"...we allowed our system to be corrupted, we allowed immoral people to take charge and influence the course of our laws."
It's not that we allowed immoral people to corrupt the system (ok we did, but that's not the point). The point of the matter is that the laws were designed to deter commercial infringement. There was no digital distribution system in place when the laws were written and so the industry was only looking to keep people from mass bootlegging. It worked and we didn't care because it didn't affect us. No one was looking for us sharing our mix tapes or making copies for friends. Technology has changed and the law hasn't and the content industry is at full on war with it's customers. How crazy is that?
We all could talk about this ad nauseam, but the fact remains that it is economic suicide to go to war with your source of revenue.
It would appear that pharma companies are in the business of creating maintenance drugs, rather than trying to cure anything. It seems the focus is more on how to manage chronic illness.
To be fair, creating addicts is an insanely profitable business model.
As for any drug that is potentially life saving, it seems the thought is to price those drugs as high as tolerable by first world nations. Extortion for human life is another insanely profitable business model.
There is this new-fangled technology called a search engine. I hear there are quite a few of them on the interwebs. If you type FCC or FAA in the search box, it returns the results, Federal Communications Commission or Federal Aviation Administration, respectively. Just saying.
Other than the offer of free cable service (which is a winning idea), I don't see any reason for consumers to want to opt in to such a feature. Nor do I see an upside to my TV having a cam that anyone can hack into.
Absent an absolutely AMAZING marketing campaign, this appears to be the best reason for cord cutting.
The obvious downside to this is EVERY intelligence agency on the planet salivating at the chance to manipulate state laws to gain access. For the children, to stop terrorism.
The examiner was thinking that there are just too many words in this bullshit patent and he had better just move on because there were soooo many more to approve that day or he might lose his job.
Glad you finally came around to the right side. You are right the justices are not infallible and they can be wrong.
Guess what? The community here has been asserting for some time that reality or "L I V I N G P R O O F" should not be argued. Yet time and again we hear that patents and copyright and other intellectual privilege is NEEDED in the digital age. Well the LIVING PROOF says otherwise.
For all the trolling and name calling that goes on around here, one thing remains true. Reality.
Call us pirates or freetards or thieves or whatever makes you feel best, but at the end of the day, we the people who use the net, have already routed around copyright. It's nice that the EU wants to modernize copyright and the rest of us will happily accept them when they join us in reality.
Laws work when they make sense to the populace and they don't work when they don't make sense to the populace. Copyright had its place when it was providing protections at the commercial level and still works commercially because that makes sense to the public and doesn't interfere with our lives.
So the trolls can trot out all of their moral and legal arguments if they like. The rest of us in the US can relax and enjoy a beer while reading their posts. Yeah we can enjoy a beer because prohibition worked so well.
1. using the color white on a mobile phone
2. using the color black on a mobile phone
3. connecting to the internet via a mobile phone
4. playing music on a mobile phone
5. displaying icons as squarish on mobile phone UI
6. sliding icons on a mobile phone UI
The real problem is that Leslie "valued" his IP at a $1 million USD.
Obviously it's only value was to the owner, or he wouldn't have gotten his laptop back.
Since he did get it back and the data wasn't recovered that means that no one can monetize the content to the tune of $1million USD + and his revenue stream is protected. So pay up and just recreate your content and sell it for the millions it was supposedly worth.
And that is all you need to know. At least when they are finally caught breaking the law, they can say they were transparent about what they are doing.
There is a reason there is no significant change in the market. Megaupload was shut down, movies were not suddenly pulled from the web.
The Mega Case (can I TM that?) is just good entertainment for us, it hasn't changed the nature of digital content or the internet.
For all of the IP maximalists out there. We are in the middle of the IP version of prohibition. Keep pushing for more enforcement and see how it plays out. History isn't on the side of enforcement of laws that are against the nature of humanity.
I'll have to admit that I didn't even bother reading the patent, but it seems that 3D Systems' entire case is predicated on the fact that no 3D printers can be built without their patent.
So it would seem that they picked the absolute wrong moment and wrong targets to sue. They want an injunction on a prototype that hasn't been built. I didn't think you could infringe upon something until you actually infringed on it.
Proving Kickstarter is inducing infringement is an entirely different situation. It's going to take some complex legal gymnastics to convince a judge that the platform is guilty for doing what it is supposed to do.
While an injunction certainly makes sense while this is all getting sorted out in court, and I say that only because the product isn't built or being sold yet; I cannot fathom the request for damages since there have been no damages. 3D Systems has not lost a single sale and until it is proven that the patent is infringed upon then there is no need for a license on something that doesn't exist.
Well played in jumping the gun 3D Systems. Your legal bill is going to be much higher than your sales next quarter.
Now that I got that out, I have to say the man is moron when it comes to knowing how to treat his fans in cyberspace. He doesn't make his videos available on YouTube. Does he really think people are still watching MTV or VH-1 ? Does he really think we are sitting around waiting for an announcement that he will be airing his videos on some TV channel?
Best way to deal with his Purple Highness is to pirate everything he's made and share it.
I would say his brain is lost in some purple haze, but then I'm sure I would get a shake down letter from a Jimmi Hendrix lawyer.
The only thing I did't like about this article is that in response to Kappos' idiotic statement about litigation in the smartphone industry, your rebuttal focused on NPE patent trolls.
While it's true that there are a few NPEs engaged in smartphone litigation (NTP anyone?), the bulk of the problem is overly broad or just ridiculous patents ( one click, rounded corners ) that are being used by the major players to hamper competition and chill actual innovation in the marketplace.
At $29 - $33 billion, it would appear that the sky is rising for the IP law industry.
I'm actually surprised the phishers haven't figured this one out. Giving people a reasonably priced option will always generate revenue.
So where are all the spam emails from Dewey, Cheetam, and Howe? We should be inundated with settlement letters that state they know we are infringing and there is a new statutory damages clause for non-commercial infringement. Pay a fine of $1 per infringement or $100, whichever is lower.
On the post: Funny How Copyright Holders Only Ramped Up Google DMCA Takedowns After SOPA Failed
Work???
Either that or pushing a few buttons was just too hard.
On the post: Jammie Thomas Asks Supreme Court: How Much Is Too Much For Copyright Infringement?
Re: Not a fan, but...
It's not that we allowed immoral people to corrupt the system (ok we did, but that's not the point). The point of the matter is that the laws were designed to deter commercial infringement. There was no digital distribution system in place when the laws were written and so the industry was only looking to keep people from mass bootlegging. It worked and we didn't care because it didn't affect us. No one was looking for us sharing our mix tapes or making copies for friends. Technology has changed and the law hasn't and the content industry is at full on war with it's customers. How crazy is that?
We all could talk about this ad nauseam, but the fact remains that it is economic suicide to go to war with your source of revenue.
On the post: Historic Ruling Against First Modern Drug Patent In India
Life saving?
To be fair, creating addicts is an insanely profitable business model.
As for any drug that is potentially life saving, it seems the thought is to price those drugs as high as tolerable by first world nations. Extortion for human life is another insanely profitable business model.
On the post: FCC Boss Tired Of Having To Put His iPad Away For Takeoff, Tells FAA To Fix It
Re: FCC AND FAA Who are they
There is this new-fangled technology called a search engine. I hear there are quite a few of them on the interwebs. If you type FCC or FAA in the search box, it returns the results, Federal Communications Commission or Federal Aviation Administration, respectively. Just saying.
On the post: The DVR That Watches You Back: Verizon Applies For 'Ambient Action' Detecting Device Patent
1984 in 2013
Absent an absolutely AMAZING marketing campaign, this appears to be the best reason for cord cutting.
The obvious downside to this is EVERY intelligence agency on the planet salivating at the chance to manipulate state laws to gain access. For the children, to stop terrorism.
On the post: Remember When You Couldn't Patent Math? Good Times
What was he thinking????
On the post: Remember When You Couldn't Patent Math? Good Times
Re: Not Infallible
Guess what? The community here has been asserting for some time that reality or "L I V I N G P R O O F" should not be argued. Yet time and again we hear that patents and copyright and other intellectual privilege is NEEDED in the digital age. Well the LIVING PROOF says otherwise.
Again, glad you came to your senses.
On the post: EU Recognizes Need To Modernize Copyright, Announces Plan To Consider Reforms
They might want to join the party
Call us pirates or freetards or thieves or whatever makes you feel best, but at the end of the day, we the people who use the net, have already routed around copyright. It's nice that the EU wants to modernize copyright and the rest of us will happily accept them when they join us in reality.
Laws work when they make sense to the populace and they don't work when they don't make sense to the populace. Copyright had its place when it was providing protections at the commercial level and still works commercially because that makes sense to the public and doesn't interfere with our lives.
So the trolls can trot out all of their moral and legal arguments if they like. The rest of us in the US can relax and enjoy a beer while reading their posts. Yeah we can enjoy a beer because prohibition worked so well.
On the post: Court Orders Yahoo To Pay Mexican Yellow Pages Companies $2.7 Billion In Mystery Case
Re: Re: 2 billion?
On the post: Judge: Apple / HTC Patent Agreement Must Be Revealed (Except For Dollar Amount)
Nooooooooo
Now they have to publicly reveal the patents on
1. using the color white on a mobile phone
2. using the color black on a mobile phone
3. connecting to the internet via a mobile phone
4. playing music on a mobile phone
5. displaying icons as squarish on mobile phone UI
6. sliding icons on a mobile phone UI
On the post: Don't Promise $1 Million For Your Lost Laptop Via YouTube & Twitter If You're Not Prepared To Pay
Music mentality
Obviously it's only value was to the owner, or he wouldn't have gotten his laptop back.
Since he did get it back and the data wasn't recovered that means that no one can monetize the content to the tune of $1million USD + and his revenue stream is protected. So pay up and just recreate your content and sell it for the millions it was supposedly worth.
On the post: NSA Releases Heavily Redacted Talking Points: Say It's Hard To Watch Public Debate On Its Efforts
Page 3
And that is all you need to know. At least when they are finally caught breaking the law, they can say they were transparent about what they are doing.
On the post: Annual Cyber-Monday ICE Take Down Blitz 2012
Re: a fight we must win
On the post: New Study: Megaupload Shutdown May Have Hurt Box Office For Smaller Movies
Results are not statistically significant
There is a reason there is no significant change in the market. Megaupload was shut down, movies were not suddenly pulled from the web.
The Mega Case (can I TM that?) is just good entertainment for us, it hasn't changed the nature of digital content or the internet.
For all of the IP maximalists out there. We are in the middle of the IP version of prohibition. Keep pushing for more enforcement and see how it plays out. History isn't on the side of enforcement of laws that are against the nature of humanity.
On the post: Opportunistic Politicians Lean On The FBI And Twitter To Shut Down Terrorist Accounts
smh
No more terrorists.
#admittedterrorist
On the post: Company Sues Kickstarter Over 3D Printer Patent, Maligns 'Hackers And Makers'
Re:
So it would seem that they picked the absolute wrong moment and wrong targets to sue. They want an injunction on a prototype that hasn't been built. I didn't think you could infringe upon something until you actually infringed on it.
Proving Kickstarter is inducing infringement is an entirely different situation. It's going to take some complex legal gymnastics to convince a judge that the platform is guilty for doing what it is supposed to do.
While an injunction certainly makes sense while this is all getting sorted out in court, and I say that only because the product isn't built or being sold yet; I cannot fathom the request for damages since there have been no damages. 3D Systems has not lost a single sale and until it is proven that the patent is infringed upon then there is no need for a license on something that doesn't exist.
Well played in jumping the gun 3D Systems. Your legal bill is going to be much higher than your sales next quarter.
On the post: Expose Blatant Security Hole From AT&T... Face Five Years In Jail
Re: It's the same thing!!!
Yes it is equivalent, and because it's the same thing there are quite a few people in Hollywood who need to be arrested and locked up for a long time.
The Italian Job
Die Hard
Heist
Gone in 60 seconds
And that's just theft. What about murder???? Oh there are a lot of writers in Hollywood that need to be in jail for a long time.
On the post: The Littlest Thug: Prince Sends Cease And Desist To Fan Who Created 'Le Petit Prince' Miniature Doll
Fan of the music not the man
Now that I got that out, I have to say the man is moron when it comes to knowing how to treat his fans in cyberspace. He doesn't make his videos available on YouTube. Does he really think people are still watching MTV or VH-1 ? Does he really think we are sitting around waiting for an announcement that he will be airing his videos on some TV channel?
Best way to deal with his Purple Highness is to pirate everything he's made and share it.
I would say his brain is lost in some purple haze, but then I'm sure I would get a shake down letter from a Jimmi Hendrix lawyer.
On the post: US Patent Boss Completely Clueless: Insists That Patent Fights Show The System 'Wires Us For Innovation'
Hmmmmm
While it's true that there are a few NPEs engaged in smartphone litigation (NTP anyone?), the bulk of the problem is overly broad or just ridiculous patents ( one click, rounded corners ) that are being used by the major players to hamper competition and chill actual innovation in the marketplace.
At $29 - $33 billion, it would appear that the sky is rising for the IP law industry.
On the post: Micro-Stock Photo Agency Prefers Converting Customers To Cracking Down On Infringers
Viable business model
So where are all the spam emails from Dewey, Cheetam, and Howe? We should be inundated with settlement letters that state they know we are infringing and there is a new statutory damages clause for non-commercial infringement. Pay a fine of $1 per infringement or $100, whichever is lower.
btw I claim the patent on this business model.
Next >>