"He is unable to come out and say "I support piracy", yet without it, his business models would not work out very well at all."
It�s amusing that you accuse Mike of being "painfully wrong", and then make this painfully wrong statement.
One of the key points of the new business models espoused here is that you give away the non-scarce in order to leverage sales of the scarce. If someone takes something that�s being offered for free, that�s not piracy! Mike�s business model have nothing to do with piracy at all.
Count that guy as someone we've figured out. Do you think acting like an asshole on the internet is going to increase sales of your music/product or decrease them? Whether you're right or wrong, that kind of braindead behaviour only drives paying customers and fans away. It never attracts more.
"Just like the SOPA deal, the opponents are more interested in their own business models and vested interests, and are going to scream loudly to get it stopped. They don�t respresent a majority, they don�t even appear to represent a good sized minority."
This is a ridiculous statement. In fact, you�ve just perfectly described SOPA proponents. The movie studios, record labels, etc are more interested in their own (outdated) business models and vested interests, and scream loudly (via lobbying the government) to get it enacted. They don�t represent a majority; they don�t even appear to represent a good sized minority (0.14% of the US�s GDP from memory).
"It�s not democratic when a small group of people try to tell the larger group what is and what is not right."
The "small group", which were not small by the standards of public protests, were not trying to tell a larger group what is and what is not right, they were trying to tell a the government what is and what is not right. It�s a rather important difference, and it�s amazing you don�t understand this.
The flight risk argument is nonsense, for three very important reasons.
Firstly, he has consistently stated that the charges will be vigorously defended with the intent of completely clearing the company of all changes. Any flight would seriously undermine that defence, and be completely counter-productive.
Second, flight would almost certainly guarantee he would not see any of the money and assets seized even again, so he�d be on the run with nothing.
Third, (and as a parent, equally as important IMO), he has three young children and a wife due to give birth to twins within a few weeks. Those so sure he�s a flight risk must be pretty callous people themselves if they thing that�s not an extraordinarily compelling reason to stay exactly where he is.
"Did companies lose potential profit as a result of it? -Without question. "
Thank you for demonstrating your total lack of understanding of economics. You'd get laughed out of a first year econ class for making a ridiculous statement like that.
"Does that mean there should be quantifiable evidence to support an indictment? -Under present law, yes - but you do realise that it puts copyright into a 'Catch 22' situation, right?"
Right, and if a law creates a Catch-22 situation, it's a bad law. Copyright law is simply inconsistent with the realities of the digital world we now live in.
Just an observation. You don't seem to understand how blogs work.
Techdirt articles always contain links to source information, and often also contain links to previous posts where a point being made in the post was discussed in greater detail. Those previous posts will also have contain links to source information, and often also contain links to previous posts where a point being made in the post was discussed in greater detail. Do you see the pattern forming here?
If you can't decide whether or not you believe something written, follow the info as far back as need to make up your mind.
"I don't think it's fair to put the burden on the artists. Artists are not businessmen, nor should we expect them to be."
How are artists any different to other self-employed people? Replace the word "artists� with pretty much any other trade, and you might see how silly this argument sounds.
"If artists wanna DIY it, more power to 'em, but they shouldn't be forced to."
Nobody is forcing anybody to do anything. Why would you even say that?
"yet you take Techdirt and Mike completely at their word, even though we have already shown that Mike is very good a cherry picking facts an ignoring reality."
The irony is strong with this one.
First, you have no idea whether I (because I can't speak for others) take Mike at his word, or in fact follow the links (always!) provided and make my own judgement based on several sources of info. You have no way of knowing how much or how little we take completely at his word, so your accusation is completely baseless. You claim it because you'd like it to be true, despite any evidence either way, which is true to form for most copyright supporters.
Second, you guys really need to get your heads around the fact that due to decades of lies, mistruths, exaggerations, dodgy accounting, attempting crippling of technology, disrespect for culture, and plain ol' abuse of artists and consumers alike, we no longer have any reason to trust those who put themselves in between creators and buyers and attempt to control markets for their own financial gain. Again, so it might sink in, WE DON'T TRUST YOU. Even if you all suddenly started behaving tomorrow, it would still take many, many years before you could build up any significant level of trust. Simply, you'll have to try much harder to convince me than Mike does.
"I can (barely) accept the very thin argument of censorship in relationship to copyright violations..."
And that is why you will have derision and scorn heaped upon you by most people here, and in fact by most people who value basic human rights over an invented (and abused) monopoly right.
"The article says it's merely a function of being liked."
The article says it's a function of being liked because of the way you treat your fans, and conversely, being disliked because of the way you mistreat your fans. Learn to read all the words, not just some.
"But they could be employing more people if parasites weren't cutting their revenue in half. "
They could be employing more people if they decided to concentrate on providing what people want, i.e. not shiny plastic discs, not over-priced locked-down digital files, not ridiculous windowed releases, not anachronistic geographical restrictions, etc...
"It NEVER ceases to amaze me how obsessed you are with the pirates' rights, but you couldn't care less about artists' rights--the very artists you pretend to care about. "
You're under the mistaken impression that all rights are of equal value. You're wrong. In case you haven't noticed, the public's respect for copyright is at an all-time low and trending downwards. Chalk it up to decades of abuse of copyright laws at the expense of both the public and artists. So spare us your moral indignity, because the rights to free (legal) speech and due process are more important than copyright.
"You're so transparent, it literally makes me sick."
Then see a doctor, you have other issues. Ignoring important physical symptoms now could be something you regret later.
"The real story here is your INCESSANT need to defend pirates at all cost, while showing absolutely no concern for those who are having their rights violated by your pirate friends."
Actually at no point did Mike defend anyone; the issue was the grossly false info provided by SOCA. But don't let facts spoil your little rant. And it's telling that you have no issue with a government agency using gross exaggerations and outright lies to scare people into compliance. That says a lot about you as a person.
"You are truly a disgusting human being."
That you view copyright as being more important than other more fundamental rights, and support government lies, makes me feel something similar about you.
On the post: Would You Rather Be 'Right' Or Realistic?
Re: Re:
It�s amusing that you accuse Mike of being "painfully wrong", and then make this painfully wrong statement.
One of the key points of the new business models espoused here is that you give away the non-scarce in order to leverage sales of the scarce. If someone takes something that�s being offered for free, that�s not piracy! Mike�s business model have nothing to do with piracy at all.
On the post: Director Alex Cox ('Repo Man') Says 'Pirate My Stuff'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Option 1: Throw in snide comment and look like an asshole.
Option 2: Submit the story!
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re:
On the post: If You're Going To Compare The Old Music Biz Model With The New Music Biz Model, At Least Make Some Sense
Re:
On the post: European Commission Suggests ACTA's Opponents Don't Have 'Democratic Intentions'
Re:
This is a ridiculous statement. In fact, you�ve just perfectly described SOPA proponents. The movie studios, record labels, etc are more interested in their own (outdated) business models and vested interests, and scream loudly (via lobbying the government) to get it enacted. They don�t represent a majority; they don�t even appear to represent a good sized minority (0.14% of the US�s GDP from memory).
"It�s not democratic when a small group of people try to tell the larger group what is and what is not right."
The "small group", which were not small by the standards of public protests, were not trying to tell a larger group what is and what is not right, they were trying to tell a the government what is and what is not right. It�s a rather important difference, and it�s amazing you don�t understand this.
On the post: Megaupload Boss Kim Dotcom Granted Bail After US Fails To Prove He's Got Cash Stashed Away To Make An Escape
Re:
Firstly, he has consistently stated that the charges will be vigorously defended with the intent of completely clearing the company of all changes. Any flight would seriously undermine that defence, and be completely counter-productive.
Second, flight would almost certainly guarantee he would not see any of the money and assets seized even again, so he�d be on the run with nothing.
Third, (and as a parent, equally as important IMO), he has three young children and a wife due to give birth to twins within a few weeks. Those so sure he�s a flight risk must be pretty callous people themselves if they thing that�s not an extraordinarily compelling reason to stay exactly where he is.
On the post: Megaupload Boss Kim Dotcom Granted Bail After US Fails To Prove He's Got Cash Stashed Away To Make An Escape
Re:
Thank you for demonstrating your total lack of understanding of economics. You'd get laughed out of a first year econ class for making a ridiculous statement like that.
"Does that mean there should be quantifiable evidence to support an indictment? -Under present law, yes - but you do realise that it puts copyright into a 'Catch 22' situation, right?"
Right, and if a law creates a Catch-22 situation, it's a bad law. Copyright law is simply inconsistent with the realities of the digital world we now live in.
On the post: 'Lawful Access' Rhetoric Rings Hollow When The Facts Are Wrong
Re: Re: "but not in an editorial capacity" !!! HAHAHA,, SO !!! ???
On the post: Be Afraid: Russia And China Seek To Put In Place Top-Down Regulation Of The Internet
Re: Re:
Absolutely not, They're just a different, more brutal, less slimy kind of bad guys compared to the US.
On the post: Recording Industry Can't Wait To Start Kicking People Offline In France For Listening To Their Favorite Songs
Re:
Techdirt articles always contain links to source information, and often also contain links to previous posts where a point being made in the post was discussed in greater detail. Those previous posts will also have contain links to source information, and often also contain links to previous posts where a point being made in the post was discussed in greater detail. Do you see the pattern forming here?
If you can't decide whether or not you believe something written, follow the info as far back as need to make up your mind.
On the post: RIAA Insists That, Really, The Music Industry Is Collapsing; Reality Shows It's Just The RIAA That's Collapsing
Re: Re:
You do realise that comments like this result in you being regarded as a joke, not to be taken even a little bit seriously, right?
On the post: If You're Going To Compare The Old Music Biz Model With The New Music Biz Model, At Least Make Some Sense
Re:
How are artists any different to other self-employed people? Replace the word "artists� with pretty much any other trade, and you might see how silly this argument sounds.
"If artists wanna DIY it, more power to 'em, but they shouldn't be forced to."
Nobody is forcing anybody to do anything. Why would you even say that?
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The irony is strong with this one.
First, you have no idea whether I (because I can't speak for others) take Mike at his word, or in fact follow the links (always!) provided and make my own judgement based on several sources of info. You have no way of knowing how much or how little we take completely at his word, so your accusation is completely baseless. You claim it because you'd like it to be true, despite any evidence either way, which is true to form for most copyright supporters.
Second, you guys really need to get your heads around the fact that due to decades of lies, mistruths, exaggerations, dodgy accounting, attempting crippling of technology, disrespect for culture, and plain ol' abuse of artists and consumers alike, we no longer have any reason to trust those who put themselves in between creators and buyers and attempt to control markets for their own financial gain. Again, so it might sink in, WE DON'T TRUST YOU. Even if you all suddenly started behaving tomorrow, it would still take many, many years before you could build up any significant level of trust. Simply, you'll have to try much harder to convince me than Mike does.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re:
http://www.techdirt.com/submitstory.php
On the post: US Government 'Suspends' JotForm.com Over User Generated Forms; Censorship Regime Expands
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Arrgh@!
And that is why you will have derision and scorn heaped upon you by most people here, and in fact by most people who value basic human rights over an invented (and abused) monopoly right.
On the post: How Much Is Enough? We've Passed 15 'Anti-Piracy' Laws In The Last 30 Years
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The US forced all those countries to extend copyright terms, so I'm sure the US can force them all to reduce them if the need arose.
On the post: If People Like You And Your Work They'll Pay; If They Like Your Work, But Don't Like You, They'll Infringe
Re: Re: Re: Wow....It's just like high school
The article says it's a function of being liked because of the way you treat your fans, and conversely, being disliked because of the way you mistreat your fans. Learn to read all the words, not just some.
On the post: The Pirate Bay's Peter Sunde Questions Why We Let Dying Industries Dictate Terms Of Democracy
Re: Re: Re: Re:
They could be employing more people if they decided to concentrate on providing what people want, i.e. not shiny plastic discs, not over-priced locked-down digital files, not ridiculous windowed releases, not anachronistic geographical restrictions, etc...
On the post: Hadopi Sends Info On Those Accused (Not Convicted) Of Repeat Infringement On To Prosecutors
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: UK Now Seizing Music Blogs (With American Domains) Over Copyright Claims
Re: Re: Re:
You're under the mistaken impression that all rights are of equal value. You're wrong. In case you haven't noticed, the public's respect for copyright is at an all-time low and trending downwards. Chalk it up to decades of abuse of copyright laws at the expense of both the public and artists. So spare us your moral indignity, because the rights to free (legal) speech and due process are more important than copyright.
"You're so transparent, it literally makes me sick."
Then see a doctor, you have other issues. Ignoring important physical symptoms now could be something you regret later.
"The real story here is your INCESSANT need to defend pirates at all cost, while showing absolutely no concern for those who are having their rights violated by your pirate friends."
Actually at no point did Mike defend anyone; the issue was the grossly false info provided by SOCA. But don't let facts spoil your little rant. And it's telling that you have no issue with a government agency using gross exaggerations and outright lies to scare people into compliance. That says a lot about you as a person.
"You are truly a disgusting human being."
That you view copyright as being more important than other more fundamental rights, and support government lies, makes me feel something similar about you.
Next >>