I feel victimized by the Streisand Effect. When I first heard the story, I chuckled a bit and then went on with my life. Then as the story kept popping up on TV, in the newspapers, and in the news on the net; I felt compelled to google the images.
Now I've seen the Royal Boobies, and yes they are nice, but until the Streisand Effect overwhelmed me, I had no desire to even peek. Who do I sue over this invasion of my will?
I think they summed it up by stating they were happy with sales. Piracy only really becomes an issue when the content owner is overcome by intense greed.
In general, "pirates" are only taking copies of things that are already selling VERY well. They are not sending artists into starvation. The content owners or their gatekeepers simply want much more money than the content is actually worth because their monopoly makes them feel entitled.
The concept of limited monopoly is completely gone from copyright. Life + 70 years is UNLIMITED as far as the consumer is concerned. If an artist creates a copyrighted work today and lives another 40 years, then that means that their work may be in the public domain when my great grandchildren become adults. Limited? Not from where I'm sitting.
Now anyone in congress who votes against any bill that is seen as "national security", will be labelled as soft on terror and risk their job.
They should have just slapped national security in SOPA and it would have sailed through. It worked for the port security bill that ended online gambling in the US.
I'm happy to deal with all the political trolls, since they really are quite amusing.
Ok your knickers are in a bunch because the Obama administration has lied from the campaign trail to now; AND you don't foresee change if Obama is re-elected.
Soooooo, the other guy must be completely honest and will change everything for the better. Well that convinced me. Well done. When you come back to TD, could you comment on the articles, please?
You just had to post that in TechDirt. Or did you just copy and paste it from your comments on Fox News?
Was your comment even relevant to transparency? Ah yes it was, you are wanting to see a birth certificate from the US Gov't that actually PROVES Obama is not a US citizen.
Hire the ACLU and sue the US for not complying with your FOIA request.
Try reading. It really will help you to make sense.
If you think Google is sustaining $38 billion in revenue from ads on pirate sites, you have much bigger issues. That is probably why no one talks about it, because it isn't reality.
As for ISPs charging for broadband. I guess you didn't read the article condemning the ETNO for trying to extort money from the ITU, or all the articles about bogus data caps. So I'm not sure which version of TD you read?
"It's a fight about who gets the 'right' to rip off creators. It used to be music labels and publishers, now it's Big Tech."
Wow, maybe you missed the previous article (click back on your browser) about authors self publishing.
Ok I get it now. You read the invisible version of TechDirt that only Clint Eastwood can see.
After reading the article, I'm really finding it hard to understand why you would think the telcos are trying to shift money from service providers on the net to network service providers. While, I agree the ETNO is making a shameless plea for cash, I think its more than harsh to say that telcos have not innovated.
The telcos in the US have invested heavily in their networks, to the tune of billions of dollars per year, turning ATM networks into IP networks. So it's unfair to say they haven't innovated on the tech side. Are they lazy fat bastards? Certainly yes. Did they fail to foresee that all communications traffic would be IP based and the cost of that traffic would be driven down? Yes, they completely miscalculated that.
The telco business model had been based almost entirely on voice traffic until shortly after the dotcom bust, so now you have a legacy industry that is still trying to figure out how to charge long distance voice fees for data traffic. They flat out want more money from customers and they want the governments to command us to give it to them. In the US this was always a fantastic symbiosis, since the states were allowed to skim huge amounts of tax revenue from voice service, but taxing data traffic was off limits.
Oddly enough it does seem that Google is one company that has decided to just create its own network. Maybe Facebook and Microsoft will try to do the same.
I used to use Napster then WinMX then KaZaa then Limewire then Frostwire then Poison, then I stopped file sharing music altogether. Did the RIAA finally get through to me? Did I suddenly realize how illegal all that sharing was? Nope.
I just started using Spotify and Grooveshark and listening to internet radio. But what about downloading new music, you say? Once I learned to record off YouTube, that solved that.
The RIAA can cry about piracy all they want, but now the piracy isn't through the Pirate Bay or BitTorrents (I'm sure that's still going strong, but why bother); internet technology simply routed around the problem.
Movies may not be as easy a solution, but in time people will innovate around the legacy players and open the gates. The gatekeepers can keep charging their excessive rents and pushing people to find new services if they like. In the end, the legacy players will just find that they are chasing market share instead of taking advantage of their formidable lead now and innovating ahead of the curve.
Whatever they choose to do is fine with me. I'm going to watch Expendables 2 at solarmovie.eu while they work it out.
"Actually, his case is pretty easy to figure out: The sites were directly and aggressively marketing itself as a source to watch the Superbowl and other major sporting events. There isn't much to hide from here, the guy was willfully and intentionally putting content that was knowingly infringing on his sites, and marketing it accordingly."
You are an asshat. Was this guy's site dodgy? Hell yes. Was it criminal? No. You are right about no wiggle room. In order to be guilty of criminal copyright infringement, you have to first infringe on copyrighted material, not simply link to it. Being arrested in the US and held for 7 months without committing a crime and with no evidence of a crime is pretty damn serious.
The fact that judges are not "falling for" the law is equally outrageous. Guess what that says to people. If judges willfully ignore the law because they don't feel it's right, then why shouldn't the public ignore laws they don't feel are right?
You have to appreciate the work that goes into setting up this scenario.
You ask to explain the fairness in your scenario, but that is if we, the public, accept the premise as valid.
Your large company spends years and "valuable" resources to "create" a method patent. That is the first part of the insanity. A patent on "how to"???
What if schools and universities began to tax your large company with their own method patent? That's what schools are all about, how to. They pass on methods.
Your scenario is based on setting up a gateway to gatekeep that the internet has taken down and you want it back.
So here is the proper answer to your question about fairness. Let your Large company focus its time and valuable resources on actually inventing a product or service; leave the whole method thing to schools.
On the post: French Court Detaches Itself From Reality, Demands Tabloid Turn Over 'Original' Topless Kate Middleton Photos
What about me?
On the post: Philippines Outlaws Cybersex
Huh???
What does that even mean?
It sounds to me like the politician who drafted this just found out that all hot girls on the internet are actually MEN.
On the post: Wyden To White House: Protecting Nuclear Power Plants Is Different Than Protecting Facebook
Coming soon to a security theater near you
On the post: How The Royal Family Got The World To Look At Naked Photos Of Kate Middleton [Updated]
I'm a victim too
Now I've seen the Royal Boobies, and yes they are nice, but until the Streisand Effect overwhelmed me, I had no desire to even peek. Who do I sue over this invasion of my will?
On the post: Feeling Threatened By Online Grocery Store, Apple Challenges Polish Site A.pl
Note left by Steve Jobs...
On the post: 'Amnesia' Is Selling So Well, The Developers Have Forgotten All About Piracy
Piracy and Greed
In general, "pirates" are only taking copies of things that are already selling VERY well. They are not sending artists into starvation. The content owners or their gatekeepers simply want much more money than the content is actually worth because their monopoly makes them feel entitled.
The concept of limited monopoly is completely gone from copyright. Life + 70 years is UNLIMITED as far as the consumer is concerned. If an artist creates a copyrighted work today and lives another 40 years, then that means that their work may be in the public domain when my great grandchildren become adults. Limited? Not from where I'm sitting.
On the post: IRS Gives $104 Million To UBS Whistleblower... Who The DOJ Put In Jail
Totally worth it
On the post: House To Vote On FISA Amendments Act, Despite Not Even Knowing How It's Being Interpreted
War on Terror - Lost
Now anyone in congress who votes against any bill that is seen as "national security", will be labelled as soft on terror and risk their job.
They should have just slapped national security in SOPA and it would have sailed through. It worked for the port security bill that ended online gambling in the US.
On the post: Testing 'The Most Transparent Administration in History'
Re:
Ok your knickers are in a bunch because the Obama administration has lied from the campaign trail to now; AND you don't foresee change if Obama is re-elected.
Soooooo, the other guy must be completely honest and will change everything for the better. Well that convinced me. Well done. When you come back to TD, could you comment on the articles, please?
On the post: Testing 'The Most Transparent Administration in History'
Re: lol
Was your comment even relevant to transparency? Ah yes it was, you are wanting to see a birth certificate from the US Gov't that actually PROVES Obama is not a US citizen.
Hire the ACLU and sue the US for not complying with your FOIA request.
On the post: Industries Dependent On Copyright Exceptions Contribute $182 Billion To Australian Economy
Re: copyright
Try reading. It really will help you to make sense.
If you think Google is sustaining $38 billion in revenue from ads on pirate sites, you have much bigger issues. That is probably why no one talks about it, because it isn't reality.
As for ISPs charging for broadband. I guess you didn't read the article condemning the ETNO for trying to extort money from the ITU, or all the articles about bogus data caps. So I'm not sure which version of TD you read?
"It's a fight about who gets the 'right' to rip off creators. It used to be music labels and publishers, now it's Big Tech."
Wow, maybe you missed the previous article (click back on your browser) about authors self publishing.
Ok I get it now. You read the invisible version of TechDirt that only Clint Eastwood can see.
On the post: EU Telcos To UN Regulators: Divert More Money Our Way And No One's Internet Gets Hurt
Slightly askew
The telcos in the US have invested heavily in their networks, to the tune of billions of dollars per year, turning ATM networks into IP networks. So it's unfair to say they haven't innovated on the tech side. Are they lazy fat bastards? Certainly yes. Did they fail to foresee that all communications traffic would be IP based and the cost of that traffic would be driven down? Yes, they completely miscalculated that.
The telco business model had been based almost entirely on voice traffic until shortly after the dotcom bust, so now you have a legacy industry that is still trying to figure out how to charge long distance voice fees for data traffic. They flat out want more money from customers and they want the governments to command us to give it to them. In the US this was always a fantastic symbiosis, since the states were allowed to skim huge amounts of tax revenue from voice service, but taxing data traffic was off limits.
Oddly enough it does seem that Google is one company that has decided to just create its own network. Maybe Facebook and Microsoft will try to do the same.
On the post: The Legacy Entertainment Industry's Business Model: Charge A Ridiculous Markup On The 'Copy File' Command
The internet routes around copyright
I just started using Spotify and Grooveshark and listening to internet radio. But what about downloading new music, you say? Once I learned to record off YouTube, that solved that.
The RIAA can cry about piracy all they want, but now the piracy isn't through the Pirate Bay or BitTorrents (I'm sure that's still going strong, but why bother); internet technology simply routed around the problem.
Movies may not be as easy a solution, but in time people will innovate around the legacy players and open the gates. The gatekeepers can keep charging their excessive rents and pushing people to find new services if they like. In the end, the legacy players will just find that they are chasing market share instead of taking advantage of their formidable lead now and innovating ahead of the curve.
Whatever they choose to do is fine with me. I'm going to watch Expendables 2 at solarmovie.eu while they work it out.
On the post: Copyright Killbots Strike Again: Official DNC Livestream Taken Down By Just About Every Copyright Holder
LOL
On the post: Hackers Get Personal Info On 12-Million Apple Users... From An FBI Laptop
Re: Cyber-insecurity (Perspective)
Another indicator of the 1% being criminals.
On the post: HBO Hooks Up Nordic Cord Cutters; Offers Standalone Streaming Service
but but but....
On the post: As Feds Drop Bogus Domain Seizure Cases, Another Site Admin Held Without Bail And About To Be Deported
Re: Asshat
You are an asshat. Was this guy's site dodgy? Hell yes. Was it criminal? No. You are right about no wiggle room. In order to be guilty of criminal copyright infringement, you have to first infringe on copyrighted material, not simply link to it. Being arrested in the US and held for 7 months without committing a crime and with no evidence of a crime is pretty damn serious.
The fact that judges are not "falling for" the law is equally outrageous. Guess what that says to people. If judges willfully ignore the law because they don't feel it's right, then why shouldn't the public ignore laws they don't feel are right?
On the post: Apple Feels Reporting Drone Strikes 'Objectionable And Crude' And Rejects App
Tracking Drones
On the post: Appeals Court Says Companies Can Be Guilty Of Inducing Infringement... Even If There Is No Direct Infringement
Re: Incorrect perspective
You ask to explain the fairness in your scenario, but that is if we, the public, accept the premise as valid.
Your large company spends years and "valuable" resources to "create" a method patent. That is the first part of the insanity. A patent on "how to"???
What if schools and universities began to tax your large company with their own method patent? That's what schools are all about, how to. They pass on methods.
Your scenario is based on setting up a gateway to gatekeep that the internet has taken down and you want it back.
So here is the proper answer to your question about fairness. Let your Large company focus its time and valuable resources on actually inventing a product or service; leave the whole method thing to schools.
On the post: Blizzard Blocking Iranian WoW Players Due To US Sanctions
Huh???
How is cutting off a source of revenue to the US, punishing Iran?
I'm trying to see the downside for Iran in this. More money that isn't going into a down US economy?
Next >>