have them get two steps forward again a few months later.
I'm more for global civil disobedience. To heck with the corporate copyright holders, if they don't want to understand the changing market, they have no right to my money. I'd rather spend my hard-earned money on movies and artists who do get it, than spend it on acts that think they are entitled to their money, as if it's a foregone conclusion.
On the post: Catcher In The Rye Sequel Fight Could Lead To Forced Licensing Rather Than Injunctions In Some Copyright Suits
Re: Re: Lux
On the post: Catcher In The Rye Sequel Fight Could Lead To Forced Licensing Rather Than Injunctions In Some Copyright Suits
Re: Sounds like copyright infringment to me
How about a story that references CitR?
How about a lesser known character?
How about you just happen to use a name, someone else also used in a different novel? And they just happen to have the same occupation, or something.
Where do you draw the line?
On the post: Catcher In The Rye Sequel Fight Could Lead To Forced Licensing Rather Than Injunctions In Some Copyright Suits
Re: Re: Re: Questions:
...
How's that dictionary coming, Websters?
...
While on the whole I agree with you, I don't agree with the notion that you can copyright a single word. A work on its own, yes, parts of the work, perhaps -that depends on context whether its protected by copyright or not- but not single words. Because where would it end?
On the post: UK Labour Party Claims 'Innocent Error' Absolves It Of Infringement -- But Where Is The 'Innocent Error' Defense In The Digital Economy Act?
So I make it 3-1
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100406/1251578900.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/ 20100425/2135299164.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100426/1133049170.shtml
and 1 strike for the Tories:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100418/2325419057.shtml
So far... Let's see how far the counter will go until someone actually closes any of their internet access.
On the post: Japanese Game Maker Engages In Wiki Edit War With Fansubbers, Then Opts For The DMCA Option
Re: Re:
Just as an aside, who can claim ownership over a thought?
On the post: Avatar Sees Theater Attendance Bump After DVD Release
Re: Re: Question:
The 3D aspect gave me a headache, the plot was non-existant, and I felt I had been robbed. (22 euros for 2 tickets for a movie not worth half that in my eyes) Sure impressively made, but visually attractiveness does not a movie make.
I'd be just as happy to watch it on my non-3d-tv with a beer in my hand.
On the post: Japanese Game Maker Engages In Wiki Edit War With Fansubbers, Then Opts For The DMCA Option
Re: TLWiki owns it ! !
What's that? You didn't mean that? You meant the opposite? Oh but your subject line disagrees with you.
Next time, improve your reading skills, layperson.
On the post: Japanese Game Maker Engages In Wiki Edit War With Fansubbers, Then Opts For The DMCA Option
Re: Re: Re:
But I agree, they shouldn't embed it in the video, but offer the subtitle as a textfile (like most subs should IMHO, I'm looking at you, foreign persons who make fansubs for NCIS, and then offer it embedded in the video file)
On the post: Avatar Blu-Ray Customers Not Enjoying Their DRM-Crippled Discs
Re: Re: Idiot comments
Piracy however you want to spin is, is not, nor will it ever be equal to theft. Because no actual goods were taken.
Take your moral highground, and stuff it with a few dictionaries and lawbooks.
On the post: F5 Doesn't Like A10's Name -- But Sues Over Patents, Not Trademarks
On the post: Who Needs Parenting When Your ISP Uses The British Film Classification System?
Re: @ 6 et all
Thank you.
On the post: Is Hulu About To Find Out That There's Always Somewhere Else To Get Content Online?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Let's say for example that Hulu only offers one episode of one series at the moment.
If the content is scarce, how is it possible that both Person A and Person B can watch that episode from that website?
Yes, content creators should be paid for their work, but as the distribution reaches infinity, you only have to set a very low price.
Look, all Hulu has to do is offer a simplified easy way of watching content, because despite what you might think, piracy isn't that easy, though it's getting there. But you have to find the content, hope it's the right content, risk viruses, hope that you have the right codecs, the right unpacking tools, hope that enough people are sharing it. etc etc etc.
For a low price* lots of people are willing to forgo the piracy route, in favour of the more legal way.
Sure, not everyone, but large parts of the populous is more than willing to pay for content if it was reasonably priced*
*To be determined
On the post: Innovation By Imitation: Study Shows That Success Comes From Imitation
Re: @1
Combine the @#-reference for all I care, but please, use that link.
Next >>