The problem is that the petition does not adequately explain the issue and so a lot of people simply won't be able to understand the scope of the problem. I'm also surprised you chose to write up this one instead of poking around and finding another that you might like better.
My personal favorite right now is the Abolish the TSA petition. It's succinct but accurate and seems to get the point across.
The problem is, from the sounds of things, when a customer cancels they must opt-OUT of further tracking. In this day and age when privacy is such a big issue to a lot of people, wouldn't the better move have been to set it up as an opt-IN program? Consider the complaints and tirades you're seeing now versus what people might say if this were the pitch instead:
OnStar is now offering a free limited service for those customers who no longer want or can afford the premium service. With the free service, your account is maintained at OnStar for easy re-enrollment later. Additionally, we can still send you urgent alerts to issues in your area such as road closures, significant weather events (tornado warnings) and mandatory evacuations. This new service is 100% free but will require continued connection to the subscibed vehicle.
The scary part is that they think they can keep the times the same (gates open 2 hours before the game). If you've got 75,000 fans entering through 8 gates with 5 security folks providing pat downs at each entrance, that's still a max of 3.8 seconds per fan to get everyone in before the game starts.
75,000 / 8 gates = 9375 fans per gate
9375 fans / 5 lines = 1875 fans per line
7200 seconds / 1875 fans = 3.8 seconds per fan
Yup, you can totally find hidden weapons when patted down by an untrained yellow shirted lackey in 3.8 seconds in the middle of Winter at Soldier Field...
I suspect there may end up being a few ticket refund fiascos before gate open times are adjusted to 4 hours before game time and we're expected to show up a minimum of 3 hours before kickoff.
Server logs + IP address reverse lookup on the files in question. That would get you a list of everyone that has visited the download page or actually downloaded. From the quoted text above:
Plaintiffs’ unreasonable delay resulted in prejudice by causing Hotfile to leave up the files that are now alleged to infringe
That says to me that some of the files identified as infringing were visited by a WB IP address prior to Hotfile receiving praise from WB for it's efforts.
Of course, in the end, it will come down to who blinks first. My bet - there will be an out of court settlement with sealed details and another opportunity for a bright line ruling will be lost.
... except all you did was present your interpretation of what the post is about. Typically, "full disclosure" is an admission of RELEVANT facts, like your name, your work affiliations and whether or not you have a financial interest in the topic at hand. Since you provided none of the above, I wouldn't really call this comment a "full disclosure".
You're right - the math is off. Let's use numbers straight from the infographic from the MPAA:
- Of the $58 Billion in lost economic output, they claim $16 Billion in lost earnings
- Immediately under that, they state that nearly 70% of film revenue comes from "DVD sales and other after markets".
70% * $16B = $11.2B
However, the $10 number is off too - that's a possible retail price. I'm pretty sure Wal-Mart doesn't pay $10 per disc. Last I checked with a friend who is a buyer for a chain store (500+ stores), they paid closer to $5 each.
$11.2B / $5 = 2.24 BILLION DVD's
- 29 Million American Adults "have downloaded or watched illegal copies of movies or TV shows online"
2.24B / 29M = 77 DVD's each
So, each and every downloader or online viewer of infringing content needs to head on over to their nearest DVD retailer and pony up for 77 new movies? Somehow, I don't think so.
(1) to perform or display it at a place open to the public or at any place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered; or
(2) to transmit or otherwise communicate a performance or display of the work to a place specified by clause (1) or to the public, by means of any device or process, whether the members of the public capable of receiving the performance or display receive it in the same place or in separate places and at the same time or at different times.
This is from the definitions (sec 101) in Title 17. Are you implying that 2-4 people is a "substantial number of persons"?
The biggest problem with red light cameras is that most people are completely unable to judge speed vs distance. This results in one of two common situations:
1) No red light camera and the person assumes they are going fast enough to get ALL THE WAY THROUGH the intersection before another direction turns green
or
2) Red light camera and the person assumes they have to SLAM their brakes to come to a stop in time. This can (and is) exacerbated by shortened yellow lights.
There's an easy, low cost multi-part solution that would have a better benefit:
1) Increase the duration of the yellow light signal by 0.5 seconds
2) Have all directions be red for 1 second in between transitions
3) Add a new painted road marker (i.e. a line across the road) to give people an idea of whether or not they can "make the light" if they're following the speed limit. If you're between the line and the stop light, it's safer to NOT brake. If you're before the line, you should be able to stop in time.
According to this article, the suit is being dropped because “numerous artists and other copyright owners” have approached David about joining up for a new action.
My first thought was why didn't she ask for the police. If she was a security risk, she should have requested a police presence immediately to clear her name so that she could fly on another airline.
The problem is, that a case settled out of court often isn't a loss so no fees are due. I'd love to see reform where any civil suit filed MUST be resolved as a "win" or "loss". If you choose to dismiss a case you've filed, that officially counts as a judgement against you including all associated jeapordies and liabilities - including fees.
The way things are now, civil suits are mostly risk free. If things go your way, the other party will offer to settle. If they don't, you offer to settle. In the end, money changes hands, lawyers get rich and zero precedents are getting set leading to further confusion of the issues.
I can't see this going much further before an over-aggressive (i.e. typical) lawyer starts throwing cease & desist letters everywhere, filing DMCA notices to take down content and claiming copyright infringement of the EULA.
On the post: Petitioning The Government Against Software Patents
Not well defined
My personal favorite right now is the Abolish the TSA petition. It's succinct but accurate and seems to get the point across.
On the post: Even If You Cancel Your OnStar Service, The Company Will Still Track (And Sell) Your Location
Re: OnStar Clarification
OnStar is now offering a free limited service for those customers who no longer want or can afford the premium service. With the free service, your account is maintained at OnStar for easy re-enrollment later. Additionally, we can still send you urgent alerts to issues in your area such as road closures, significant weather events (tornado warnings) and mandatory evacuations. This new service is 100% free but will require continued connection to the subscibed vehicle.
Someone was asleep at the switch on this one.
On the post: NFL Ramps Up Security Theatre
Do the math...
75,000 / 8 gates = 9375 fans per gate
9375 fans / 5 lines = 1875 fans per line
7200 seconds / 1875 fans = 3.8 seconds per fan
Yup, you can totally find hidden weapons when patted down by an untrained yellow shirted lackey in 3.8 seconds in the middle of Winter at Soldier Field...
I suspect there may end up being a few ticket refund fiascos before gate open times are adjusted to 4 hours before game time and we're expected to show up a minimum of 3 hours before kickoff.
On the post: Hotfile Responds To Lawsuit Filed By Studios, Countersues Warner Bros. For Copyright Misuse
Re:
Plaintiffs’ unreasonable delay resulted in prejudice by causing Hotfile to leave up the files that are now alleged to infringe
That says to me that some of the files identified as infringing were visited by a WB IP address prior to Hotfile receiving praise from WB for it's efforts.
Of course, in the end, it will come down to who blinks first. My bet - there will be an out of court settlement with sealed details and another opportunity for a bright line ruling will be lost.
On the post: Hollywood Accounting: Darth Vader Not Getting Paid, Because Return Of The Jedi Still Isn't Profitable
Re:
Oh wait, you can't
wuss.
On the post: Top Entrepreneurs Warn Congress: PROTECT IP Will Stifle Innovation & Hurt Job Growth
Re:
... except all you did was present your interpretation of what the post is about. Typically, "full disclosure" is an admission of RELEVANT facts, like your name, your work affiliations and whether or not you have a financial interest in the topic at hand. Since you provided none of the above, I wouldn't really call this comment a "full disclosure".
/bydhttmwfi
On the post: Top Entrepreneurs Warn Congress: PROTECT IP Will Stifle Innovation & Hurt Job Growth
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: MPAA's Bogus 'Piracy' Numbers Mean It Thinks Downloaders Would Buy 200 More DVDs Per Year
Re:
- Of the $58 Billion in lost economic output, they claim $16 Billion in lost earnings
- Immediately under that, they state that nearly 70% of film revenue comes from "DVD sales and other after markets".
70% * $16B = $11.2B
However, the $10 number is off too - that's a possible retail price. I'm pretty sure Wal-Mart doesn't pay $10 per disc. Last I checked with a friend who is a buyer for a chain store (500+ stores), they paid closer to $5 each.
$11.2B / $5 = 2.24 BILLION DVD's
- 29 Million American Adults "have downloaded or watched illegal copies of movies or TV shows online"
2.24B / 29M = 77 DVD's each
So, each and every downloader or online viewer of infringing content needs to head on over to their nearest DVD retailer and pony up for 77 new movies? Somehow, I don't think so.
On the post: 1984 Case Shows Abuse Of Phrase 'Public Performance' Has A Long, Ugly History
Re: Re: Re:
(1) to perform or display it at a place open to the public or at any place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered; or
(2) to transmit or otherwise communicate a performance or display of the work to a place specified by clause (1) or to the public, by means of any device or process, whether the members of the public capable of receiving the performance or display receive it in the same place or in separate places and at the same time or at different times.
This is from the definitions (sec 101) in Title 17. Are you implying that 2-4 people is a "substantial number of persons"?
On the post: By Definition, A Defensive Patent Is A Bad Patent
Re: Extremely Important Distinction
The system is broken. We all know it's broken. Accept it and start buying into the system already, would you?
/at least that's how I read it... :-)
On the post: Misleading Scientific American Report On Traffic Cameras
Re: Re: Still in favor
1) No red light camera and the person assumes they are going fast enough to get ALL THE WAY THROUGH the intersection before another direction turns green
or
2) Red light camera and the person assumes they have to SLAM their brakes to come to a stop in time. This can (and is) exacerbated by shortened yellow lights.
There's an easy, low cost multi-part solution that would have a better benefit:
1) Increase the duration of the yellow light signal by 0.5 seconds
2) Have all directions be red for 1 second in between transitions
3) Add a new painted road marker (i.e. a line across the road) to give people an idea of whether or not they can "make the light" if they're following the speed limit. If you're between the line and the stop light, it's safer to NOT brake. If you're before the line, you should be able to stop in time.
Works in theory... :-)
On the post: American-Statesman: Suspect Position, Bad Example, Another Bad Example, Debunked Statistics, Contradiction
Re:
On the post: Major US ISPs Agree To Five Strikes Plan, Rather Than Three
Re: Re: Re: Re: Anonymous Coward
Thanks... thanks a lot.
On the post: Major US ISPs Agree To Five Strikes Plan, Rather Than Three
Re: Re: Re: Re: Only the web!
On the post: Silly Promotional Stunt Lawsuit Against CBS For 'Profiting From Piracy' Dropped
You should have read Eriq Gardner's story
Somehow, I doubt we've seen the last of this one.
On the post: US Airways Employee Handles Complaining Passenger The 'TSA Way'
Re: Hold the fort
On the post: Righthaven Loses Again; Has To Pay Legal Fees
Re: Legal Reform
The way things are now, civil suits are mostly risk free. If things go your way, the other party will offer to settle. If they don't, you offer to settle. In the end, money changes hands, lawyers get rich and zero precedents are getting set leading to further confusion of the issues.
On the post: How Did The iTunes Terms Of Service Become A Cultural Phenomenon All Its Own?
Can't go much further...
On the post: Russia's 'Crime Of The Century' Highlights Importance Of Anonymous, Public Whistleblowing
Self-fulfilling meme
On the post: Apple Sues Teen Who Sold Repair Parts To Make Your iPhone Into A Mythical White iPhone
Re: Re: Re:
Next >>