Mike, I think you did a public service by blogging this. Sure, you may have been misled by your source (though experience suggests you try to prevent this), and attacking you because they don't like the message is grossly unjust.
WAIT! Please explain. Having search engines do this sort of filtering is wrong, they aren't responsible for content; but requiring it (or encouraging, semantics again) from Amazon is reasonable?
I get the impression that we are in the famous "I don't know how to distinguish it, but I know it when I see it" (not an exact quote, I am sure) quote.
Wouldn't it be nice if we had consistency? To much to ask, I assume.
Mike, I am ashamed of you. Your column normally has a higher quality than so-called "professional" journalists, but here you say someone's wrong in taking action in a dispute, but don't appear to know WHY they did it!
There may be very good reasons for what they did. Until you know WHY, you should limit your comments more than you do.
"No one is going to think that Best Buy "sponsored" the Newegg commercial."
I basically agree with the article, and think Best Buy made a huge mistake here.
However, the above quote shows an equally huge ignorance of the trademark law.
Good article. I agree wholeheartedly.
As an IP attorney, I think it applies generally. I have invented a lot of things in the past; and if I am not going to pursue them personally, I give them away (with a sincere effort to help implement them, if someone wishes to). I sometimes see my inventions in products, and it makes me feel good (and NO, I do NOT expect anything - not even that I be acknowledged!). I have also suggested logos for Trademarks - it makes me feel good to see them; but I do not by any stretch of the imagination have a "stake" in them!
Remember, Ben Franklin dedicated his inventions to the public.
As an IP attorney, I substantially agree, but once again, we have a case of "pegging". Because large entity or "defensive" IP, especially patents, is grossly abused, and SHOULD BE ELIMINATED; the idea is "all IP is evil".
We are urged to "throw out the baby with the bath water".
This shows a complete ignorance of the reason the founding fathers put a provision for IP in the US Constitution, and assumes they were wrong in doing so.
If anyone were willing to listen (like saying, "is there intelligent life here"?), anyone with an understanding of this could explain why IP could be a major good... I realize that is asking for intelligent discussion, silly me!
Great article! I agree with all that was said!
I will say, to me the greatest threat is big business (or "defensive" IP, especially patents - where the real purpose is not to "protect an invention" or "promote progress", it is to make litigation so expensive that, whether an invention is involved or not, it is too expensive to fight!
I am personally (after working with defensive patenting until I became too repulsed to continue) believe most defensive patents DO NOT include an invention!
But, small entity IP (especially patenting) doesn't work, even though litigation is cheap, and inventions (and if you work with me, execution) are involved, don't work because small entities don't have much money!
There is also a tendency for small entities to want to do things "the way the big boys do" - so, to cut their own throats.
Interesting discussion. Here is what I got from it:
1. Decide what your conclusion will be.
2. Cull out any information that disagrees (or just ignore it).
3. Thereby you "prove" you were right all along.
I agree, Apple will regret this. It is the same thing they did when they were big, and Microsoft was small, and explains why Microsoft kicked Steve Job's butt.
BUT, notice:
If a thug bullies someone and takes their money, he goes to jail and Techdirt applauds.
If a (business thug like Apple) bullies someone and takes their money, Techdirt says they have that right, and whimpers a little.
Okay, while I like music (and at one time bought a lot of records, listened to music on the radio religiously, etc. - but then it became a "don't listen unless you pay", and I stopped listening (or going to the movies, or ...).
In either case, I hardly see "Idle Americans" as being of any great importance - sometimes well paid, but so what?
At one time, I designed a state of the art module known as the BCD-BINARY and BINARY-BCD converter - crucial to the industry at that time. Did my employer make me wealthy? OF COURSE NOT! They PAID ME to do that sort of thing, and paid me well! WHY WOULD THEY DO ANY MORE? Incidentally, it became a often cited matter of IP law, eventually.
I feel the same way about "Idle Americans" (or Idle whoever), fair pay for doing your best; not "now I am the center of the Universe"-type thinking!
Okay, forgot one thing: I am going to "peg", even though that, to me, proves Einstein was right when he said "the only things that are infinite are the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe".
SOFTWARE PATENTS ARE BAD! COPYRIGHT, FOR MORE THAN, SAY, FIVE YEARS, IS BAD!
Great article, again, though it suffers from the same-old, same-old. Example: "Communism is evil! Communism is a social system, and is neither good or bad, dictatorships (most communist or socialist systems, at this time) are evil!
Here, as I read it, Fred Wilson did NOT say patenting is bad, he said the abusive system we have NOW is bad!
He is dead right; as an IP attorney, I agree completely. To say all IP systems are bad, on the other hand, twists what he said, and is completely wrong - IP, as the founding fathers saw it, has benefits (I avoid "good" and "bad", it is a business or societal system, not a "thing").
I will say "Pegging is bad - though it is all too common!"
When I was earning one of my undergraduate degrees (in EE), a Professor Raab taught for one year. His style was not what the university wanted, so only one year, but during that year, I learned more than in the other three years.
I feel so fortunate for having him for a professor during his brief stay at the university!
As an IP attorney, GREAT! IP is hugely abused, and it is great to see anyone questioning the impacts!
To me, there is a balancing act. IP as I practice it (which I believe I can show is exactly what the founding fathers intended) has (sometimes decisive) benefits. IP as it is practiced generally ("large entity" or "defensive" IP), being based on the "Golden Rule of business"; the one with the gold makes the rules - is, IMO, often unAmerican and destructive.
Before people "pile on" with negative comments, as an attorney (though I no longer practice litigation), Mike is RIGHT!
There needs to be a balance between personal responsibility and public responsibility. Here, if you don't "vet" a bank (or a broker, or a realtor, or ...) you likely deserve what you get.
Even with violent video games (yes, Mike, unbiased research now shows it promotes violence, and my personal experience reinforces that), banning them really puts a responsibility on the public that should belong to the individual.
On the post: Giant Breweries Get Laws Passed In Wisconsin To Make Life Hard For Small Breweries [Updated]
Attack the Messenger!
On the post: Kindle Spam Is A Filter Issue, Not A Spam Issue
Amazon filtering based on content
I get the impression that we are in the famous "I don't know how to distinguish it, but I know it when I see it" (not an exact quote, I am sure) quote.
Wouldn't it be nice if we had consistency? To much to ask, I assume.
On the post: Senators Unconcerned About Massive Unintended Consequences Of Criminalizing People For Embedding YouTube Videos
Incompetence or corruption?
On the post: Sony Movies Pulled From Netflix Streams; Because Customers Just Love That Kind Of Thing
Sony and Netflix
There may be very good reasons for what they did. Until you know WHY, you should limit your comments more than you do.
On the post: 'Geek Power': Best Buy Sends C&D To Newegg Over Marketing Campaign
'Geek Power': Best Buy ...
I basically agree with the article, and think Best Buy made a huge mistake here.
However, the above quote shows an equally huge ignorance of the trademark law.
On the post: Publishers Realizing It's Silly To 'Fight Piracy'
Publishers Realizing It's Silly ....
As an IP attorney, I think it applies generally. I have invented a lot of things in the past; and if I am not going to pursue them personally, I give them away (with a sincere effort to help implement them, if someone wishes to). I sometimes see my inventions in products, and it makes me feel good (and NO, I do NOT expect anything - not even that I be acknowledged!). I have also suggested logos for Trademarks - it makes me feel good to see them; but I do not by any stretch of the imagination have a "stake" in them!
Remember, Ben Franklin dedicated his inventions to the public.
On the post: Ideas Do Matter, But That Has Nothing To Do With 'Intellectual Property'
Ideas Do Matter, But ....
We are urged to "throw out the baby with the bath water".
This shows a complete ignorance of the reason the founding fathers put a provision for IP in the US Constitution, and assumes they were wrong in doing so.
If anyone were willing to listen (like saying, "is there intelligent life here"?), anyone with an understanding of this could explain why IP could be a major good... I realize that is asking for intelligent discussion, silly me!
On the post: Why Propping Up Old Business Models Is Bad For The Economy And Bad For Innovation
Innovation
I will say, to me the greatest threat is big business (or "defensive" IP, especially patents - where the real purpose is not to "protect an invention" or "promote progress", it is to make litigation so expensive that, whether an invention is involved or not, it is too expensive to fight!
I am personally (after working with defensive patenting until I became too repulsed to continue) believe most defensive patents DO NOT include an invention!
But, small entity IP (especially patenting) doesn't work, even though litigation is cheap, and inventions (and if you work with me, execution) are involved, don't work because small entities don't have much money!
There is also a tendency for small entities to want to do things "the way the big boys do" - so, to cut their own throats.
On the post: Becoming A Platform: How RunKeeper Continues To Keep Competitors At Bay
Innovation and the need for IP
1. Decide what your conclusion will be.
2. Cull out any information that disagrees (or just ignore it).
3. Thereby you "prove" you were right all along.
On the post: Apple Threatens Wireless Industry Group For Daring To List Out Other App Stores
Apple abuse
BUT, notice:
If a thug bullies someone and takes their money, he goes to jail and Techdirt applauds.
If a (business thug like Apple) bullies someone and takes their money, Techdirt says they have that right, and whimpers a little.
On the post: Youtube, Creative Commons And Why It's OK For You To License Your Artwork Any Way You Want
CC licensing and the like
In either case, I hardly see "Idle Americans" as being of any great importance - sometimes well paid, but so what?
At one time, I designed a state of the art module known as the BCD-BINARY and BINARY-BCD converter - crucial to the industry at that time. Did my employer make me wealthy? OF COURSE NOT! They PAID ME to do that sort of thing, and paid me well! WHY WOULD THEY DO ANY MORE? Incidentally, it became a often cited matter of IP law, eventually.
I feel the same way about "Idle Americans" (or Idle whoever), fair pay for doing your best; not "now I am the center of the Universe"-type thinking!
On the post: Investors Speaking Up About Patents Harming Innovation
Fred Wilson on patents
SOFTWARE PATENTS ARE BAD! COPYRIGHT, FOR MORE THAN, SAY, FIVE YEARS, IS BAD!
On the post: Investors Speaking Up About Patents Harming Innovation
Fred Wilson on patents
Here, as I read it, Fred Wilson did NOT say patenting is bad, he said the abusive system we have NOW is bad!
He is dead right; as an IP attorney, I agree completely. To say all IP systems are bad, on the other hand, twists what he said, and is completely wrong - IP, as the founding fathers saw it, has benefits (I avoid "good" and "bad", it is a business or societal system, not a "thing").
I will say "Pegging is bad - though it is all too common!"
On the post: DailyDirt: Hey Teacher, Leave Those Kids Alone!
Education today
When I was earning one of my undergraduate degrees (in EE), a Professor Raab taught for one year. His style was not what the university wanted, so only one year, but during that year, I learned more than in the other three years.
I feel so fortunate for having him for a professor during his brief stay at the university!
On the post: WIPO Commissioned Study On Intellectual Property Acting As A Barrier To Entry
WIPO looking at the down side of IP
To me, there is a balancing act. IP as I practice it (which I believe I can show is exactly what the founding fathers intended) has (sometimes decisive) benefits. IP as it is practiced generally ("large entity" or "defensive" IP), being based on the "Golden Rule of business"; the one with the gold makes the rules - is, IMO, often unAmerican and destructive.
On the post: Judge: Not Having The Best Security Not Illegal; Defrauded Company Can't Blame Bank
Judge absolves bank with poor security
There needs to be a balance between personal responsibility and public responsibility. Here, if you don't "vet" a bank (or a broker, or a realtor, or ...) you likely deserve what you get.
Even with violent video games (yes, Mike, unbiased research now shows it promotes violence, and my personal experience reinforces that), banning them really puts a responsibility on the public that should belong to the individual.
On the post: Gwiz's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re: Re: Ban Musical Instruments
Amazingly, many refuse to be bought, or will agree to only a partial buy-out.
Campaign finance reform, like the police, is never there when you need it.
And the Supreme Court (to me, the worst ever) has made them even easier to buy, now.
On the post: Gwiz's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Ban Musical Instruments
Nice to see someone recognize that. There is a tendency to put everyone in one "shoe-box", not recognizing that people, like shoes, are different.
On the post: Gwiz's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re: Re: Comments
On the post: Gwiz's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Ban Musical Instruments
It's easy. Offer them a free album if they will swallow a potassium cyanide pill.
Problem solved!
Proves once again that you cannot trust lawyers, right?
Next >>