Yes, but that's a niche market, much like people who still buy vinyl albums. Assuredly, a vast majority of farmers, grocery store owners, etc would be out of business.
I would think that the 25 cents you pay for a paper barely covers the cost of printing the paper and delivering it to your doorstep. The content itself is, I thought, covered by advertising.
Funny, it sounds to me like you're better prepared to run a news organization than anyone currently doing so.
Also, the burden of proof falls on them, not you. The way MediaSentry (or whatever they're called these days) does it is finding a file that their client has the sole rights to distribute being illegally distributed. Then single out one IP address and download the entire file from that IP address. They only *know* that you shared it once, with them.
Now, these Digiprotect people are hunting down downloaders (which I thought was legal, since I thought it didn't infringe on a person's right to distribute if you received, only when you distributed-- IANAL) So, they secure the rights to distribute, then they distribute in a system that, by default, distributes automatically and during the downloading process, as well as after completion. This seems to be a de-facto authorization to re-distribute. It would be as if I handed you an apple and then told you it's illegal if you let the apple come into contact with air. Moreso, they don't know if you've uploaded it at all, unless they re-download it from you. I'd say they have zero case, myself.
Again, IANAL, so feel free to set me straight.
The way I see it, as more and more artists utilize P2P networks to distribute freely, it will get harder and harder to prove willful infringement. How is the user supposed to know which torrents are authorized or not? Radiohead is a fairly well-known name, and many people may very well assume that it would be illegal to download their latest album on a torrent website, but it is, in fact, perfectly legal. Turn it around then, and it still applies. If I say that Radiohead put up their music for free, and I just assumed that Metalica did as well since they were on the same torrent site, wouldn't that negate the "willful" part of it, drastically lowering the amount that can be awarded?
The clock is ticking on the Label's current method of retaliation against the fans. Thankfully so.
Re: Re: Another Dark Helmet Government Policy Change
Basically, look at each torrent currently on your system. Does it point to a copyright work? Remove it.
I don't know if you're the same misguided AC as above, but I recently cleared this up for you/him/her. Every creative expression is copyrighted upon creation.
It doesn't matter how much you try to distribute the concept, in the end, the idea is to actively infringe of copyright.
*sigh*
You poor, poor fool. Everything is automatically copyrighted upon creation. If I draw a picture of a horse having sex with you, it's copyrighted. Futhermore, if I wrote a little song about a horse having sex with you, and I put it on Mininova, it would be copyrighted but not infringing. If, say, Radiohead, puts their music on Mininova, it's copyrighted but not infringing. If Radiohead says I can post their music on Mininova, it's copyrighted, but not infringing.
Tell me, O Enlightened One, how are they supposed to tell an authorized copyrighted work from an unauthorized one?
I'm sorry miss, but you don't see any problem with the fact that you have to pay someone money to create a database of their lyrics? How does this hurt them at all?
They don't have any similar service to compete with.
No one reads the lyrics to a song and feels as if that is a fair substitute to listening to said song. In fact, more likely (as has been said above) the searcher is looking for the title of the song knowing only a few lyrics with the intent to buy said song.
This is all ass backwards, and you jumped to be first in line. Where does that put you?
We're not all musicians, steve. I don't want to know the lyrics because I want to sing them, I want to know because I can't understand him-- or better yet, I only remember one line and would like to know what song it comes from.
Also, just because you did it in between defending your village from mammoth attacks doesn't mean we should be forced to do it that way...
On the post: Bad Ideas: Trying To Make Content More Like Physical Property
Re: Re:
On the post: IP Czar Won't Be In The Most Sensible Place Because Industry Doesn't Like It?
Re: So
I never was very good at History.
On the post: Brill Gets More Delusional: Now Thinks 10 to 15% Of Online Newspaper Readers Will Pay
Re: Paying for subscription
I would think that the 25 cents you pay for a paper barely covers the cost of printing the paper and delivering it to your doorstep. The content itself is, I thought, covered by advertising.
Funny, it sounds to me like you're better prepared to run a news organization than anyone currently doing so.
On the post: Brill Gets More Delusional: Now Thinks 10 to 15% Of Online Newspaper Readers Will Pay
Re: Idiots...
No, their flaw is thinking we can't get it elsewhere.
On the post: Brill Gets More Delusional: Now Thinks 10 to 15% Of Online Newspaper Readers Will Pay
Re: Just wondering...
:P
On the post: FCC To Study Single Rating System For Movies, Video Games, TV & Music
Re: Um...
Not that a rating system is required, don't get me wrong. Google is a parent's friend, too.
I just wouldn't go around assuming that a harmless name = a children's game.
On the post: FCC To Study Single Rating System For Movies, Video Games, TV & Music
Re: Re: You know what, this is really simple
Name your offer.
On the post: Digiprotect Admits It Shares Files Just To Find People To Demand Settlement Money From
Re: well......
Also, the burden of proof falls on them, not you. The way MediaSentry (or whatever they're called these days) does it is finding a file that their client has the sole rights to distribute being illegally distributed. Then single out one IP address and download the entire file from that IP address. They only *know* that you shared it once, with them.
Now, these Digiprotect people are hunting down downloaders (which I thought was legal, since I thought it didn't infringe on a person's right to distribute if you received, only when you distributed-- IANAL) So, they secure the rights to distribute, then they distribute in a system that, by default, distributes automatically and during the downloading process, as well as after completion. This seems to be a de-facto authorization to re-distribute. It would be as if I handed you an apple and then told you it's illegal if you let the apple come into contact with air. Moreso, they don't know if you've uploaded it at all, unless they re-download it from you. I'd say they have zero case, myself.
Again, IANAL, so feel free to set me straight.
The way I see it, as more and more artists utilize P2P networks to distribute freely, it will get harder and harder to prove willful infringement. How is the user supposed to know which torrents are authorized or not? Radiohead is a fairly well-known name, and many people may very well assume that it would be illegal to download their latest album on a torrent website, but it is, in fact, perfectly legal. Turn it around then, and it still applies. If I say that Radiohead put up their music for free, and I just assumed that Metalica did as well since they were on the same torrent site, wouldn't that negate the "willful" part of it, drastically lowering the amount that can be awarded?
The clock is ticking on the Label's current method of retaliation against the fans. Thankfully so.
Once again, IANAL. I don't even play one on TV.
On the post: Recording Industry Lobbyists Says Politicians Worried About User Rights Are 'Disgusting'?
Re: FYI (Enter != Tab)
Seems more than reasonable to me.
On the post: Recording Industry Lobbyists Says Politicians Worried About User Rights Are 'Disgusting'?
FYI
On the post: Are Copyright Holders Seeding Own Files To Find, Sue Downloaders?
Re: Re: Re: If I were to be used for sharing files ...
How much does a name change cost again? :)
On the post: Why Sprint Should Be Giving Away The Palm Pre For Free
Re: Re: And what if the problem is you're an iPhone fanboy?
Seriously. Fanboy vs. Fanboy hate is awesome. :)
On the post: Apple Approves Spotify App... Spotify Should Thank Google
Re:
On the post: A Hunger Strike Isn't A New Business Model And It Won't Stop File Sharing
Win-Win
Anyway.
So, the musicians that embrace file sharing will continue to eat and the ones that don't are starving themselves?
Sounds like a win-win to me.
On the post: Mininova Told To Remove Infringing Material
Re: Re: Another Dark Helmet Government Policy Change
I don't know if you're the same misguided AC as above, but I recently cleared this up for you/him/her. Every creative expression is copyrighted upon creation.
Read it, please.
On the post: Mininova Told To Remove Infringing Material
Re:
*sigh*
You poor, poor fool. Everything is automatically copyrighted upon creation. If I draw a picture of a horse having sex with you, it's copyrighted. Futhermore, if I wrote a little song about a horse having sex with you, and I put it on Mininova, it would be copyrighted but not infringing. If, say, Radiohead, puts their music on Mininova, it's copyrighted but not infringing. If Radiohead says I can post their music on Mininova, it's copyrighted, but not infringing.
Tell me, O Enlightened One, how are they supposed to tell an authorized copyrighted work from an unauthorized one?
On the post: Nina Paley Releases Some Data On 'Sita Sings The Blues': The More She Shared, The More She Made
Re: Let's do the math
On the post: Music Publishers Now Suing Lyrics Sites And Their Execs
Re: Additional Information
They don't have any similar service to compete with.
No one reads the lyrics to a song and feels as if that is a fair substitute to listening to said song. In fact, more likely (as has been said above) the searcher is looking for the title of the song knowing only a few lyrics with the intent to buy said song.
This is all ass backwards, and you jumped to be first in line. Where does that put you?
For shame.
On the post: Music Publishers Now Suing Lyrics Sites And Their Execs
Re: people are lazy
Also, just because you did it in between defending your village from mammoth attacks doesn't mean we should be forced to do it that way...
..or do you still ride a horse to work?
Thanks for playing though.
On the post: Doctor Who Uploaded Rorschach Images Now Being Investigated
Re: Re: And the disease
Next >>