Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 6 May 2011 @ 1:46am
If you are a thoughtful citizen who wants sensible IP laws that protect artists and innovators while still preserving a robust public domain
I AM a thoughtful citizen who wants sensible IP laws. The IP laws haven't been within driving distance of sensible for many years and the public domain is steadily being eroded by increasingly lengthy copyright terms that mean fewer things enter the public domain and more and more broad interpretations that allow corporations to gobble up and re-lock up things already in the public domain. I don't have a problem with someone having a somewhat better chance to be paid for something they did, I do have a problem with someone else who did nothing expecting to still be paid for it 70 years after they are dead.
So yes, anything that has even the chance of stretching an already ludicrous situation further bothers me very much. As does the US politicians using secret backroom deals, bullying and bribery to get their way with other governments and trample over the rights of people in other countries as well as its own in order to protect the corporations that pay them most.
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 6 May 2011 @ 12:55am
Re: Re: Re: The Alchemist
You CAN steal an idea, well most people can, only the stupid ones cannot.
No, you can't steal an idea - at least not without major brain surgery or electro-shock therapy and drugs - but you can understand and USE one and only the stupid ones can't....... hmm I'll stop that sentence there.
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 5 May 2011 @ 2:58am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Frivolous. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
I'm not sure it means what you think it means either.
You seem to be using the word as some sort of quasi-legal definition of "having no merit in terms of legal process". Others seem to be using it closer to the dictionary sense:
frivolous [ˈfrɪvələs]
adj
1. not serious or sensible in content, attitude, or behaviour; silly a frivolous remark
2. unworthy of serious or sensible treatment; unimportant frivolous details
To convey the idea of something that is clear to any observer skilled in the field is nonsensical, but will be endlessly argued over by lawyers because a piece of paper says they can.
You do, however, score a +1 Princess Bride reference.
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 5 May 2011 @ 1:53am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So what? I can learn about World War II from reading Wikipedia, or I can learn about it from reading a history textbook. Does that mean we should discard Wikipedia?
Wikipedia should only be discarded in that example if it starts trying to tell you that any other source of WWII data is breaking the law.....
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 5 May 2011 @ 1:34am
Re: Re: Re: You can't see the difference?
Besides, isn't the UK the place with all those government CCTV cameras?
Yup, I believe the statistic is in London you're caught on camera around 300 times a day. We have more CCTV cameras per capita than any nation on earth. Indeed I seem to remember we have about 4 x the TOTAL number of cameras of you lot in the US or some similarly ludicrous number.
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 4 May 2011 @ 9:11am
It'd be clearer if it were a venue - there's often a standard disclaimer for "public" venues in the UK (or venues that let the public in) to say basically "You may be filmed in this venue and we can use it so there and you accept this by coming in". But in a public place like the Mall? I wonder if you could stretch that to an "event area. I suspect not.
As for the Google thing, it was dumb in the first place. It might have been nice if they'd had a process where you could spot yourself and apply to be taken out (likely that'd be covered by the UK Data Protection Act) but a blanket "But what about my privacy standing here in full view" scrape seemed a bit of a stretch at the time.
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 4 May 2011 @ 9:04am
Re: More Evidence of the Incredibly Shortsited Content Industry
Which will give Dish a larger amount of premium subscribers, who will pay Starz a larger licensing fee, who will pay Disney a larger licensing fee.
And of course the kicker that makes it even more dumb is that it's totally free advertising to Disney. The "cost" (in lowered margin) of the cheaper subscription is borne by Dish and Disney still get the same license fees - they have nothing to lose and plenty to gain. Who thinks like that?
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 4 May 2011 @ 8:57am
Re: Re: Re: Shocked! Shocked, I say!
Faced with the exclusive patent rights, the competitor is expected to conduct research and development to build a better mousetrap, which itself could be patented. The public gets the benefit of the R&D via the public disclosure required to obtain a patent.
Which is only 1 way to look at it. Invention is incremental ALWAYS. The fact of it being "different enough" to warrant a separate patent rather than being infringing is merely a matter of degree and ultimately subjective.
It is just as true to say that the public would derive more benefit from that same R&D money going to an incremental improvement of, say, the manufacturing of a patented item that significantly reduces the cost to the public of producing a desired thing.
It's not so good for the company now with stiff competition, but it can be argued that it's better for the public, which is who patents are supposed to benefit in the first place.
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 4 May 2011 @ 8:37am
Re:
Consider a simpler scenario: an upstream entity with NO LICENSE to a copyright licenses someone downstream. The downstream party DOES NOT have a defense to copyright infringement by pointing at the upstream entity.
Hmm and in your "simple scenario", what if the downstream company has reasonable grounds to expect that the company upstream DOES have the rights to offer what they bought and it later turns out they were full of sh*t?
Should the downstream company employ an IP lawyer to scan and background check the licenses of the upstream company for every single piece of content they take from them? That kind of thinking leads the the "Lawyer Event Horizon" (c.f. Douglas Adams' "shoe event horizon") in which it becomes impossible for any employment to exist except for lawyers.
This is a prime example of what's so totally broken about how IP in general and copyright in particular is structured. Copyright is only provable in the negative; Certain uses are definitely breaking the law, but it is damn near impossible to say any given use is definitely not breaking the law. That's insane any way you look at it.
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 3 May 2011 @ 5:20am
Oooo look... dinosaurs
Yet another well thought through "DRM implementation". Trying to block something for which there are dozens of technical work-arounds and the main thing you'll accomplish by doing it is annoying the hell out of your customers and make them go somewhere else.
Well done! Bravo sir! *claps politely*
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 3 May 2011 @ 1:49am
Paraphrasing
Reading through the answers there it seem to me to read something like this:
Opinion: These provisions suck - they are overly broad and taking the broad interpretation they violate EU law.
Commission: Ah, but there's that word "may" in there. We don't have to do that bit so that's OK.
Opinion: Yeah, but we've seen this stuff before once it's agreed there will be a major push to make sure the broadest interpretation is used. It's happened, like, EVERY time something like this is done, so it's the effect of broadest interpretation that should be considered.
Commission: Well yes... but that's a political question not a legal one so right now we can politically pretend it's not going to happen and totally ignore you. Ha ha ha
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 29 Apr 2011 @ 7:47am
Re: I'm no longer a luddite! *pops cork
It amazes me this industry can put Twitter and Facebook on a goddamn BD player but can't prevent the FBI warning, now completely unskippable, from showing if the security layer is present
Yep, only the film industry could take a wonderful "new" technology, so much more convenient than a tape because you have instant access to any point of the content.... and make it so that doesn't work. Same as the legitimate TV streaming media - unskippable ads in the centre - I can skip them on my PVR player but not when I watch it online... Doh!
Can I suggest the answer to your dilemma is hooking a small PC to the TV instead of a vanilla DVD player and using the appropriate tool to prevent the stupidity?
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:07am
You bunch of thieves
It's disgusting that you would even talk about "freeing" such valuable content. Culture is something that should be locked behind glass and paid for by anyone who wants to appreciate the wonder of it. It is certainly not something that should be listened to much less allow grubby little plebs to get their hands of for free.
Next thing you know they'd want to steal it by making something of their own that sounds like it might once have been sort of the same as a little bit of the middle of one of the pieces and then the walls of civilisation will come crumbling down, the seas will boil and a plague of locusts (lawyers) will be on the land.
THINK before you act you freeloading bunch of sons of.....
Sincerely
- A Recording Industry Executive
(P.S. This is not just because there's a small chance that somewhere 15 years ago we might possibly have acquired a portion of the rights of a bit of this stuff. Besides even if it was how would I know? We don't pay attention to that sort of thing unless we can sue someone for it)
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 1:47am
I always thought.....
... that Godzilla was a sort of phonetic translation of a name of a Japanese monster from folklore (large dinosaur/reptilian beasty famous for eating cities). Can you have a trademark on that sort of thing? Or is this company getting all Disney?
Either way their trademark can't be *that* strong anyway as I'd never have associated all the things I've ever seen called "Godzilla" (a fair few if I think about it) with a single company, never mind any of the myriad other "xxx-zilla" products.
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 1:22am
Re: Re: Nice but not innovative
I don't that O'Reilly has gone quite so far in this area, but they are another of the more respectable publishers as regarded by my personal acquaintances. I don't much care which of them comes up with a good idea, so long as that idea is out in the world helping people.
So is this where O'Reilly sue, claiming to have a patent that covers the online remixing of textbooks thus killing the idea and "helping drive innovation"? Or is that just be being cynical....?
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 27 Apr 2011 @ 10:11am
Re: Part of the problem...
What are the qualifications needed to become a patent examiner for IT patents, anyway?
An over-developed bicep on the dominant arm for rubber stamping and the ability to pick a computer out of a lineup with a lump of cheese, a small chimpanzee, a rotary engine crank case and a fruitbat - best out of 3 minimum qualification
On the post: The EU Commission Tries To Defend ACTA And Fails Miserably
I AM a thoughtful citizen who wants sensible IP laws. The IP laws haven't been within driving distance of sensible for many years and the public domain is steadily being eroded by increasingly lengthy copyright terms that mean fewer things enter the public domain and more and more broad interpretations that allow corporations to gobble up and re-lock up things already in the public domain. I don't have a problem with someone having a somewhat better chance to be paid for something they did, I do have a problem with someone else who did nothing expecting to still be paid for it 70 years after they are dead.
So yes, anything that has even the chance of stretching an already ludicrous situation further bothers me very much. As does the US politicians using secret backroom deals, bullying and bribery to get their way with other governments and trample over the rights of people in other countries as well as its own in order to protect the corporations that pay them most.
On the post: Paulo Coelho Explains Why He 'Loves Pirates'
Re: Re: Re: The Alchemist
No, you can't steal an idea - at least not without major brain surgery or electro-shock therapy and drugs - but you can understand and USE one and only the stupid ones can't....... hmm I'll stop that sentence there.
On the post: Utah Legislators Want Extra Tax For Owners Of Hybrid & Electric Vehicles
Re: Re:
Couldn't resist this one... insanely expensive? Ha! ha! hahaha! haha! haha! haa! haaa! hahaha! aaaaaaa! *thump*
US Diesel cost seems to be around $4.20 a gallon? UK Diesel cost currently around $8.92 per gallon (US). NOW talk to me about "insane".......
On the post: How One Startup Used Patents To Kill A (Better) Competitor
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm not sure it means what you think it means either.
You seem to be using the word as some sort of quasi-legal definition of "having no merit in terms of legal process". Others seem to be using it closer to the dictionary sense:
To convey the idea of something that is clear to any observer skilled in the field is nonsensical, but will be endlessly argued over by lawyers because a piece of paper says they can.
You do, however, score a +1 Princess Bride reference.
On the post: How One Startup Used Patents To Kill A (Better) Competitor
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Wikipedia should only be discarded in that example if it starts trying to tell you that any other source of WWII data is breaking the law.....
On the post: Google Street View Is Invasion Of Privacy... But The BBC Showing Everyone At The Royal Wedding?
Re: Re: Re: You can't see the difference?
Yup, I believe the statistic is in London you're caught on camera around 300 times a day. We have more CCTV cameras per capita than any nation on earth. Indeed I seem to remember we have about 4 x the TOTAL number of cameras of you lot in the US or some similarly ludicrous number.
On the post: Google Street View Is Invasion Of Privacy... But The BBC Showing Everyone At The Royal Wedding?
As for the Google thing, it was dumb in the first place. It might have been nice if they'd had a process where you could spot yourself and apply to be taken out (likely that'd be covered by the UK Data Protection Act) but a blanket "But what about my privacy standing here in full view" scrape seemed a bit of a stretch at the time.
On the post: Disney Claims It's Copyright Infringement For Dish To Offer Starz To Non-Premium Subscribers
Re: More Evidence of the Incredibly Shortsited Content Industry
And of course the kicker that makes it even more dumb is that it's totally free advertising to Disney. The "cost" (in lowered margin) of the cheaper subscription is borne by Dish and Disney still get the same license fees - they have nothing to lose and plenty to gain. Who thinks like that?
On the post: How One Startup Used Patents To Kill A (Better) Competitor
Re: Re: Re: Shocked! Shocked, I say!
Which is only 1 way to look at it. Invention is incremental ALWAYS. The fact of it being "different enough" to warrant a separate patent rather than being infringing is merely a matter of degree and ultimately subjective.
It is just as true to say that the public would derive more benefit from that same R&D money going to an incremental improvement of, say, the manufacturing of a patented item that significantly reduces the cost to the public of producing a desired thing.
It's not so good for the company now with stiff competition, but it can be argued that it's better for the public, which is who patents are supposed to benefit in the first place.
On the post: Tolkien Estate 'Settles' Dispute Over Historical Fiction Book With JRR Tolkien As A Character
Re:
On the post: Disney Claims It's Copyright Infringement For Dish To Offer Starz To Non-Premium Subscribers
Re:
Hmm and in your "simple scenario", what if the downstream company has reasonable grounds to expect that the company upstream DOES have the rights to offer what they bought and it later turns out they were full of sh*t?
Should the downstream company employ an IP lawyer to scan and background check the licenses of the upstream company for every single piece of content they take from them? That kind of thinking leads the the "Lawyer Event Horizon" (c.f. Douglas Adams' "shoe event horizon") in which it becomes impossible for any employment to exist except for lawyers.
This is a prime example of what's so totally broken about how IP in general and copyright in particular is structured. Copyright is only provable in the negative; Certain uses are definitely breaking the law, but it is damn near impossible to say any given use is definitely not breaking the law. That's insane any way you look at it.
On the post: Trying To Limit Net Access, Dutch Telcos Accidentally Force Government To Speak Out On Net Neutrality
Oooo look... dinosaurs
Well done! Bravo sir! *claps politely*
On the post: Big Hollywood Directors Seem To Think People Will Actually Pay $30 To Watch Movies At Home
Re:
You seem a man(?) of few words... may I loan you an "epic" to go with that?
On the post: The EU Commission Tries To Defend ACTA And Fails Miserably
Paraphrasing
Opinion: These provisions suck - they are overly broad and taking the broad interpretation they violate EU law.
Commission: Ah, but there's that word "may" in there. We don't have to do that bit so that's OK.
Opinion: Yeah, but we've seen this stuff before once it's agreed there will be a major push to make sure the broadest interpretation is used. It's happened, like, EVERY time something like this is done, so it's the effect of broadest interpretation that should be considered.
Commission: Well yes... but that's a political question not a legal one so right now we can politically pretend it's not going to happen and totally ignore you. Ha ha ha
What a crock.
On the post: Studios Apparently Would Prefer Searches Only Turn Up Pirated Copies, Rather Than A Legit Option
Re: I'm no longer a luddite! *pops cork
Yep, only the film industry could take a wonderful "new" technology, so much more convenient than a tape because you have instant access to any point of the content.... and make it so that doesn't work. Same as the legitimate TV streaming media - unskippable ads in the centre - I can skip them on my PVR player but not when I watch it online... Doh!
Can I suggest the answer to your dilemma is hooking a small PC to the TV instead of a vanilla DVD player and using the appropriate tool to prevent the stupidity?
On the post: The Massive Treasure Trove Of Historic Jazz Recordings That Almost No One Has Heard... Thanks To Copyright
You bunch of thieves
Next thing you know they'd want to steal it by making something of their own that sounds like it might once have been sort of the same as a little bit of the middle of one of the pieces and then the walls of civilisation will come crumbling down, the seas will boil and a plague of locusts (lawyers) will be on the land.
THINK before you act you freeloading bunch of sons of.....
Sincerely
- A Recording Industry Executive
(P.S. This is not just because there's a small chance that somewhere 15 years ago we might possibly have acquired a portion of the rights of a bit of this stuff. Besides even if it was how would I know? We don't pay attention to that sort of thing unless we can sue someone for it)
On the post: Trademarkzilla Strikes Again: Complains That Fingerzilla May Confuse People Into Thinking It's Godzilla
I always thought.....
Either way their trademark can't be *that* strong anyway as I'd never have associated all the things I've ever seen called "Godzilla" (a fair few if I think about it) with a single company, never mind any of the myriad other "xxx-zilla" products.
On the post: Flat World Knowledge Continues To Innovate: Make Your Own Textbook Platform
Re: Re: Nice but not innovative
So is this where O'Reilly sue, claiming to have a patent that covers the online remixing of textbooks thus killing the idea and "helping drive innovation"? Or is that just be being cynical....?
On the post: Targeted Advertising? Patented! Bunch Of Media Companies Sued
Re: Part of the problem...
An over-developed bicep on the dominant arm for rubber stamping and the ability to pick a computer out of a lineup with a lump of cheese, a small chimpanzee, a rotary engine crank case and a fruitbat - best out of 3 minimum qualification
On the post: Dropbox Tries To Kill Off Open Source Project With DMCA Takedown
Re: Re: Re:
Which pretty much has to be among the favorites in the running for "Stupidest and least true saying of all time"
Next >>