It's actually worse than that. Copyright and patents are the exception and limitation. Not fair use.
Property rights are considered inalienable rights in the Constitution. They're also considered natural rights. They can be thought of as inherent rights. They're not given by government. They are given by nature itself. The purpose of government is not to give such rights, but to protect such rights. And the government can only intrude upon such rights through due process.
Unlike property rights, copyrights and patents needed to be explicitly included in the Constitution because they were not natural. The concept of giving out monopoly rights to ideas was contrary to nature. Thus, such monopolies were by their nature an exception and highly limited.
As pointed out here before. Copyrights originally lasted only 15 years. And even more interesting, copyrights did not cover music or literature.
But as money was made on these limited monopolies, those who collected the rents needed more gates from which to collected upon. So music was added. Literature was added. The length of time was increased. The monopoly on publishing was not enough. Soon performances were added. And now we're stuck with a convoluted draconian system where we need to pay a license to combine music with video, separate from the publishing right, and separate from the performance right.
The reason we think of fair use as a limitation and an exception, is because for over two centuries, copyright law has turned on its head.
Like I said earlier, it's amazing that none of my N64, Dreamcast, PS1 and PS2 games ever needed updating. So tell me more about how it's "impossible" to ship a game right the first time?
I totally agree. Microsoft wants games right the first time. But it realizes no one is perfect, so it gives one freebie patch.
That forces you to make sure your game is done. And if it's not done, it forces you to make sure your patch is done, 'cause you're not gonna get a third chance to get it right (without paying a lot of money).
Fish failed with both. I have no sympathy for him. Either he simply doesn't give a frick about testing and quality (or his customers) or he's simply a lousy game developer.
"Without a much stronger commitment from rights holders..."
Oh yeah, the movie and music industries are just so lackadaisical when it comes to pushing for stronger monopoly rights. They've really got to step up their game.
Seriously, what the #*$&* does that even mean?! The "rights holders" are the only people pushing for increasing monopoly rights.
Was that a subtle request for the copyright maximalists to give them more money? To use their resources to squash the dissent in the media?
I've often wondered whether copyright laws would become so draconian that eventually the average person would turn against it. It is my sincere hope that we've reached that point.
"Perhaps there is nothing malicious about this and they want to be really sure they are doing the right thing here."
In that case let the petition go forward. Why add the first step of asking whether they should have the petition? How is adding that first step doing the right thing? If people thought the petition was somehow "offensive, inflammatory or otherwise objectionable," they would simply not sign the petition.
Heck, sometimes I listen to music off of youtube while cooking. David better go after manufacturers of stoves, refrigerators, and microwave ovens.
Sometimes I'll even "air" drum with wooden spoons on pots and pans. That'd be an infringing derivative performance of the song. The kitchen utensil industry has been mooching off of musicians for decades! David, they're next!
Further, in order to loot you need to have a $1,000 dollar laptop, a $500 dollar iPhone or $400 Samsumg tablet. It turns out the supposedly “free” stuff really isn’t free. In fact it’s an expensive way to get “free” music. (Like most claimed “disruptive innovations”it turns out expensive subsidies exist elsewhere.) Companies are actually making money from this looting activity. These companies only make money if you change your principles and morality! And none of that money goes to the artists!
He thinks the electronic industry and wireless industry should be paying him. Can you imagine if a musician from the 70s claimed that he should get a cut from all the Ghetto Boxes sold? Someone from the 60s claiming that he should get a cut from all the turntables sold?
Heck, David... why stop there? Those laptops have to sit somewhere. Sue the table manufacturers for your cut. And those electronic devices use electricity. Sue the power industry for your cut. And those devices are delivered over the roadways. Sue the construction companies that build those roads. Sue fricken everyone!
David, it appears you think the entire world owes you a living. It does not. Do what you love. If it doesn't provide enough income, quit bitching and get a fricken job. That's why I did when I couldn't make a living playing music back in the 90s.
The sad thing is that decades ago I loved David Lowery's Camper Van Beethoven. They were the coolest American band in the 80s. Now, decades later, it turns out that David Lowery is a tool. A corporate music tool. I can't even listen to their music now without thinking what a corporate tool he is.
"THAT OWES ITS CONCEPT AND EXECUTION TO NOBODY AT ALL"
CBS is not getting it. The issue is not that ABC did not get the idea of Glass House from Big Brother. I have no doubt that ABC did get the idea from CBS. Just like CBS got the idea from the same show from the Netherlands.
The issue is whether the government should grant a monopoly on that mere idea. Should the mere idea of people being filmed in a house be locked up for perpetually minus one day? That makes no fricken sense.
"Even if there's nothing illegal happening, just having the police show up -- and having people think that there might be something wrong -- causes people to worry about taking part."
And yet people adamantly want the government to be run like a business. Yeah, let's give the guys with the guns a profit motive.
"reporter for a newspaper has basically been suspended from his job for the sin of posting a link to a credible news source"
Reporters fired for reporting news? Does anyone else find it funny when newspapers argue that we need old-guard, brick and mortar news sources to do real journalism?
Yeah, that's what we need. More "news" papers like the Colorado Gazette.
On the post: Congress Has Lost All Perspective When It Considers Prosecuting Journalists As Spies
Re:
On the post: Congress Has Lost All Perspective When It Considers Prosecuting Journalists As Spies
Beware Mike, pretty soon reporting about reporters who report about whistleblowrs will also be considered treason.
On the post: We Should Stop Calling Fair Use A 'Limitation & Exception' To Copyright; It's A Right Of The Public
Property rights are considered inalienable rights in the Constitution. They're also considered natural rights. They can be thought of as inherent rights. They're not given by government. They are given by nature itself. The purpose of government is not to give such rights, but to protect such rights. And the government can only intrude upon such rights through due process.
Unlike property rights, copyrights and patents needed to be explicitly included in the Constitution because they were not natural. The concept of giving out monopoly rights to ideas was contrary to nature. Thus, such monopolies were by their nature an exception and highly limited.
As pointed out here before. Copyrights originally lasted only 15 years. And even more interesting, copyrights did not cover music or literature.
But as money was made on these limited monopolies, those who collected the rents needed more gates from which to collected upon. So music was added. Literature was added. The length of time was increased. The monopoly on publishing was not enough. Soon performances were added. And now we're stuck with a convoluted draconian system where we need to pay a license to combine music with video, separate from the publishing right, and separate from the performance right.
The reason we think of fair use as a limitation and an exception, is because for over two centuries, copyright law has turned on its head.
On the post: Charging $40,000 To Issue A Patch Makes Games 'Better,' Microsoft?
Re: Re:
On the post: Charging $40,000 To Issue A Patch Makes Games 'Better,' Microsoft?
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Charging $40,000 To Issue A Patch Makes Games 'Better,' Microsoft?
Re: Re: Re:
And don't you also find it strange that we didn't start needing updates until the capability for updates was added by Microsoft in the original Xbox?
Maybe Microsoft has finally figured out the mistake it made and is trying to set things right.
On the post: Charging $40,000 To Issue A Patch Makes Games 'Better,' Microsoft?
Re:
That forces you to make sure your game is done. And if it's not done, it forces you to make sure your patch is done, 'cause you're not gonna get a third chance to get it right (without paying a lot of money).
Fish failed with both. I have no sympathy for him. Either he simply doesn't give a frick about testing and quality (or his customers) or he's simply a lousy game developer.
On the post: US And EU Still Clueless About What The SOPA And ACTA Defeats Really Mean
Oh yeah, the movie and music industries are just so lackadaisical when it comes to pushing for stronger monopoly rights. They've really got to step up their game.
Seriously, what the #*$&* does that even mean?! The "rights holders" are the only people pushing for increasing monopoly rights.
Was that a subtle request for the copyright maximalists to give them more money? To use their resources to squash the dissent in the media?
I've often wondered whether copyright laws would become so draconian that eventually the average person would turn against it. It is my sincere hope that we've reached that point.
On the post: Is A Petition Calling For A Pardon Of The Pirate Bay's Peter Sunde 'Offensive'?
Re:
In that case let the petition go forward. Why add the first step of asking whether they should have the petition? How is adding that first step doing the right thing? If people thought the petition was somehow "offensive, inflammatory or otherwise objectionable," they would simply not sign the petition.
On the post: Some Facts & Insights Into The Whole Discussion Of 'Ethics' And Music Business Models
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Heck, sometimes I listen to music off of youtube while cooking. David better go after manufacturers of stoves, refrigerators, and microwave ovens.
Sometimes I'll even "air" drum with wooden spoons on pots and pans. That'd be an infringing derivative performance of the song. The kitchen utensil industry has been mooching off of musicians for decades! David, they're next!
On the post: Some Facts & Insights Into The Whole Discussion Of 'Ethics' And Music Business Models
Re: Re:
He thinks the electronic industry and wireless industry should be paying him. Can you imagine if a musician from the 70s claimed that he should get a cut from all the Ghetto Boxes sold? Someone from the 60s claiming that he should get a cut from all the turntables sold?
Heck, David... why stop there? Those laptops have to sit somewhere. Sue the table manufacturers for your cut. And those electronic devices use electricity. Sue the power industry for your cut. And those devices are delivered over the roadways. Sue the construction companies that build those roads. Sue fricken everyone!
David, it appears you think the entire world owes you a living. It does not. Do what you love. If it doesn't provide enough income, quit bitching and get a fricken job. That's why I did when I couldn't make a living playing music back in the 90s.
On the post: Some Facts & Insights Into The Whole Discussion Of 'Ethics' And Music Business Models
On the post: CBS Mocks Its Own Failed Copyright Lawsuit By Sarcastically Announcing New 'Completely Original' Show 'Dancing On The Stars'
CBS is not getting it. The issue is not that ABC did not get the idea of Glass House from Big Brother. I have no doubt that ABC did get the idea from CBS. Just like CBS got the idea from the same show from the Netherlands.
The issue is whether the government should grant a monopoly on that mere idea. Should the mere idea of people being filmed in a house be locked up for perpetually minus one day? That makes no fricken sense.
On the post: Denmark Ditches Warning Letters, Launches Soft War On Piracy
That's easy. Simply offer convenient legal solutions people are willing to pay for, and that'll be motivation enough.
On the post: Police Ticketing Informal Rideshare Participants Based On No Law, But To Protect Port Authority Revenue
And yet people adamantly want the government to be run like a business. Yeah, let's give the guys with the guns a profit motive.
On the post: Newspaper Puts Reporter On Leave For Posting Link To Article About His Employer On Facebook
Reporters fired for reporting news? Does anyone else find it funny when newspapers argue that we need old-guard, brick and mortar news sources to do real journalism?
Yeah, that's what we need. More "news" papers like the Colorado Gazette.
On the post: Funnyjunk's Lawyer, Charles Carreon, Continues To Lash Out: Accuses Matt Inman Of 'Instigating Security Attacks'
On the post: Amazon Deletes Ebooks Automatically Generated From YouTube Comments Leaving Many Questions Unanswered
On the post: Australian Gov't Chooses 'Consumer Advocate' For Secret Anti-Piracy Meetings: The Chairman Of The Copyright Council
You're kidding right? This doesn't raise any such questions. This answers such questions. Definitively.
On the post: Feds Say We Need Stronger IP Laws Because Grocery Stores Employ Lots Of People
Oh. Now I get it. Thanks MPAA and RIAA!
Next >>