So do I. That way a court will correct their flawed conclusions, and force them to pay costs for their idiotic claims.
Slaters best move is to stop persuing this issue. He should ignore anyone using his photos ?without permission" and just focusing on getting license fees from any agencies too paranoid to NOT pay somebody. Though I would caution him to structure these license deals carefully to avoid fraudulent claims.
Re: Re: This is a possible violation of Verizon's spectrum license terms...
By blocking particular applications from running to suit their business model. That pretty much the opposite behaviour those rukes were supposed to encourage.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: But this is EXACTLY what you wanted
I shouldn't have to pay a cent to argue my innocence. It is my right to do so. If you think ive broken a law, the responsibility falls to you to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that I have actually done so. Anything less is a complete gutting and tarnishing of our legal system.
This is the only way to get the point across. We the people have to spam the accusation system. Write a short phrase, or a song, or draw a simple image, publish it. Submit dozens, hundreds of accusations that the company reps and politicians have infringed.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What innovation resulted from Safe Harbors?
And why should I or any other taxpayer have to foot the bill for that research and enforcement? Hell,Big Content already wastes so much oof out time an money via the courts, I think they should have to pay back the $billions due there.
Perhaps stop worrying about all this free advertising, and find a way to exploit the growing audience and interest. Well all be better off.
I really appreciate the way some tv commercials now include a music credit at the beginning and/or end of their spots. It really is the simplest solution to the problem of people trying to figure out what an unknown track is.
Plus, the band in question gets better exposure, for which they might be willing to lower therice of the licensed use.
Wow, ok, so the comment parsing system really does not like that. That sentence above should read: "It has an open carrot in it, and appears to be cut off" much like my comment itself was cut off.
My first thought was that this was a shot across the bow against corporate use of open source solutions, attempting to introduce risk and uncertainty where there is none.
It seems to heavily attack corporate contributions to open source projects, which to me today largely is an attack on Android and its vendor customizations.
It could also be referring to webserver architecture and Linux at large, but I suspect the FUD is more pointed.
Then sell the hardware for what it actually costs instead of taking a loss and counting on game sale license fees to make up for it. Why not just make an open platform, and not charge license fees to develop for it?
Oh wait, we have that already. Its known as the PC.
I don't think that you understand chilling effects. The problem is that content that is/should be freely usable would be blocked due to a concern about a slim chance of massive liabilty.
It is not possible to determine a priori whether a given clip is "licensed" or infringinging or not. It depends on a huge number of inputs, most of which are not at youtubes disposal, and even less available to the user who embeds the clip.
To reduce risk, people err onto the side of blocking or not using content. That's a chilling effect.
On the post: France Three Strikes Law Suggests A Huge Percentage Of French Citizens At Risk Of Losing Internet Access
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Photographer David Slater Claims That Because He Thought Monkeys Might Take Pictures, Copyright Is His
Re:
Slaters best move is to stop persuing this issue. He should ignore anyone using his photos ?without permission" and just focusing on getting license fees from any agencies too paranoid to NOT pay somebody. Though I would caution him to structure these license deals carefully to avoid fraudulent claims.
On the post: Killing The Golden Goose: Is Hollywood To Blame For Netflix's Poorly Thought Out Massive Price Hike?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought: Verizon Breaks Phones; Turns Off Feature
Re: Re: This is a possible violation of Verizon's spectrum license terms...
On the post: ISP's Five Strikes Plan: Railroading, MPAA/RIAA-Style
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: But this is EXACTLY what you wanted
On the post: Congress Condemns Belarus For Doing A Bunch Of Things It Wants To Do
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: We're Different!
On the post: Patents As Theft: How Oracle & Microsoft Seek To Profit From Android Despite Having Nothing To Do With It
Re: Android Despite Having Nothing To Do With It
On the post: Get Accused Of Copyright Infringement Under New Five Strikes Plan? It'll Cost You To Challenge
Re:
On the post: Get Accused Of Copyright Infringement Under New Five Strikes Plan? It'll Cost You To Challenge
Re: Not supposed to happen
On the post: Smear Campaign Ramps Up Against Those Who Believe Free Speech Is More Important Than Hollywood's Obsolete Business Model
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What innovation resulted from Safe Harbors?
Perhaps stop worrying about all this free advertising, and find a way to exploit the growing audience and interest. Well all be better off.
On the post: Is Copyright Needed To Stop Plagiarism?
music in tv commercials
Plus, the band in question gets better exposure, for which they might be willing to lower therice of the licensed use.
On the post: Is Copyright Needed To Stop Plagiarism?
Re: Re: Missing HTML tag
On the post: Is Copyright Needed To Stop Plagiarism?
Re: Missing HTML tag
On the post: Is Copyright Needed To Stop Plagiarism?
Missing HTML tag
The last lines of non-quoted text are appearing italicized, along with everything else after this article on the front page.
Just FYI.
On the post: Ridiculous Assertion: Righthaven Ruling Threatens Open Source
Re: Re: Undermining Open Source?
Its silly whatever the intent was, because as Mike pointed out, its just flat out wrong.
On the post: Ridiculous Assertion: Righthaven Ruling Threatens Open Source
Undermining Open Source?
It seems to heavily attack corporate contributions to open source projects, which to me today largely is an attack on Android and its vendor customizations.
It could also be referring to webserver architecture and Linux at large, but I suspect the FUD is more pointed.
On the post: Sony Continues Suing People Who Help Others Modify Their PS3s
Re: Re: Re: stupid
Oh wait, we have that already. Its known as the PC.
On the post: Sony Continues Suing People Who Help Others Modify Their PS3s
Re: Re: Re: Customizing Your Car
On the post: UN Report On Human Rights Condemns Three Strikes As Civil Rights Violation
Re:
On the post: Senators Want To Put People In Jail For Embedding YouTube Videos
Re:
It is not possible to determine a priori whether a given clip is "licensed" or infringinging or not. It depends on a huge number of inputs, most of which are not at youtubes disposal, and even less available to the user who embeds the clip.
To reduce risk, people err onto the side of blocking or not using content. That's a chilling effect.
Next >>