The service they provide is innovative, not the hardware used to deliver the service. Even they know it's a terrible technical solution, but it's required to stay compliant with stupid laws.
"I may have been in jail a couple of times, two or three times..."
May have? Two or three times? Could he be more weasely?
I'd say for most people, going to jail is a significant enough event in their lives that they remember quite well whether or not it happened, and whether it happened two times or three times. It's safe to assume he has definitely been to jail three times.
"If this doesn't work, we'll bring back the real punishment."
First, the whole point of the article is that nobody knows if it's working or not because nobody is releasing any data. The lack of any data proving success would strongly suggest failure.
Second, who is this "we" you speak of? And why would anyone "bring back" methods that failed so spectacularly before?
When did the term "troublemaker" come to mean somebody who should only be approached with a drawn weapon? You're either using the wrong word, or you're suggesting an insane over-reaction.
No, continuing to work as an armed LEO when you're scared all the time would NOT be understandable, it would be irresponsible and stupid. In fact, superior officers allowing someone to keep working under those conditions would also be irresponsible and stupid.
I think you're wrong however. I don't think they all live in fear of their lives, it seems more likely they're poorly selected and poorly trained.
So where are all the detractors from Tim's previous article telling him he didn't know what he was talking about? They seem awfully quiet this time around. Must be a bit harder to defend the legal theory when a bit of reality is thrown in.
That's a myopic, short-term view. If Apple can be successful with this, others will have a go too and then you'll have a competitive market. Remember there'd be no Android without Apple's success with the iPhone.
Me neither. All I use my phone for is making calls, sending text messages and emails, taking and sending photos, browsing the internet, playing games, waking me in the morning, navigating in the car, checking traffic cameras, tracking commercial flights, ordering food, lighting my way, buying movie tickets, and a bunch of other app-enabled tasks. There's no way I should've paid more than $50 for all that, I got ripped off!
Somebody sounds very pissy about being made look a bit silly. Next time you make a smart-ass request thinking nobody will be able to answer you, check Wikipedia first...
"then describe an example of such a thing as "innovation economy", where it exists, how it exists, when it started, why, and then explain the economics of it."
In case you missed it above, here's everything you asked for.
"He is pushing this story the same way and for the same reasons he sold gay porn: for the money."
Yes, because journalism is one of those jobs you get paid for. Do you think journalists should work for free?
"That and its being sold and held back in the same manner as a strip tease. if its news release it, dont sell it to the highest bidder or only in the champagne room."
Are you being deliberately obtuse or do you actually not know what's been happening with these docs? Greenwald works for the The Guardian and they're publishing stories he writes for them. He is not the only one with the docs and not the only one writing stories based on their contents.
Re: Re: Re: "In fact, smart law enforcement folks realized that rather than blaming the online service providers"
Are you new here or something? Techdirt has often discussed the successful cooperation between service providers and law enforcement to catch people doing things that are actually illegal. It's done quite openly and legally, and is a million miles away from any of the NSA's actions.
Re: Re: Re: And lets have a list of how often the public borrows from Disney...
"Uh, how do you think that the public gets artistic works if the artists can't eat and get health care?"
Most artists get paid fees for their work and the film studio, record label or book publisher keeps the copyright. Those fees pay for food and healthcare. If those artists want more food and healthcare, they do more work. It�s remarkably like the system used by most of the world�s workers.
"What is sad is how uncreative and literal everyone is around here. You would think that the only way that Disney can give back is to let people make unrestricted copies of their work. But that's not how Disney borrowed from the public domain either. They didn't take some public domain video and make verbatim copies. Nope. They refilmed everything and reworked it."
You�re arguing against a complete strawman. Nobody, and I mean nobody, is arguing for the right to make unrestricted copies of Disney�s work. They are arguing for the right to do exactly what you describe Disney did, i.e. take public domain work and recreate their own version.
When Disney made their classic old films based on public domain material, they were able to do so by taking advantage of much shorter copyright lengths. Since then they have actively and continuously campaigned to change copyright laws to prevent others from doing just what they did. It�s despicable and indefensible.
"That's what parodists do and that's how people have been borrowing from Disney for years."
Parody has nothing to do with this discussion. Bringing it up is either meant to be a distraction or it just shows your lack of understanding of the subject.
I don't know about the kind of people you hand around with, but I've never had a conversation with anyone, let alone multiple people, using the sort of language quoted above. What they're saying a long way from normal angry responses. For you to not be even a bit worried about these people's attitudes say a lot about your own...
Re: Because it's MORAL for the producers to get rewarded for what THEY created.
"Not your fat pirate slobs like Kim Dotcom."
When you try to make a moral argument by insulting someone's physical appearance, you fail badly.
"I skipped reading the body, need only your headline to know where you went: the usual baseless assertions that greasy grifters must be cut in and pirates allowed to steal however much wished."
And this is why nobody here takes you seriously, and I doubt it's just us who feels this way. The article has nothing to do with your suggestion, and the fact that you're so far off base shows you're not nearly as clever as you think you are.
"SO, though I regret the coming of DRM, it's entirely reasonable and necessary."
That's sounds like something I'd expect to hear from a clueless politician! Please explain how something that has a long and sordid history of abject failure can be considered "reasonable and necessary".
Re: Goes WRONG at: "First They Came For The File Sharing Domains"
"Nor should Techdirt support a new bunch of sleazy little grifters like Spotify..."
I've spent more money buying music in the last six months than in the previous six years. Why? Spotify and Pandora, so called "grifters". Why do you hate people spending money on music? Why do you hate artists!
"its so funny you could have easily replaced the word FORD for Google and it would be exactly the same..."
That's the same claim you make in EVERY post! Just replace Ford with whoever the article is actually about, and bam, your latest zero-credibity Google attack. When are you going to get some new schtick to bore us with?
Re: Mike blazing a trail to blithering irrelevancy.
"Here are two items far more important to everyone"
If you don't think Mike's tackling the important issues, get off your lazy ass and start your own blog instead of freeloading off this one. I'm sure it'd be hugely popular...
On the post: International Music Organizations Claim Aereo Must Be Illegal Because Of International Trade Agreements
Re:
On the post: Nielsen Joins The DMCA Abuse Party, Issues Takedown Of Publicly Available Ratings
Re:
On the post: Litigious Congressman Trying To Bury History Of His Arrest Through Lawsuits And Bogus Legal Threats
May have? Two or three times? Could he be more weasely?
I'd say for most people, going to jail is a significant enough event in their lives that they remember quite well whether or not it happened, and whether it happened two times or three times. It's safe to assume he has definitely been to jail three times.
On the post: CCI Claims Six Strikes Working Great To Thwart Piracy, Offers Absolutely No Evidence To Support That Claim
Re: Be careful what you wish for....
First, the whole point of the article is that nobody knows if it's working or not because nobody is releasing any data. The lack of any data proving success would strongly suggest failure.
Second, who is this "we" you speak of? And why would anyone "bring back" methods that failed so spectacularly before?
On the post: Cop Shoots Teen Holding Wii Controller In His Own Home
Re: Re:
On the post: Cop Shoots Teen Holding Wii Controller In His Own Home
Re: It's not complicated
I think you're wrong however. I don't think they all live in fear of their lives, it seems more likely they're poorly selected and poorly trained.
On the post: How A Grand Jury's Indictment Is Indistinguishable From Being Found Guilty
On the post: How A Grand Jury's Indictment Is Indistinguishable From Being Found Guilty
Re: Re: Harsh Judgement
No, he didn't. Learn to think a little harder about what you're reading before shooting your mouth off.
On the post: Apple's Promised TV Revolution Will Be More Of The Same Crap, Thanks To Terrified Cable & Broadcast Executives
Re: Re:
On the post: Pioneering French Electronic Artist Thinks Creative Industry Should Get '$300-400' Of Each Smartphone Sale
Re: Wrong Wrong Wrong!
On the post: Dr. Matthew Rimmer Takes A Closer Look At Fair Use
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Dr. Matthew Rimmer Takes A Closer Look At Fair Use
Re: Re:
In case you missed it above, here's everything you asked for.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation_economics
On the post: Canadian Gov't Responds To Spying Revelations By Saying It's All A Lie And Calling Glenn Greenwald A 'Porn Spy'
Re: Re: Re: meaning of term
Yes, because journalism is one of those jobs you get paid for. Do you think journalists should work for free?
"That and its being sold and held back in the same manner as a strip tease. if its news release it, dont sell it to the highest bidder or only in the champagne room."
Are you being deliberately obtuse or do you actually not know what's been happening with these docs? Greenwald works for the The Guardian and they're publishing stories he writes for them. He is not the only one with the docs and not the only one writing stories based on their contents.
On the post: Congressional Moral Panic Over The Fact That Prostitutes Now Use Twitter
Re: Re: Re: "In fact, smart law enforcement folks realized that rather than blaming the online service providers"
On the post: Crowdsourcing A List Of How Disney Uses The Public Domain
Re: Re: Re: And lets have a list of how often the public borrows from Disney...
Most artists get paid fees for their work and the film studio, record label or book publisher keeps the copyright. Those fees pay for food and healthcare. If those artists want more food and healthcare, they do more work. It�s remarkably like the system used by most of the world�s workers.
"What is sad is how uncreative and literal everyone is around here. You would think that the only way that Disney can give back is to let people make unrestricted copies of their work. But that's not how Disney borrowed from the public domain either. They didn't take some public domain video and make verbatim copies. Nope. They refilmed everything and reworked it."
You�re arguing against a complete strawman. Nobody, and I mean nobody, is arguing for the right to make unrestricted copies of Disney�s work. They are arguing for the right to do exactly what you describe Disney did, i.e. take public domain work and recreate their own version.
When Disney made their classic old films based on public domain material, they were able to do so by taking advantage of much shorter copyright lengths. Since then they have actively and continuously campaigned to change copyright laws to prevent others from doing just what they did. It�s despicable and indefensible.
"That's what parodists do and that's how people have been borrowing from Disney for years."
Parody has nothing to do with this discussion. Bringing it up is either meant to be a distraction or it just shows your lack of understanding of the subject.
On the post: The Fact That The US Intelligence Community So Readily Admits To Fantasies Of Killing Ed Snowden Shows Why They Can't Be Trusted
Re:
I don't know about the kind of people you hand around with, but I've never had a conversation with anyone, let alone multiple people, using the sort of language quoted above. What they're saying a long way from normal angry responses. For you to not be even a bit worried about these people's attitudes say a lot about your own...
On the post: Hollywood Needs The Internet More Than The Internet Needs Hollywood... So Why Is The W3C Pretending Otherwise?
Re: Because it's MORAL for the producers to get rewarded for what THEY created.
When you try to make a moral argument by insulting someone's physical appearance, you fail badly.
"I skipped reading the body, need only your headline to know where you went: the usual baseless assertions that greasy grifters must be cut in and pirates allowed to steal however much wished."
And this is why nobody here takes you seriously, and I doubt it's just us who feels this way. The article has nothing to do with your suggestion, and the fact that you're so far off base shows you're not nearly as clever as you think you are.
"SO, though I regret the coming of DRM, it's entirely reasonable and necessary."
That's sounds like something I'd expect to hear from a clueless politician! Please explain how something that has a long and sordid history of abject failure can be considered "reasonable and necessary".
On the post: Pharmacy Group Lies To Registrars: If We Complain About A Site, It Must Be Taken Down No Questions Asked
Re: Goes WRONG at: "First They Came For The File Sharing Domains"
I've spent more money buying music in the last six months than in the previous six years. Why? Spotify and Pandora, so called "grifters". Why do you hate people spending money on music? Why do you hate artists!
On the post: Ford VP Claims The Company Is Tracking Everyone's Driving Habits... Then Denies It
Re:
That's the same claim you make in EVERY post! Just replace Ford with whoever the article is actually about, and bam, your latest zero-credibity Google attack. When are you going to get some new schtick to bore us with?
On the post: Ellen Degeneres: Pirate Enabler? Her Watermarked Copy Of 'Walter Mitty' Leaks Online
Re: Mike blazing a trail to blithering irrelevancy.
If you don't think Mike's tackling the important issues, get off your lazy ass and start your own blog instead of freeloading off this one. I'm sure it'd be hugely popular...
Next >>