Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 24 May 2010 @ 10:41am
Re: 50% of zero is zero
The answer is to adjust your business model. Don't focus on selling infinite goods(like digital books). That's a losing strategy. Instead, come up with ways to use the infinite goods to make your finite goods more valuable. You make your money off of the finite goods.
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 21 May 2010 @ 2:22pm
Not a source of revenue
Did anyone else catch that the first article states "City officials say they aren't making money off the red-light cameras which were installed in 2001." but in the very next sentace, there is a link to another article, and in that article, it says "The cameras also have been revenue producers. The cost of the cameras for a four-year period from 2002-2006 was $1.49 million while the gross revenue while the gross revenue for the same period was $1.78 million -- a net revenue of $295,000."
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 17 May 2010 @ 6:07am
Re: Re: Devil's Advocate
Not quite, but close.
What I am saying is that if Metallica offers to sell their CDs with the stipulation that you can't smash them with a hammer, and you agree to purchase the CD with that stipulation, then you should not be able to smash it. And if you don't agree to that stipulation, then you should not buy the CD to begin with.
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 17 May 2010 @ 6:02am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Devil's Advocate
Now, that is not what I stated. I never said anyone should not follow the law. My argument was that the law was not a good law, and it should be changed so that there was balance on both sides, allowing the creator to choose whether their works would eventually go public, be public immediately, or never go public.
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 17 May 2010 @ 5:51am
Re: Re: Re: Devil's Advocate
No, I can't. I'm trying to argue for a side I don't really believe in here (hence, why the subject is 'Devil's Advocte') and I've run out of reasons to argue.
But by the size of the comment thread, I'd say I kicked off some healthy discussion, so mission accomplished.
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 14 May 2010 @ 2:24pm
Re: Re: Devil's Advocate
Fair Use is a loophole that should never have been placed into the law. It prevents a creator from controlling their works, if they so desire. Nothing prevents a creator from putting their work into the public domain, or creative commons non-commercial, and allowing someone to use their work for whatever they like.
But the difference is that its the creator's choice. Under the current system of Fair Use, and with the changes proposed above, you are taking that choice away.
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 14 May 2010 @ 2:22pm
Re: Re: Devil's Advocate
Yes, if Ford wanted to put that sort of restriction in the contracts for selling their cars, then he should have that right. And if you don't like it, you have the right to buy from someone else, or at the very least, not buy from Ford.
Whats wrong with that? No one is forcing you to buy from Ford. But you are trying to force Ford into doing business in a way that they may not agree with. Why should you have that power over a company that isn't yours?
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 14 May 2010 @ 2:03pm
Devil's Advocate
The creator of a work should be able to decide how their work is being consumed and used. This change will undermine that ability, and take that ability to decide out of the creators hands.
If a creator wants to distribute his work in a way that restricts the use, then that is his right, and it is not our place to strip that right from him.
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 21 Apr 2010 @ 6:25am
Good Response
Personally, I think it was a good response. April Fools Pranks are meant to be humorous. To laugh in response is the appropriate immediate reaction. Especially over a tweet.
Now, the question becomes what is their long-term reaction? I would think that a press release about how well their composting project is going would be a great response the week after.
This sort of response would work well for big and small businesses.
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 19 Apr 2010 @ 7:15am
Wrong Moron
I was going to post something witty here. My username practically demands it. However, given that I'm completely sober at the moment, I don't think I'm the moron you are looking for.
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 13 Apr 2010 @ 12:17pm
Oh, the Humanity...
I like Dan's article, but I don't draw the same conclusion he does. He was actually in the room, so I could be way off base here, but when I hear that a company doesn't want to try the experiment because they don't want to upset their customers, that doesn't make me think that they are great humanitarians. That makes me think that they are greedily hoarding the customers they already have, and don't want to risk loosing the profits they are generating.
Am I cynical? Yes. But that doesn't mean I'm not right.
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 12 Apr 2010 @ 1:51pm
Mike, I'm not sure I agree with your disagreement..
Let me hit the easy point first with your comment about cub reporters, who don't ask questions because they aren't comfortable, or who are fed press releases without asking hard questions. I don't think that this is the point she was making. An inexperienced reporter is going to have this problem no matter what. But an experienced reporter who is reporting on a subject they are not an expert in will have more confidence and be able to pick apart something that is nicely packaged, because they have had experience in other areas. If you've seen experienced reporters who take the nice package at face value, whether they are covering their normal beat, or branching out into something new, I would say that they probably just aren't very good investigative reporters.
This leads up to the more challenging question of whether or not this expert bias is a problem. You state:
"even after nodding my head through Wallace's column, after thinking about it a bit, I'm no longer sure I really believe it makes sense. Go back to her opening anecdote. In that case, she's actually as guilty as the reporters she's mocking. "
This seems contradictory. It looks to me like you are saying that this expert bias doesn't exist because she is falling for it as well. But logically, if she's falling for it, then it must exist.
It seems to me like Expert Bias exists, but it can stem from multiple sources. In one case, Lane recognizes that other reporters are biased because they are familiar and knowledgeable with the industry. In the other case, we recognize that Lane is biased because she has insider information.
So, with two examples of this Expert Bias, and you even kicking in a few examples from your own past, why would you not think that it makes sense?
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 29 Mar 2010 @ 2:23pm
Re: Re: Yes it is...
A website that offers the ability to post anonymously should never reveal one of its own posters who has chosen to make use of that ability. They have the responsibility to make the effort to protect the posters anonymity in the same way that a reporter has a responsibility to protect the identity of their sources.
However, if they are discovered by a third-party (perhaps some other investigative reporter?) without the assistance of the website, and that third-party reveals the poster's identity, the website is off the hook.
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 29 Mar 2010 @ 8:43am
Suggestive Critisism
Yeaup. I would certainly be confused.
Suggestion: If they were to change their name to Project L.E.G.O., it would make me pause from my constant hurry and wonder if there might be a different meaning here instead of instantly assuming they meant the toy blocks.
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 25 Mar 2010 @ 11:11am
Being broadcast over a specific medium, even public access television, would have no affect on whether or not material is copyrighted.
I guess I would want to know if they are claiming copyright over any recordings made of the meeting, or only over some sort of 'official' recording made? If John Q. Citizen brought his camcorder in and made his own recording, and they tried to claim copyright over that, then there is a serious issue.
On the post: Could You Replace Copyrights And Patents With A Fairness-Based Legal Liability?
Re: "but the book makes a very compelling argument that copyright law is a clear violation of First Amendment principles."
I would think that if it gets discussed regularly in an academic setting, then it at least has enough basis to merit serious consideration.
On the post: Could You Replace Copyrights And Patents With A Fairness-Based Legal Liability?
Re: 50% of zero is zero
CwF + RtB = Profit
On the post: Could You Replace Copyrights And Patents With A Fairness-Based Legal Liability?
What is Fair?
On the post: Attorney Decodes Numbers On Redlight Camera Photo To Prove That The Light Was Green
Not a source of revenue
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Re: Re: Devil's Advocate
If your garden includes Azalias, then you should buy Azalia-friendly shears. Why is that so difficult?
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Re: Re: Devil's Advocate
What I am saying is that if Metallica offers to sell their CDs with the stipulation that you can't smash them with a hammer, and you agree to purchase the CD with that stipulation, then you should not be able to smash it. And if you don't agree to that stipulation, then you should not buy the CD to begin with.
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Devil's Advocate
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Devil's Advocate
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Re: Re: Re: Devil's Advocate
But by the size of the comment thread, I'd say I kicked off some healthy discussion, so mission accomplished.
What more is there that I need to say?
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Re: Re: Devil's Advocate
But the difference is that its the creator's choice. Under the current system of Fair Use, and with the changes proposed above, you are taking that choice away.
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Re: Re: Devil's Advocate
Whats wrong with that? No one is forcing you to buy from Ford. But you are trying to force Ford into doing business in a way that they may not agree with. Why should you have that power over a company that isn't yours?
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Devil's Advocate
If a creator wants to distribute his work in a way that restricts the use, then that is his right, and it is not our place to strip that right from him.
On the post: McDonald's Laughs Off Criticism Embedded In April Fool's Joke
Good Response
Now, the question becomes what is their long-term reaction? I would think that a press release about how well their composting project is going would be a great response the week after.
This sort of response would work well for big and small businesses.
On the post: Judge Rules: Drunk Moron In A Hurry Wouldn't Know Tequila From Maker's Mark
Wrong Moron
On the post: One Reason Companies Don't Do 'Free': They're Scared Of Pissing Off Those Who Bought?
Oh, the Humanity...
Am I cynical? Yes. But that doesn't mean I'm not right.
On the post: Is There A Bias In Expertise? Or Is The Problem Just In Silencing Discussion?
Let me hit the easy point first with your comment about cub reporters, who don't ask questions because they aren't comfortable, or who are fed press releases without asking hard questions. I don't think that this is the point she was making. An inexperienced reporter is going to have this problem no matter what. But an experienced reporter who is reporting on a subject they are not an expert in will have more confidence and be able to pick apart something that is nicely packaged, because they have had experience in other areas. If you've seen experienced reporters who take the nice package at face value, whether they are covering their normal beat, or branching out into something new, I would say that they probably just aren't very good investigative reporters.
This leads up to the more challenging question of whether or not this expert bias is a problem. You state:
"even after nodding my head through Wallace's column, after thinking about it a bit, I'm no longer sure I really believe it makes sense. Go back to her opening anecdote. In that case, she's actually as guilty as the reporters she's mocking. "
This seems contradictory. It looks to me like you are saying that this expert bias doesn't exist because she is falling for it as well. But logically, if she's falling for it, then it must exist.
It seems to me like Expert Bias exists, but it can stem from multiple sources. In one case, Lane recognizes that other reporters are biased because they are familiar and knowledgeable with the industry. In the other case, we recognize that Lane is biased because she has insider information.
So, with two examples of this Expert Bias, and you even kicking in a few examples from your own past, why would you not think that it makes sense?
On the post: If It's Newsworthy, Should A Website Reveal A Previously Pseudononymous Poster?
Re: Re: Yes it is...
However, if they are discovered by a third-party (perhaps some other investigative reporter?) without the assistance of the website, and that third-party reveals the poster's identity, the website is off the hook.
On the post: Is A Moron In A Hurry Confused Between Plastic Building Blocks And A Youth Empowerment Charity?
Suggestive Critisism
Suggestion: If they were to change their name to Project L.E.G.O., it would make me pause from my constant hurry and wonder if there might be a different meaning here instead of instantly assuming they meant the toy blocks.
On the post: Is A Moron In A Hurry Confused Between Plastic Building Blocks And A Youth Empowerment Charity?
Re: Re:
On the post: New Jersey Town Claims Copyright Over Public Meetings
I guess I would want to know if they are claiming copyright over any recordings made of the meeting, or only over some sort of 'official' recording made? If John Q. Citizen brought his camcorder in and made his own recording, and they tried to claim copyright over that, then there is a serious issue.
Next >>