As equally outlined in the preamble to the Statute of Anne publishers were busily bankrupting themselves with the same title being issued by a number of publishers at the same time which was no way to stay in business either.
That and you argue against your own position of morality when you say: "thereby ripping off the authors and bringing financial ruin upon them." True enough but that isn't a moral argument it's an economic one. If you want a large number of people to write books you actually have to pay at least some of them. Morality is tangential at best.
DRM existed long before the DMCA was written much less passed. Lotus protected Lotus 1-2-3 by adding a dongle to the box that had to be plugged into the parallel port, or was it the serial port?, to work. And that's just one example. VHS videos that you rented often came with a kind of DRM that prevented you copying from one VHS deck to another.
As far as DRM is concerned I've heard it argued that it's been needed to enforce copyright for the benefit of the artists/authors/programmers]. In neither case is it a moral argument as it has to do with money changing hands and who gets it. It's an economic transaction. Worse, because the motion picture and recording industries have basically become cartels in North America is has little or nothing to do with the artists but with the members of the cartels.
The moral argument, such as it is, gets reduced to ought creators get paid. As has been stated here repeatedly the answer is a resounding yes. Even with the reality that the cartels rarely seem to get around to paying them. See Mick Jagger's comments above.
Had the Statute of Anne been a document primarily concerned with the morality of a creator getting paid and controlling their work it would have forbid assignment of copyright to anyone be it publisher, recording company, motion picture company, Uncle Joe or third cousin Jane four times removed. It didn't. It did bring order to the publishing industry in the UK, it even got some authors paid. But the moment a creator signs over their copyright to someone else the creator loses all control over the work and that often includes the right to get paid for it.
Which is why I don't send off news tips or pictures to TV stations or newspapers or news sites on the web because part of the standard deal there is that I have to sign over my copyright and all the rights that come with it. Including getting paid for it.
While there may be a moral obligation to pay a creator copyright didn't create a moral right to a thing once the creator assigned the copyright to someone else. The (supposedly) temporary rights are conferred on the rights holder who, more often that not, is someone other than the person who created the work.
Now, to get back to the main point of the post that prior to the time where an artificial division was created between performers and musicians and the public everyone did take part in music and performance. Whether is was on something as simple as a recorder or something as complex and difficult to learn as a piano. People played music, they sang and they danced. Everyone did.
That died out during the 1950s with the arrival of listenable AM and then the arrival of stereo FM where people began to imitate the "professionals" which got us to the "air guitar". I had to put up with piano lessons as a kid, all classical crap. Nothing folk or modern, jazz or that awful rock'n'roll stuff. But I could sing. I was blessed with one hell of a good voice. A 5 octave range as a boy soprano who got tapped for solos in my church choir because not only did I have the range but I learned to sing with power in a way that didn't tear my vocal chords to pieces. I'm a bass-baritone now, still have the power and still just love to sing. I can sing everything from sacred music to rock and country and everything in between. And I don't need sheet music now any more than I did then. Play a few bars and let me go. I got it, Toyota.
We all can. We can all dance. Most of us can play some kind of instrument if we take the time. Music is intrinsic to our species. It's central to every known culture. And no activity lights up so many parts of the human brain as music does.
Where copyright is used to deny us access to something this fundamental it's corrupt and it's wrong. Deep in our beings and souls we know this. If morality plays a role that's where it comes in. Music is part of what makes us human.
Copyright, on the other hand, is economic. It was supposed to set up an economic arrangement where we would tolerate, for a limited time, our access to this central resource. It's long since stopped doing that.
From the article:
"ACTA BACKERS of the European People's Party will likely abstain from any vote on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) treaty in the European Parliament this week...
The EPP could possibly force a postponement, and Fjellner added that the party could ask "for the vote to be referred back to committee".
Source: The Inquirer (http://s.tt/1gIAd)
Perhaps someone from Europe could enlighten me on this one. Fjellner seems to be indicating that if all the members of the EPP suddenly vanish during the vote being taken, mass emergency call to the loo or whatever, that the EPP may delay or postpone the vote? Or am I reading this wrong?
So they're all lined up at the urinals? Vote anyway!
Carreon is a walking, talking, typing example that a lawyer who has represents himself has a fool for a client.
Not only is he trying to dig to the other side of the planet he's forgetting to shore up the walls as he goes. Not only does he make empty legal threats to people who don't know the law he does the same to lawyers who know the applicable law better than he does.
The world isn't the same as it was when the PRI were rightly tossed out. You can bet the new president of Mexico knows that. Sure, he'll play to whatever he needs to to cement his and the PRI's position which might mean making noises towards TPP and the so-called transparency. For now, Mexico is tied up in a nasty nation wide gang war that affects everyone from the a corner street vendor to the President's office in Mexico City. Lots and lots of blood all around and that's one of the nicer aspects of it. He has better, more immediate things to do.
OK, got it out of your system now? The TP is to the right and please be sure to flush. (And not I didn't vote Tory.)
I'm gonna do the unthinkable and agree with an AC here. Stuff it already. We got the same "transparency" out of the Canada-US FTA (Mulroney) and NAFTA (Chretien) that we're gonna get here. At least, I admit we were at the table there and not in the far distant peanut gallery on the horizon.
Harper got his majority a year ago. As yet there's nothing in Ottawa to replace him. Maybe the new leader of the NDP will become that, which he's showing a lot of signs of doing. Maybe the Liberals will stop their path to self-destruction though I wouldn't bet on it.
Oh, and another shot taken at the West isn't helping your side of the debate either, along with the other caricatures you're tossing about.
Yeah, if we had an once of self respect we'd pack up and go home. We gave that up years ago with the Free Trade Agreement and NAFTA. Thing is, you know, that it wouldn't matter who was living at 24 Sussex Dr in Ottawa. We'd still be there under the same terms and conditions. It's in our interest to be there, or as close as we can to being there. One way or another we'll be stuck with it anyway.
At least, we're not as close to becoming the 51st State as England is. Not yet, anyway.
NOTE: Quote taken out of context
"placement USPTO overseas IP attaches in Thailand, China, Russia, India, Brazil and Egypt."
I'm sitting here pondering the not so minor detail that between then China and India account for something slightly more than one third of human population on the planet. That and their individual wealth is growing. If they can't afford the patented drug then by all means use the clause to force outfits like Bayer to issue compulsory licenses to generics makers. How long before Bayer takes a large stake out in the generic maker and continues to rake money in?
If the size and growing wealth of those two countries isn't enough to provide big pharma incentive to service them then something is truly rotten in the state of Denmark and it's not just the cheese.
There's a valid argument to be made for patents for new drugs and the research and approval process they need to go through. That argument falls apart the moment the company not only has paid off those costs but is making a profit on the drug in question at the astronomically higher price. (Don't get me started on the renewal process around pharmaceuticals.)
No matter. If a combined market of over 2 billion people doesn't provide incentive to innovate, particularly when disposable income in that market is increasing rather than North America and the EU where disposable income is decreasing, I don't know what is.
Before someone reminds me, cancer treatments are hardly optional so the money spent on them can hardly be called disposable income but I think you get my drift.
What's amusing here is that the USPTO looks like they're going to bat for a German company, which Bayer is, who still sell ASA as Aspirin and do very well by it. More amusing is that India is well within its rights to do what it did. (Anyone interested can look up Bayer's less than stellar role in World War 2.)
We were all sold a useless bill of goods when we were told that tighter medical patents would do things like bring research dollars, lower prices and what not when we, country by country, adopted them. To a large extent we got nothing of the kind. Oh, and lives weren't made better and illnesses often went and go untreated because people can't afford them. You know, say, a cancer.
And since when did it become the job of a quasi-judicial body like the USPTO to lobby for a particular industry or group of industries. They need to spend a bit more time examining patents to make sure they're valid, if you ask me. Which they haven't. ;-)
I don't know if this is a case of putting the cart before the horse but it does seem a case of stepping in what comes out of the south end of a northbound horse.
Re: No but this letter might get something from them.
It isn't immediately obvious because these things get written by lawyers but I'll bet dollars to donuts that what they're talking about is storing so called infringing material in their cloud. The same applies to the criminal and civil liability clause. Both are more popularly known as CYA.
The role of collecting configuration data is for support as is usage to a small extent. Though it would be nice if they actually got off their butt and said that. From some 35 years of supporting telco data and voice stuff it it was always better to know configuration of gear than not so that I could get in the back door and have a look because some 80% of the time a trouble call on a key system or switchboard was some change the customer made that caused the problem. For data that's closer to 100%.
Anyway, here's nice sample email:
Dear Cisco,
I feel your pain at swallowing both legs up to your hips but can you imagine mine at not being able to log into my router now. Not to mention some of the bad wording in the Terms and Conditions of Use that seemed to leave me wide open to you sharing everything about me with the world.
I appreciate the clarification on your blog at: http://blogs.cisco.com/home/answering-our-customers-questions-about-cisco-connect-cloud/
that cleared up some of my concerns however you may be assured that from this point forward I will no longer use Cisco devices in my home or recommend them for any other home or small business. You have lost the good will that you've built up over 30 years with me and a number of others who I've spoken with and we all agree that no matter the technical advantages of your routers we can no longer use or recommend a router whose maker chooses to treat its customers and users in such a cavalier manner.
Attached is my receipt for my router and plug ins for each of my computing devices including smartphones and I expect a cheque in return as a full refund as the router and all Linksys devices in my home will be put in recycle in an unusable condition to prevent anyone else from suffering through this.
Good luck. They're only doing what everyone else in the business is doing which is downloading and implementing software and firmware upgrades to save you time and money. You know the line. "For you own good".
Ditto with this one.
The tone of Cisco's posting is one of a PR department caught with its pants down and with no way out of what's already happened. BUT I'd say that the that this "press release" posting changes the terms and conditions statement that they can share everything but the pictures you take of yourself in the shower to that they can't share a bloody thing. Not that it will change anything. But I'd be sure to let Cisco know via email that you keep a copy of that that's your interpretation now if you chose and keep it.
Bloody hell!
Once the DSL signal is past the telco or cableco dataset it's none of their damn business what you hook up to it, They just won't support it at their help line.
ISP's will and do provide wireless router or router/dataset combinations that they've rebranded mostly ATT and 2Wire. They get to share the "sale" with ATT and 2Wire when they do that. I have no idea if 2Wire is as bad as it was when it first appeared but until I found out I will never, ever, have one.
Sad, you know. Cisco gear, till this, used to be a bit old fashioned and crotchety but it ran forever. Oh, the price of progress.
Jobs was more than happy to admit he 'stole', made it better and made it successful.
I mean really, the ability to get a product kept out of the US market because it has rounded corners? Ya gotta be kidding!
Nice to know Samsung's phone and tablet are still available in the rest of the world. Particularly the rapidly up and coming consumer market in China and the two close behind like India and Brazil. I wonder how badly this will affect Samsumg's sales?
I can see Samsung's ads elsewhere. A play on the I'm a Mac and I'm a PC ads Apple used so well and effectively!.
For businesses as with individual humans there are those who will resist change no matter how clear it is that the change will or already has happened and it can't be undone.
Yes, a boatload of buggy companies closed with the arrival of the automobile because they couldn't fathom that these smoke burping, ungainly things could ever replace them, and the horse, as the main means of road transportation. It wasn't a hard conclusion to come to in the early days of the auto industry either.
Some didn't and the became the coach designers and makers for car companies. Remember the old GM ads with the tag line "body by Fisher"? They got started as buggy makers who bet on the car and survived even if only a small portion of the larger auto industry.
The major failure is that they can't see any other way for things to work. Be it an individual or a company. That's just how things are supposed to work.
On a bit of a tangent myth surrounding both the recording industry and motion picture industry got their start by infringing on patents held by others and neither bothered much about whether or not their product infringed on copyright. Could be a delayed guilty conscience?
Both industries have responded with near panic when confronted by home recording -- reel to reel and cassette for audio and VHS for video then the various recording and copying applications available for computers -- and even something remotely related like player piano rolls. It's like they have no confidence in their business models or their products.
Like the major film studios as far as paying the creators goes Universal and other RIAA members all agree that 1+1 = -3 so that the artist ends up paying them!
Kinda like income tax that way so it's gotta be legal.
Unless he's like us Canucks who are induging in too many Brewski's, be it Blue, Canadian, Moosehead or the stuff we pirated by copying the recipes and brewing it at home!
Happy Canada Day, all!
And for the annoying troll Dark Helmet nailed:
LOWERY!!!!!!!
Split decisions such as this are the easiest ones to take back to a body like SCOTUS as there is always the minority opinion to base that appeal on. IF the court ever consents to hear that.
I'd love to hear just how, in Reader's Digest form if you took up pages over at Groklaw, this tax somehow becomes a poll tax classically defined as a head tax based on census data. When I went to Groklaw I couldn't find it.
I understand that in the USA a poll tax is often thought of as a tax paid at a polling station so that the person can vote and was often used to discourage southern blacks from voting.
I shouldn't answer myself but I left something out. The early PC industry was dominated by middle class WASP types for any number of reasons.
It will take time for the influence of women and people of colour (or however) you want to put that to be recognized and felt. This list cries out for something like a lifetime achievement reward so that people like Admiral Hopper can be recognized for what they did and their enduring influence on just about any level of computing you feel like touching.
On the post: Another Reason The Music Industry Won't Be Coming Back -- The History Of Music Is More About Participation Than Compensation
Re: Copyright and ethics
That and you argue against your own position of morality when you say: "thereby ripping off the authors and bringing financial ruin upon them." True enough but that isn't a moral argument it's an economic one. If you want a large number of people to write books you actually have to pay at least some of them. Morality is tangential at best.
DRM existed long before the DMCA was written much less passed. Lotus protected Lotus 1-2-3 by adding a dongle to the box that had to be plugged into the parallel port, or was it the serial port?, to work. And that's just one example. VHS videos that you rented often came with a kind of DRM that prevented you copying from one VHS deck to another.
As far as DRM is concerned I've heard it argued that it's been needed to enforce copyright for the benefit of the artists/authors/programmers]. In neither case is it a moral argument as it has to do with money changing hands and who gets it. It's an economic transaction. Worse, because the motion picture and recording industries have basically become cartels in North America is has little or nothing to do with the artists but with the members of the cartels.
The moral argument, such as it is, gets reduced to ought creators get paid. As has been stated here repeatedly the answer is a resounding yes. Even with the reality that the cartels rarely seem to get around to paying them. See Mick Jagger's comments above.
Had the Statute of Anne been a document primarily concerned with the morality of a creator getting paid and controlling their work it would have forbid assignment of copyright to anyone be it publisher, recording company, motion picture company, Uncle Joe or third cousin Jane four times removed. It didn't. It did bring order to the publishing industry in the UK, it even got some authors paid. But the moment a creator signs over their copyright to someone else the creator loses all control over the work and that often includes the right to get paid for it.
Which is why I don't send off news tips or pictures to TV stations or newspapers or news sites on the web because part of the standard deal there is that I have to sign over my copyright and all the rights that come with it. Including getting paid for it.
While there may be a moral obligation to pay a creator copyright didn't create a moral right to a thing once the creator assigned the copyright to someone else. The (supposedly) temporary rights are conferred on the rights holder who, more often that not, is someone other than the person who created the work.
Now, to get back to the main point of the post that prior to the time where an artificial division was created between performers and musicians and the public everyone did take part in music and performance. Whether is was on something as simple as a recorder or something as complex and difficult to learn as a piano. People played music, they sang and they danced. Everyone did.
That died out during the 1950s with the arrival of listenable AM and then the arrival of stereo FM where people began to imitate the "professionals" which got us to the "air guitar". I had to put up with piano lessons as a kid, all classical crap. Nothing folk or modern, jazz or that awful rock'n'roll stuff. But I could sing. I was blessed with one hell of a good voice. A 5 octave range as a boy soprano who got tapped for solos in my church choir because not only did I have the range but I learned to sing with power in a way that didn't tear my vocal chords to pieces. I'm a bass-baritone now, still have the power and still just love to sing. I can sing everything from sacred music to rock and country and everything in between. And I don't need sheet music now any more than I did then. Play a few bars and let me go. I got it, Toyota.
We all can. We can all dance. Most of us can play some kind of instrument if we take the time. Music is intrinsic to our species. It's central to every known culture. And no activity lights up so many parts of the human brain as music does.
Where copyright is used to deny us access to something this fundamental it's corrupt and it's wrong. Deep in our beings and souls we know this. If morality plays a role that's where it comes in. Music is part of what makes us human.
Copyright, on the other hand, is economic. It was supposed to set up an economic arrangement where we would tolerate, for a limited time, our access to this central resource. It's long since stopped doing that.
On the post: ACTA Supporters In Europe Fighting To The Bitter End
Huh?
On the post: ACTA Supporters In Europe Fighting To The Bitter End
OK, how does this work?
"ACTA BACKERS of the European People's Party will likely abstain from any vote on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) treaty in the European Parliament this week...
The EPP could possibly force a postponement, and Fjellner added that the party could ask "for the vote to be referred back to committee".
Source: The Inquirer (http://s.tt/1gIAd)
Perhaps someone from Europe could enlighten me on this one. Fjellner seems to be indicating that if all the members of the EPP suddenly vanish during the vote being taken, mass emergency call to the loo or whatever, that the EPP may delay or postpone the vote? Or am I reading this wrong?
So they're all lined up at the urinals? Vote anyway!
On the post: Charles Carreon Tries To Intimidate Parodist With Bizarre List Of Demands Plus DMCA Takedown Threat
A lawyer who reprsents...
Not only is he trying to dig to the other side of the planet he's forgetting to shore up the walls as he goes. Not only does he make empty legal threats to people who don't know the law he does the same to lawyers who know the applicable law better than he does.
No further proof is required.
On the post: Canada And Mexico Not Allowed To Observe TPP Negotations, Even Though They're Joining Them
Re: Trust us
Then we'll ignore it if you don't mind.
On the post: Canada And Mexico Not Allowed To Observe TPP Negotations, Even Though They're Joining Them
Re:
On the post: Canada And Mexico Not Allowed To Observe TPP Negotations, Even Though They're Joining Them
We're off on the horizon, in the peanut gallery!
I'm gonna do the unthinkable and agree with an AC here. Stuff it already. We got the same "transparency" out of the Canada-US FTA (Mulroney) and NAFTA (Chretien) that we're gonna get here. At least, I admit we were at the table there and not in the far distant peanut gallery on the horizon.
Harper got his majority a year ago. As yet there's nothing in Ottawa to replace him. Maybe the new leader of the NDP will become that, which he's showing a lot of signs of doing. Maybe the Liberals will stop their path to self-destruction though I wouldn't bet on it.
Oh, and another shot taken at the West isn't helping your side of the debate either, along with the other caricatures you're tossing about.
Yeah, if we had an once of self respect we'd pack up and go home. We gave that up years ago with the Free Trade Agreement and NAFTA. Thing is, you know, that it wouldn't matter who was living at 24 Sussex Dr in Ottawa. We'd still be there under the same terms and conditions. It's in our interest to be there, or as close as we can to being there. One way or another we'll be stuck with it anyway.
At least, we're not as close to becoming the 51st State as England is. Not yet, anyway.
On the post: Canada And Mexico Not Allowed To Observe TPP Negotations, Even Though They're Joining Them
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Summary
On the post: The USPTO: Where Up Is Down, Expensive Medicine Saves Lives, And Cheap Alternatives Violate International Law
Really????
"placement USPTO overseas IP attaches in Thailand, China, Russia, India, Brazil and Egypt."
I'm sitting here pondering the not so minor detail that between then China and India account for something slightly more than one third of human population on the planet. That and their individual wealth is growing. If they can't afford the patented drug then by all means use the clause to force outfits like Bayer to issue compulsory licenses to generics makers. How long before Bayer takes a large stake out in the generic maker and continues to rake money in?
If the size and growing wealth of those two countries isn't enough to provide big pharma incentive to service them then something is truly rotten in the state of Denmark and it's not just the cheese.
There's a valid argument to be made for patents for new drugs and the research and approval process they need to go through. That argument falls apart the moment the company not only has paid off those costs but is making a profit on the drug in question at the astronomically higher price. (Don't get me started on the renewal process around pharmaceuticals.)
No matter. If a combined market of over 2 billion people doesn't provide incentive to innovate, particularly when disposable income in that market is increasing rather than North America and the EU where disposable income is decreasing, I don't know what is.
Before someone reminds me, cancer treatments are hardly optional so the money spent on them can hardly be called disposable income but I think you get my drift.
What's amusing here is that the USPTO looks like they're going to bat for a German company, which Bayer is, who still sell ASA as Aspirin and do very well by it. More amusing is that India is well within its rights to do what it did. (Anyone interested can look up Bayer's less than stellar role in World War 2.)
We were all sold a useless bill of goods when we were told that tighter medical patents would do things like bring research dollars, lower prices and what not when we, country by country, adopted them. To a large extent we got nothing of the kind. Oh, and lives weren't made better and illnesses often went and go untreated because people can't afford them. You know, say, a cancer.
And since when did it become the job of a quasi-judicial body like the USPTO to lobby for a particular industry or group of industries. They need to spend a bit more time examining patents to make sure they're valid, if you ask me. Which they haven't. ;-)
I don't know if this is a case of putting the cart before the horse but it does seem a case of stepping in what comes out of the south end of a northbound horse.
On the post: You Don't Own What You Buy, Part 15,332: Cisco Forces Questionable New Firmware On Routers
Re: No but this letter might get something from them.
The role of collecting configuration data is for support as is usage to a small extent. Though it would be nice if they actually got off their butt and said that. From some 35 years of supporting telco data and voice stuff it it was always better to know configuration of gear than not so that I could get in the back door and have a look because some 80% of the time a trouble call on a key system or switchboard was some change the customer made that caused the problem. For data that's closer to 100%.
Anyway, here's nice sample email:
Dear Cisco,
I feel your pain at swallowing both legs up to your hips but can you imagine mine at not being able to log into my router now. Not to mention some of the bad wording in the Terms and Conditions of Use that seemed to leave me wide open to you sharing everything about me with the world.
I appreciate the clarification on your blog at:
http://blogs.cisco.com/home/answering-our-customers-questions-about-cisco-connect-cloud/
that cleared up some of my concerns however you may be assured that from this point forward I will no longer use Cisco devices in my home or recommend them for any other home or small business. You have lost the good will that you've built up over 30 years with me and a number of others who I've spoken with and we all agree that no matter the technical advantages of your routers we can no longer use or recommend a router whose maker chooses to treat its customers and users in such a cavalier manner.
Attached is my receipt for my router and plug ins for each of my computing devices including smartphones and I expect a cheque in return as a full refund as the router and all Linksys devices in my home will be put in recycle in an unusable condition to prevent anyone else from suffering through this.
Yours Truly
One Immensely Pissed Off Ex Customer.
On the post: You Don't Own What You Buy, Part 15,332: Cisco Forces Questionable New Firmware On Routers
Re: Got to try
Ditto with this one.
The tone of Cisco's posting is one of a PR department caught with its pants down and with no way out of what's already happened. BUT I'd say that the that this "press release" posting changes the terms and conditions statement that they can share everything but the pictures you take of yourself in the shower to that they can't share a bloody thing. Not that it will change anything. But I'd be sure to let Cisco know via email that you keep a copy of that that's your interpretation now if you chose and keep it.
Bloody hell!
On the post: You Don't Own What You Buy, Part 15,332: Cisco Forces Questionable New Firmware On Routers
Re: Re: Re:
ISP's will and do provide wireless router or router/dataset combinations that they've rebranded mostly ATT and 2Wire. They get to share the "sale" with ATT and 2Wire when they do that. I have no idea if 2Wire is as bad as it was when it first appeared but until I found out I will never, ever, have one.
Sad, you know. Cisco gear, till this, used to be a bit old fashioned and crotchety but it ran forever. Oh, the price of progress.
On the post: Dear Judge Koh: Competition Is No Reason To Ban A Phone
Re: LOOK AT HOW SIMILAR THEY ARE!!!!!!!
On the post: Dear Judge Koh: Competition Is No Reason To Ban A Phone
Re:
I mean really, the ability to get a product kept out of the US market because it has rounded corners? Ya gotta be kidding!
Nice to know Samsung's phone and tablet are still available in the rest of the world. Particularly the rapidly up and coming consumer market in China and the two close behind like India and Brazil. I wonder how badly this will affect Samsumg's sales?
I can see Samsung's ads elsewhere. A play on the I'm a Mac and I'm a PC ads Apple used so well and effectively!.
On the post: Crowdfunded Album Leaps Onto The Charts, Sells More Than Rihanna And Coldplay
Re: Adapt or die
Yes, a boatload of buggy companies closed with the arrival of the automobile because they couldn't fathom that these smoke burping, ungainly things could ever replace them, and the horse, as the main means of road transportation. It wasn't a hard conclusion to come to in the early days of the auto industry either.
Some didn't and the became the coach designers and makers for car companies. Remember the old GM ads with the tag line "body by Fisher"? They got started as buggy makers who bet on the car and survived even if only a small portion of the larger auto industry.
The major failure is that they can't see any other way for things to work. Be it an individual or a company. That's just how things are supposed to work.
On a bit of a tangent myth surrounding both the recording industry and motion picture industry got their start by infringing on patents held by others and neither bothered much about whether or not their product infringed on copyright. Could be a delayed guilty conscience?
Both industries have responded with near panic when confronted by home recording -- reel to reel and cassette for audio and VHS for video then the various recording and copying applications available for computers -- and even something remotely related like player piano rolls. It's like they have no confidence in their business models or their products.
On the post: Charles Carreon Keeps Digging & Digging: Inman And IndieGoGo Hit Back
One question:
On the post: Judge Slams Universal Music For Trying To 'Bamboozle' Court & Producers Over Eminem Royalties
Kinda like income tax that way so it's gotta be legal.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Wendesay?
Happy Canada Day, all!
And for the annoying troll Dark Helmet nailed:
LOWERY!!!!!!!
(Oh Canada we stand on guard for thee!)
LOWERY!!!!!!!!!
On the post: Healthcare, Journalism, And The Mad Dash For 'The Scoop'
Re:
I'd love to hear just how, in Reader's Digest form if you took up pages over at Groklaw, this tax somehow becomes a poll tax classically defined as a head tax based on census data. When I went to Groklaw I couldn't find it.
I understand that in the USA a poll tax is often thought of as a tax paid at a polling station so that the person can vote and was often used to discourage southern blacks from voting.
On the post: Bias In Tech & Media: Lists That Perpetuate The Stereotypes
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It will take time for the influence of women and people of colour (or however) you want to put that to be recognized and felt. This list cries out for something like a lifetime achievement reward so that people like Admiral Hopper can be recognized for what they did and their enduring influence on just about any level of computing you feel like touching.
Next >>