I want my tv and Internet from DIFFERENT companies
TV content and ISPs should be two different companies. That way each content provider works with all ISPs and your ISP works with all content. Stop the abuses we have already seen with fast lanes those who pay twice; and slow lanes for competing tv content providers.
No ISP should favor a particular content provider. And vice versa.
It keeps competition healthy. Content providers should compete to provide the best content at the best price.
ISPs should compete to deliver the best internet service at the best price -- regardless of what you use your internet for (which is none of their business).
Is the TSA as good at risk assessment as it is at assessing whether a passenger has cash or other valuable items, such as ipads, that should be removed from the passenger or their luggage?
Is the TSA's risk assessment as good as it's ability to assess whether an attractive person needs to be groped?
The backdooring of encryption is privitizing value (eg, government snoops and voyeurs) and socializing costs (eg, easier for hacker or foreign agent to break into bank account, stock exchange, airline systems, utility systems).
Maybe the judge (or the Florida legislature) should focus on shutting down these criminal shops that sell cameras and other criminal paraphernalia such as lenses and camera bags.
If you don't believe these things can be used for crimes, I will point you to the simple fact that a large expensive heavy camera lens can be used to club someone over the head, and a camera bag could hide terrorist things, like film or (gasp!) SD cards.
Photography (and the intarwebtubes) represent a threat to the state that is at least as bad as the printing press. Therefore new regulations must be required. (Don't get me started about the dangers of 3D printing and how the sky is falling.)
What Google did was take Apache Harmony, an independently developed, open source Java implementation, which Sun knew about and had no problem with.
Most of the contribution and effort in Apache Harmony came from IBM.
Apache Harmony does not have any Oracle code in it.
Furthermore, Oracle's Java, at the time is under the GPL license. So how can the API's not be under the same license, since the APIs are in the source code.
In a nutshell: Google has money. Oracle wants it.
Before Oracle bought Sun, Sun knew about Android and had made public statements about not having a problem with it.
> Frankly, I rather doubt there is anything the movie industry could > do to satisfy the deep seated animus regularly exhibited here short of > totally disclaiming and abandoning reliance upon the longstanding > body of law we refer to as copyright law.
You are wrong. But you are too blind to see it.
Here are a dozen things the movie industry could do.
1. Quit focusing on Google which has absolutely nothing to do with piracy. 2. Go after actual infringers. With proof. Using due process. You know, the site hosting infringing content. Free Clue: if you take those down, then those sites don't appear in Google. (and other search engines!) 3. Quit trying to use copyright as a censorship tool. 4. Quit trying to create laws the impose liability upon everyone except the actual infringers. 5. Try making movies that I actually want to see. (There is exactly one movie this summer that I am interested in seeing -- this is the first time in several years. This new stupid anti-piracy ad for three minutes is giving me 2nd thoughts.) 6. If you want to actually help the hard working people you feature in your anti piracy ad, then get rid of Hollywood Accounting. 7. Quit complaining about the Creative Commons license. 8. If I buy a DVD (or CD) I should own either a piece of plastic that costs virtually nothing to produce, or I should own a licensed copy that allows me to very cheaply replace the worn piece of plastic. Or have reasonable backup policies. Most people are honest. But you'll never see this. 9. Quit trying to destroy the public domain. Quit trying to re-copyright it. 10. Quit extending copyright. 11. In short, quit abusing copyright. 12. Quit trolling TechDirt
Extra freebie:
13. Get your head out of the sand. Quit being stuck in the past. See the future. Technology is your friend. It always has been historically even when you fought it kicking and screaming.
Every Who on the Internet liked Netflix a lot... But the Cable who lived north of Internet, Did NOT! The Cable HATED Netflix, the whole TV streaming! Now, please don't ask why. No one quite knows the reason.
It could be his head wasn't screwed on just right. It could be, perhaps, that his greed was too tight. But the reason most likely for the copyright pigs May have been that their ego was six sizes too big.
Whatever the reason, Their heart or their greed, They stood on the precipice of Cable TV. Staring down from their cave with a sour, greedy fret, At the warm lighted screens all over the Internet.
For they knew down on the Internet Every Who they could see Was watching Netflix original series Instead of Cable TV!
And that new streaming content! cable snarled with a sneer, Streaming TV is popular, it is practically here! Then they growled with their long fingers nervously drumming, "I MUST find some way to stop the Streaming from coming!"
For in the future cable knew, all the Who girls and boys, Would be watching on smart phones, their tablets, gadgets and toys!
Then they got an idea! An awful idea! The Cable got a horrible, awful idea! "I know just what to do!" The Cable laughed like a brute. I'll call my lawyers", they snarled, "to file a lawsuit!"
Copyright has already fragmented into many ridiculous rights for the playing and listening of music.
They could just make up some more. * Separate licensing for right to listen on an airplane * Separate licensing for right to listen from a cell phone. (Hey, getting to hear your music from your phone adds value to that MP3 you bought)
Re: Re: YOU HAVE A "RIGHT" TO PAY FOR COPIES! THAT IS IT, PIRATES!
Yes, that.
I have bought MP3's from Amazon. I have never shared them. I have enough backup copies on my several devices and a backup drive that I will never lose it to a defective media.
That's how it ought to be. I paid for a license for private listening. That's how I use it.
This suggests a fantastic scam. One that copyright maximalists should take note of.
Deliberately make some percentage of your physical recordings defective. People cannot return them if they've opened them. Even if the original purchaser returns it unopened, some other sucker is going to end up holding the defective copy that cannot be returned. Some (large) percent of those people will simply fork out to buy another copy, hoping it is not one of the XX percent of defective ones.
This scam is not quite as good as the scam of imaginary property itself. But still could provide the copyright maximalists with desperately needed supplementary income.
Of course, a way to fix this would be that you can only return a defective item for an exchange of the same item.
This tilts things much more in the consumer's favor. For the cost of only one copy, one could return and exchange a large number of defective copies. (Assuming they were all originally defective of course. Not to suggest doing something improper. No, nosiree.)
It is astonishing that there would even be any dissent
I find it astonishing that there would be any dissent that you can charge someone to use something that is in the public domain.
Any contract regarding payments for LIMITED TIME monopolies, such as patents and copyrights, should always be interpreted as having an end date once that monopoly ends.
After watching The Internet's Own Boy, there is absolutely nothing that the U.S. Attorney's Office could do that I would find shocking. Probably not even if they tortured and murdered people.
Weasely way to have submarine patents / functional claims
Your honor! I am not making a functional claim!
Traveling back in time is the specific implementation of how I do the functional claim of altering the past to my advantage.
My patent on time travel, which has applications such as altering the past to ones own advantage, has been submarined all these years beneath the waves of bureaucracy. It has surfaced now that the evil defendant has come up with an implementation that infringes my invention of time travel, which has applications such as altering the past.
On the post: Comcast's New Half-Assed Answer To Netflix Is No Answer At All
I want my tv and Internet from DIFFERENT companies
No ISP should favor a particular content provider. And vice versa.
It keeps competition healthy. Content providers should compete to provide the best content at the best price.
ISPs should compete to deliver the best internet service at the best price -- regardless of what you use your internet for (which is none of their business).
On the post: TSA Blows Off Inspector General's Suggestion Boarding Pass Information Be Encrypted
TSA risk assessment
Is the TSA's risk assessment as good as it's ability to assess whether an attractive person needs to be groped?
On the post: CIA: Repeat After Me. The NYPD Is NOT A REAL Intelligence Agency.
Please do not underestimate the importance of NYPD
On the post: Two Of The Most Ridiculous Statements From Senators At Yesterday's Encryption Hearings
Privatizing Value, Socializing Costs
On the post: Florida Judge Sued After Banning Protestors From 'Questioning Integrity Of The Court'
Re:
On the post: Florida Judge Sued After Banning Protestors From 'Questioning Integrity Of The Court'
Photography is a crime
If you don't believe these things can be used for crimes, I will point you to the simple fact that a large expensive heavy camera lens can be used to club someone over the head, and a camera bag could hide terrorist things, like film or (gasp!) SD cards.
Photography (and the intarwebtubes) represent a threat to the state that is at least as bad as the printing press. Therefore new regulations must be required. (Don't get me started about the dangers of 3D printing and how the sky is falling.)
On the post: With 'Pregnant Woman Mode,' Chinese Router Maker Begins Marketing To Paranoids
Obsession
Such things have no place when trying to determine public policy.
(I wouldn't put a /sarc tag, but it almost seems necessary.)
On the post: Supreme Court Won't Hear Oracle v. Google Case, Leaving APIs Copyrightable And Innovation At Risk
Re:
What Google did was take Apache Harmony, an independently developed, open source Java implementation, which Sun knew about and had no problem with.
Most of the contribution and effort in Apache Harmony came from IBM.
Apache Harmony does not have any Oracle code in it.
Furthermore, Oracle's Java, at the time is under the GPL license. So how can the API's not be under the same license, since the APIs are in the source code.
In a nutshell: Google has money. Oracle wants it.
Before Oracle bought Sun, Sun knew about Android and had made public statements about not having a problem with it.
On the post: MPAA Targets New Anti-Piracy Ads... At People Who Already Paid To Go See Movies
Re:
Also cessation of breathing and heart beat is unlikely to keep you from receiving demand letters.
* or someone who merely claims to be an agent but in fact does not represent the copyright holder
On the post: MPAA Targets New Anti-Piracy Ads... At People Who Already Paid To Go See Movies
A dozen things the Movie Industy could do
> do to satisfy the deep seated animus regularly exhibited here short of
> totally disclaiming and abandoning reliance upon the longstanding
> body of law we refer to as copyright law.
You are wrong. But you are too blind to see it.
Here are a dozen things the movie industry could do.
1. Quit focusing on Google which has absolutely nothing to do with piracy.
2. Go after actual infringers. With proof. Using due process. You know, the site hosting infringing content. Free Clue: if you take those down, then those sites don't appear in Google. (and other search engines!)
3. Quit trying to use copyright as a censorship tool.
4. Quit trying to create laws the impose liability upon everyone except the actual infringers.
5. Try making movies that I actually want to see. (There is exactly one movie this summer that I am interested in seeing -- this is the first time in several years. This new stupid anti-piracy ad for three minutes is giving me 2nd thoughts.)
6. If you want to actually help the hard working people you feature in your anti piracy ad, then get rid of Hollywood Accounting.
7. Quit complaining about the Creative Commons license.
8. If I buy a DVD (or CD) I should own either a piece of plastic that costs virtually nothing to produce, or I should own a licensed copy that allows me to very cheaply replace the worn piece of plastic. Or have reasonable backup policies. Most people are honest. But you'll never see this.
9. Quit trying to destroy the public domain. Quit trying to re-copyright it.
10. Quit extending copyright.
11. In short, quit abusing copyright.
12. Quit trolling TechDirt
Extra freebie:
13. Get your head out of the sand. Quit being stuck in the past. See the future. Technology is your friend. It always has been historically even when you fought it kicking and screaming.
On the post: Years Of Pretending Netflix Cord Cutting Wasn't Real Is Biting The Cable Industry In The Ass
How the Cable TV stole Internet Streaming
But the Cable who lived north of Internet, Did NOT!
The Cable HATED Netflix, the whole TV streaming!
Now, please don't ask why. No one quite knows the reason.
It could be his head wasn't screwed on just right.
It could be, perhaps, that his greed was too tight.
But the reason most likely for the copyright pigs
May have been that their ego was six sizes too big.
Whatever the reason, Their heart or their greed,
They stood on the precipice of Cable TV.
Staring down from their cave with a sour, greedy fret,
At the warm lighted screens all over the Internet.
For they knew down on the Internet
Every Who they could see
Was watching Netflix original series
Instead of Cable TV!
And that new streaming content! cable snarled with a sneer,
Streaming TV is popular, it is practically here!
Then they growled with their long fingers nervously drumming,
"I MUST find some way to stop the Streaming from coming!"
For in the future cable knew, all the Who girls and boys,
Would be watching on smart phones, their tablets, gadgets and toys!
Then they got an idea! An awful idea!
The Cable got a horrible, awful idea!
"I know just what to do!" The Cable laughed like a brute.
I'll call my lawyers", they snarled, "to file a lawsuit!"
On the post: Legal Giant Dentons Demonstrates Exactly How Not To Respond To Critical Media Coverage
Don't pick a fight with a publisher
Don't pick a fight with someone who buys electrons by the barrel.
On the post: Australia Passes Its Own SOPA, Ignores All Concerns About It
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: UK High Court Strips Away Short-Lived Private Copying Right, Buying Recording Industry's Demented Assertions
Re: Re:
They could just make up some more.
* Separate licensing for right to listen on an airplane
* Separate licensing for right to listen from a cell phone. (Hey, getting to hear your music from your phone adds value to that MP3 you bought)
Etc. . . start your imaginations
On the post: UK High Court Strips Away Short-Lived Private Copying Right, Buying Recording Industry's Demented Assertions
Re: Whistling in the dark
One must also be objectively realistic about what history teaches will eventually happen.
On the post: UK High Court Strips Away Short-Lived Private Copying Right, Buying Recording Industry's Demented Assertions
Re: Re: YOU HAVE A "RIGHT" TO PAY FOR COPIES! THAT IS IT, PIRATES!
I have bought MP3's from Amazon. I have never shared them. I have enough backup copies on my several devices and a backup drive that I will never lose it to a defective media.
That's how it ought to be. I paid for a license for private listening. That's how I use it.
On the post: UK High Court Strips Away Short-Lived Private Copying Right, Buying Recording Industry's Demented Assertions
Re: Re:
Deliberately make some percentage of your physical recordings defective. People cannot return them if they've opened them. Even if the original purchaser returns it unopened, some other sucker is going to end up holding the defective copy that cannot be returned. Some (large) percent of those people will simply fork out to buy another copy, hoping it is not one of the XX percent of defective ones.
This scam is not quite as good as the scam of imaginary property itself. But still could provide the copyright maximalists with desperately needed supplementary income.
Of course, a way to fix this would be that you can only return a defective item for an exchange of the same item.
This tilts things much more in the consumer's favor. For the cost of only one copy, one could return and exchange a large number of defective copies. (Assuming they were all originally defective of course. Not to suggest doing something improper. No, nosiree.)
On the post: Supreme Court Quotes Spiderman's 'Great Power, Great Responsibility' Line In Rejecting Royalties On Expired Patent
It is astonishing that there would even be any dissent
Any contract regarding payments for LIMITED TIME monopolies, such as patents and copyrights, should always be interpreted as having an end date once that monopoly ends.
On the post: Evidence Suggests DOJ Got A Gag Order Silencing Reason Over Its Bogus Subpoena
U.S. Attorney's Office, shocking?
On the post: Appeals Court May Have Finally Reversed An Error That Enabled Bogus Software Patent Claims
Weasely way to have submarine patents / functional claims
Traveling back in time is the specific implementation of how I do the functional claim of altering the past to my advantage.
My patent on time travel, which has applications such as altering the past to ones own advantage, has been submarined all these years beneath the waves of bureaucracy. It has surfaced now that the evil defendant has come up with an implementation that infringes my invention of time travel, which has applications such as altering the past.
Next >>