"Is this really the message the US DOJ and White House want to be giving the day after mass, widespread protests happened concerning a fear that this new law would be used to take down websites?"
I'm sure this was planned and in the works way before blackout day was planned, however this is exactly the message they wanted to send. The DOJ doesn't care what anybody thinks. They just follow orders. If you want to blame someone, it's Biden.
This approach is in direct response to what has always been said..."the internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." They want a solution that allows them to whack the moles that they have already learned, will spring up. The reality is they are learning in spite of themselves.
First they learned, 'we need to do this'.
Now they know, 'we need to do this quickly to keep up'.
The next inevitable step is, 'we won't succeed regardless how fast we are'.
Re: Re: If they were aware it was pending, why didn't they fight it?
True, but if you are aware of one, it's cheaper to contest it then drop a whole product line. Unless of course, it was unprofitable anyway. The company wouldn't bother defending something they ready to drop anyway. That may have been the case here.
Re: Re: If they were aware it was pending, why didn't they fight it?
@Helmet While your solution to have the USPTO find prior art as part of their job is, in principle, correct it is also impractical. Do you honestly believe they could do a good job in finding any prior art given their workload and their performance so far? Luma obviously did a better job at it then they did. Luma had too much faith in the patient review, and didn't think it was worth spending the money invalidating a patient application they thought was too ridiculous to ever be approved.
Standing on your principles here wouldn't help fix a broken system. I think it would be better to have an open peer review approach. Anything considered 'obvious to those skilled in the art' would be quickly discredited and the patient denied.
If the ISP decided to give 3 or 4 percent in total and divide that amongst anybody that came calling, that would show them.
2 rights holders each get 1/2 of the 3-4%
3 rights holders each get 1/3 of the 3-4%
4 rights holders each get 1/4 of the 3-4%
...and so on. I know... You're all saying they shouldn't get anything, but think about it for a second... The current beneficiaries would immediately sue any newcomer for their alleged share of this pot, instead of suing the ISP for not paying. It instantly turns it into the rights holder's legal problem, and to the ISP it's just a budgetable cost of doing business. They would pass it on to us of course, but it would never get any bigger as a percentage of the ISP's revenues.
Raising punititive damages would be a waste of time
Raising punitive damages would do nothing. No possible amount of money could be a deterrent for our wasteful government. If the punitive damages where against the employee them self, not enough people would ever know of the outcome to be deterred either.
But there have been those who carried the bad boy reputation all the way to the bank. You guys aren't thinking outside the box. Remember, she makes more then all of us [put together]. You can't complain about what obviously works.
I never said the costs wouldn't be passed down. But if the final price is still competitive with the surcharge included, it won't matter. The argument you are making is a moral one, not an economic one.
If Google or the government don't care, why should I? Google obviously doesn't feel like it's loosing any money. Mike often makes the claim [indirectly] that economics isn't a zero sum game. Here's an [albeit strange] example. It doesn't matter how bizarre the licensing is, if the final price to the consumer is competitive.
In Lady Gaga's case you could almost make the argument that the persona she has created is a scarce good. It's certainly more scarce then her music. So, she's on a better track then most others in regards to protecting her scarcity.
I totally agree with jduhis on this. If the goal is public safety it's Ok to flash, since they do slow down. If the goal is revenue, flashing is a bad thing. The cops could accomplish the same thing as the civilian headlight flashers just by sitting there with the cherries on [instead of the radar gun], but there isn't any money in that, is there?
I didn't read that much into it. Simply put, if it was infringing long before the lawsuit, why didn't WB say so then? Answer: WB left them up intentionally in order to bring suit.
On the post: Public Interest Groups Speak Out About Next Week's Secret Meeting In Hollywood To Negotiate TPP (Think International SOPA)
The industy's assertion isn't wrong...unfortunately
This is true. Obama signed the thing, after all. Looks like they were right.
On the post: DOJ Gives Its Opinion On SOPA By Unilaterally Shutting Down 'Foreign Rogue Site' Megaupload... Without SOPA/PIPA
I'm sure this was planned and in the works way before blackout day was planned, however this is exactly the message they wanted to send. The DOJ doesn't care what anybody thinks. They just follow orders. If you want to blame someone, it's Biden.
On the post: Did Mitt Romney Just Come Out Against SOPA/PIPA?
He's full of crap
On the post: RIAA: We Must Take A Shoot First, Ask Questions Later Approach To Censorship
Re: Re: Faster then the speed of internet
On the post: RIAA: We Must Take A Shoot First, Ask Questions Later Approach To Censorship
Faster then the speed of internet
First they learned, 'we need to do this'.
Now they know, 'we need to do this quickly to keep up'.
The next inevitable step is, 'we won't succeed regardless how fast we are'.
The Padawans are slow to learn.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Or maybe this is a stupid law that no reasonable person wants to follow and should be repealed...prohibition, anyone?
On the post: Luma Labs Discontinues Popular Product Line After Competitor Gets A Patent... Despite Prior Art Going Back Over A Century
Re: Re: If they were aware it was pending, why didn't they fight it?
On the post: Luma Labs Discontinues Popular Product Line After Competitor Gets A Patent... Despite Prior Art Going Back Over A Century
Re: Re: If they were aware it was pending, why didn't they fight it?
Standing on your principles here wouldn't help fix a broken system. I think it would be better to have an open peer review approach. Anything considered 'obvious to those skilled in the art' would be quickly discredited and the patient denied.
On the post: Royalty Collection Agency SABAM Demands 3.4% 'Piracy License' From Belgian ISPs
3 of 4 % as a whole would screw them....
2 rights holders each get 1/2 of the 3-4%
3 rights holders each get 1/3 of the 3-4%
4 rights holders each get 1/4 of the 3-4%
...and so on. I know... You're all saying they shouldn't get anything, but think about it for a second... The current beneficiaries would immediately sue any newcomer for their alleged share of this pot, instead of suing the ISP for not paying. It instantly turns it into the rights holder's legal problem, and to the ISP it's just a budgetable cost of doing business. They would pass it on to us of course, but it would never get any bigger as a percentage of the ISP's revenues.
On the post: The Difficulty In Holding The Gov't Accountable When It Breaks The Law
Raising punititive damages would be a waste of time
On the post: Lady Googoo Gone Gone After Lady Gaga Gets Injunction Against Parody
Re: Re: Isn't a persona a scarce good?
On the post: Lady Googoo Gone Gone After Lady Gaga Gets Injunction Against Parody
Re: Re: Isn't a persona a scarce good?
On the post: Can We Just Admit That It's Insane When Microsoft Has A 'Licensing Program' For Someone Else's Products?
Re: Re: Why Care?
On the post: Can We Just Admit That It's Insane When Microsoft Has A 'Licensing Program' For Someone Else's Products?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Why Care?
On the post: Can We Just Admit That It's Insane When Microsoft Has A 'Licensing Program' For Someone Else's Products?
Why Care?
On the post: Lady Googoo Gone Gone After Lady Gaga Gets Injunction Against Parody
Isn't a persona a scarce good?
On the post: Facebook Says Some of Your Personal Data Is Its 'Trade Secrets or Intellectual Property'
Re: The real trade secret
On the post: NYTimes Sues The Federal Government For Refusing To Reveal Its Secret Interpretation Of The PATRIOT Act
Consttutional issue
On the post: Is It A First Amendment Violation To Get Pulled Over For Flashing Your Lights To Warn Others Of Cops?
Re: slow down
On the post: Hotfile Responds To Lawsuit Filed By Studios, Countersues Warner Bros. For Copyright Misuse
Re: Re:
Next >>