I listen to about 95% of my music through spotify, and I pay the $5 a month for no commercials. The other 5% is from driving around and listening to the radio. So pretty much spotify is the reason I don't need to buy/download/whatever music anymore, not anything else that the music industry might claim.
I would think that the 10 year deal with Universal would prevent that, since the whole point is to force people to continue paying for cable. If HBO just bypasses that for their own service without Netflix, Universal is just as screwed as if they went to Netflix
I think people are missing the larger idea of what's happening here, and that's HBO becoming the closest thing Netflix has to a direct competitor. The groundwork is already in place with the aforementioned Go service. Add in exclusive access to movies from all those studios, and $15 a month for HBO Go starts looking nearly as appealing as $15 a month for Netflix.
I don't consider that a competitor at all, certainly not one for the same price. Because in order to get that you need the $100+ cable package, which is why it will never compete directly against Netflix.
If having the device active was all it took to potentially take down a plane then their rules wouldn't do jack shit to prevent that anyways. I've listened to my phone (in airplane mode) while taking off, all you have to do is have a hoodie on. They can't stop that, so how would they stop someone trying to 'take down the plane' by having the device on, when they could just leave it in their pocket or face down, and they wouldn't even know it's on. And an electronic device doesn't hurt more when it's turned on, just an fyi to the FAA
Isn't the whole point of spending all that money for the advanced features, Which the other Tim said in the article No one spends $80 for a "plug and play" mouse (or over $300 with the keyboard -- which also requires a connection and an account).
It was published in 2005
$20k for a 7 (almost 8) year old book in a week (or two, don't remember how long this bundle was)? That's pretty damn good if you ask me. Not to mention Bob just ignores most everything that doesn't go well with his 'argument'
Re: That's a narrow niche: wait until China copies 'em.
Have you never heard of the CwF thing they have talked about here? That's exactly what this is about. CW&T connected with their fans, and appealed to them to not support the other company who copied. If CW&T had been a shitty company, I doubt people would have really cared too much about supporting CW&T vs another company. But yeah, Mike never talks about that and is totally against it.
by providing the first few lines of our stories to Internet users, the service reduces the chances that they will look at the entire story in our web sites
Is the news so boring that after a few lines they are don't want to read any more than the first couple lines?
Nobody said it was completely stopping innovation. We have said several times that they are slowing/hindering innovation. How much faster would it grow if they spent more money on innovating than on lawsuits? How many more startups would be successful if they didn't have to worry about being sued out of existence because of the cost, not because of a valid claim.
Yeah, cause the patents that Apple is using to sue people over are brand new and innovative, and not overly broad at all. I mean slide to unlock?! holy crap, where do they come up with this. Bouncing screen animations, Open as, those guys are brilliant
Universal's employee who sent the DMCA "had no idea what to look for," that still might not be enough to show subjective bad faith
How is having someone look for something, when they don't know what to look for, not bad faith? The only way it could be worse I'd think is if they didn't have anyone look at it (which they automated takedowns do).
Sorry I sold you this fake painting, but I asked someone on the street if it was legit and they said they thought so...
So they don't know when things aren't infringing, they can't just throw videos through a filter to see if they are actually legal content, but Google should be able to do that, right?
They're the ones that are fighting to keep artists in control.
That's funny bob. They don't give two shits about the artists. They want to keep control, they want money, they give/let the artist keep as little money/control as possible.
Also, where is it that they are giving away free copies? The only free copies Google gives away are of books in the public domain. Being able to see a couple pages does not constitute giving away the book.
The publishers were tiny compared to Big Search and they were still able to stand tall like David and insist that Goliath must pay them a fair share for their hard work.
Stand tall by waiting 7 years before agreeing to what Google originally proposed?
On the post: Music Industry Data: Sales Up, Piracy Down... But It's Not Because Of Any 'Anti-Piracy' Efforts
Spotify
On the post: Dear HBO, Disney, Netflix Et Al: Fragmenting Online TV Lets Piracy Keep Its Biggest Advantage
Re: Re: HBO Go != Netflix Competitor
On the post: Dear HBO, Disney, Netflix Et Al: Fragmenting Online TV Lets Piracy Keep Its Biggest Advantage
HBO Go != Netflix Competitor
I don't consider that a competitor at all, certainly not one for the same price. Because in order to get that you need the $100+ cable package, which is why it will never compete directly against Netflix.
On the post: FAA Facing More Pressure To Change Its Rules On Electronic Device Usage
On the post: When A Mouse Requires An Internet Connection, You're Doing 'Cloud' Wrong
Re: This is just incorrect
On the post: Exploring The Earnings Of A Humble Bundle Author
Re: Re: Zero?
$20k for a 7 (almost 8) year old book in a week (or two, don't remember how long this bundle was)? That's pretty damn good if you ask me. Not to mention Bob just ignores most everything that doesn't go well with his 'argument'
On the post: Why Hardware Patent Trolls May Be The Next Big Problem
Re: That's a narrow niche: wait until China copies 'em.
On the post: Brazilian Newspapers Apparently Don't Want Traffic; They All Opt Out Of Google News
Boring news?
Is the news so boring that after a few lines they are don't want to read any more than the first couple lines?
On the post: Apparently If You Explain Many Ways That Artists Can Make Money Outside Of Copyright, You're Against Artists Getting Paid
Re: Let's not "push it"
On the post: There Are 250,000 Active Patents That Impact Smartphones; Representing One In Six Active Patents Today
Re: BUT the whole field just keeps growing!
On the post: There Are 250,000 Active Patents That Impact Smartphones; Representing One In Six Active Patents Today
Re:
On the post: There Are 250,000 Active Patents That Impact Smartphones; Representing One In Six Active Patents Today
On the post: Why It's Almost Impossible To Get Punished For A Bogus DMCA Takedown
Re: Well, in this case, the reason is NO ACTUAL HARM.
But the rest of the world does not have the video to play all they want.
On the post: Why It's Almost Impossible To Get Punished For A Bogus DMCA Takedown
Bad faith
How is having someone look for something, when they don't know what to look for, not bad faith? The only way it could be worse I'd think is if they didn't have anyone look at it (which they automated takedowns do).
Sorry I sold you this fake painting, but I asked someone on the street if it was legit and they said they thought so...
On the post: Dancing Baby Video Fight Heads Back To Court: Will A Bogus Takedown Finally Get Punished?
On the post: Hollywood Star Rosario Dawson Speaks Out Against Hollywood's 'Six Strikes' Plan
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Hollywood Star Rosario Dawson Speaks Out Against Hollywood's 'Six Strikes' Plan
Re: Re:
That's funny bob. They don't give two shits about the artists. They want to keep control, they want money, they give/let the artist keep as little money/control as possible.
On the post: Copyright Maximalists Can't Help But Inject Bogus 'Copyright Wins!' Argument Into Google/Publisher Settlement
Re: Is Google going to make the FULL works FREELY available?
On the post: Copyright Maximalists Can't Help But Inject Bogus 'Copyright Wins!' Argument Into Google/Publisher Settlement
Re: Et tu, copyright deniers?
On the post: Copyright Maximalists Can't Help But Inject Bogus 'Copyright Wins!' Argument Into Google/Publisher Settlement
Re: Et tu, copyright deniers?
Stand tall by waiting 7 years before agreeing to what Google originally proposed?
Next >>