Content Creators Need to Adapt to Changing Technology
Why should content creators be protected from technological evolution? How much sympathy do the content creators have for the typists that have been put out of work with word-processing software.
As a simplistic observation; property rights are believed by some to originate out of scarcity. Conversely, if scarcity no longer is an issue; the property right should diminish. Anyway copyright is a privilege that is being distorted into an assumed property right.
Content creators need to adapt, like everyone else, to changing technology.
Mike concluding sentences sum-up the fact that Congress and the President are paralyzed into indecision. The debt ceiling, like patents, has been a known issue for a long long time that became a manufactured crises for theatrical drama. Our Congress people do not seem capable of actually solving anything. Kick-the-can-down-the-road has become a very popular Congressional game.
Like anonymous, I am appreciate the fact that you have delved into this issue. Of particular note, your analysis was quite rationale.
Since this whole debt ceiling/budget issue has blown-up there has been an immense amount of disinformation and word parsing to obfuscate what is really being said. The principle one being the phrase "debt reduction". There is NO proposed debt reduction. From what I can tell, the current plan of the Administration is to spend slightly less in the future than originally proposed. Since the Congress and the President have not proposed an honest or logical solution to deficit spending, a downgrade in the US credit rating would seem appropriate. (Even though the rating firms themselves have not exactly proven to be honest either.)
The misleading budget game plan exposed. As a quick allegorical summary. When Obama took office he proposed to buy an allegorical $100,000 luxury car, instead of (blame) Bush's $30,000 clunker of a car. The people get upset and begin to demand that Obama cut back on his proposed extravagant spending.
Obama comes back with a counter proposal to now buy a more modest $50,000 car. He then claims to have "saved" the American people $50,000. What is NOT mentioned is that he is still proposing to spend $20,000 more than originally proposed under (blame) Bush.
There will be NO reduction in the allegorical US credit card balance statement. If one keeps adding to their credit card balance, at some point - a lower credit score is justified.
Correct. There is also an inherent conflict of interest in many ratings. The companies seeking a rating pay the rating firms. The rating firms consequently and not surprisingly tend to give favorable ratings.
The demise of the space shuttle program is one of many sad reflections that the US has lost its vision and continues to be increasingly paralyzed through internal squabbling.
I believe that we should have a continued "manned" program, but that really isn't the point. We still could pursue an unmanned program. The point is that the US has lost focus and the will to make the space program a national effort.
Collateral damage of our (negatively) evolving patent system is the suppression of "reverse engineering". The concept of "reverse engineering" has become a silent victim without a vocal advocate.
Patents are not longer about patenting a specific real device doing a specific task that would allow others to develop their own devices to do the same task. Patents are now about seizing control of an entire concept of accomplishing a "task" and then preventing any competitive alternatives from being implemented.
Regretfully, it seems that there is a vocal minority (????) of people who seem to believe in the concept that "Greed is Good". Anything that corporations do to foster business is considered "legal". Anything that hinders business should be summarily decreed as "illegal". Of course due process is now considered "old school" and a hindrance to maximizing corporate profits.
People customize their cars. Like a car one should be able to customize their PS3. It continues to astound me that certain companies refuse to acknowledge the private property tights people acquire when they purchase a product. Given this trend, someday a person puts a Chevy part in a Ford and the car explodes.
There is an ethos in the US concerning property rights and entrepreneurship that has melded into so-called "intellectual property". I will even go so far as to say that Ayn Rand has exacerbated the whole issue by asserting that "mental work" deserves to protected.
Consequently we are left with the motherhood perception that if you don't believe in "intellectual property" that you are depriving creators of their income and they will all starve to death.
People can be shown the "truth" as Galileo tried to do before an inquisition, but the "truth" may simply be deemed to heretical by the populace to be accepted. Not to mention that many of our politicians blindly accept the rationale of their contributory sponsors.
Companies seem to now believe that when they issue a "policy" it "makes law", therefore they are entitled to proactively take whatever action they need to take to "protect" their so-called intellectual property from "criminals". Due process and private property rights for the consumer are obsolete as far as the corporations are concerned
Another example of a company extending its reach post-sale. Technically if someone buys a product, such as an iPad, they are free to sell it or give it away free. I don't seem much difference between giving something away even when done through a promotional event or not. Apple was already paid for the product, what one does with the product should not be Apple's business.
I have issues with Intuit. Intuit for one requires that you buy a new version of Quicken every three years. TurboTax, obviously has to be bought every year. Each of these programs has the link so that you can opt-out.
Well, by the way it is structured, Intuit makes it complicated for the consumer to opt-out. First when when updating/upgrading there is NO indication that your prior privacy selection would remain in effect. Strike 1.
Second, when opting out, you have to re-enter all the information that you previously entered (from the act of registration and from prior years). Strike 2.
Third, when you opt out there is a confusing message concerning whether you would continue to actually receive valid program updates. I assume that Intuit wants you to believe that by opting out of marketing junk mail that you would no longer receive program updates. Strike 3.
Computers are supposed to make live easier by eliminating the necessity to re-certify your preferences and by eliminating the need to re-enter duplicate data. I assume that Intuit is abusing computer technology in the hopes that people won't re-certify their decision to opt-out.
On the positive side, I have not been receiving any spam from Intuit.
What is especially sad is that in the 1960s and 1970 the youth of this country stood-up for freedom. Now many of these same people are in positions of national leadership. Instead of using their leadership positions to foster freedom, the US is increasingly becoming a police state in the name of fighting terrorism, drugs, and piracy. Due process is vaporizing.
Back in the 60s and the 70s, the youth of this Nation rose-up for freedom and peace. Now many of these same people are in positions of National leadership. Obama, who is ostensibly (but not really) a baby boomer is supposed to be a constitutional lawyer. It is quite depressing to see the Flower Children bring us Orwell's 1984 police state.
I don't think that the ACLU has a real understanding concerning the interaction of technology and personal freedom. The ACLU seems to be amazingly quite.
Seems that we have never ending examples of companies asserting that they continue to own a product even though the supposedly "sold" it. Look at the Amazon deleting Orwell books from the Kindle or Sony post sale modifying the PS3 by disabling features.
This highlights the shallowness of those who claim that net-neutrality regulation is not needed. Despite all the rhetoric concerning the benefits of "freedom" of an unregulated internet, the real "freedom" will be the ability of the ISPs to manipulate the data-stream for their benefit. Customer rights, none. With this so-called "freedom", there will be NO neutral net.
It amazes me that a Swiss army knife is a prohibited item, but carry on luggage with the handle bars and little wheels is not. There is probably enough metal in one of those to make a variety of weapons. The most obvious one being a "spear".
On the post: Author Says eBooks Will Hurt Authors Because Of Royalty Rates
Content Creators Need to Adapt to Changing Technology
As a simplistic observation; property rights are believed by some to originate out of scarcity. Conversely, if scarcity no longer is an issue; the property right should diminish. Anyway copyright is a privilege that is being distorted into an assumed property right.
Content creators need to adapt, like everyone else, to changing technology.
On the post: WSJ Latest To Note Ridiculous State Of The Patent System
Congress Pretends to Solve but Does Nothing
On the post: Apple Wins Europe-Wide Blockade Of Samsung Tablets; Guess Which Tablet Apple Is Scared Of Most?
Free Enterprise
On the post: Insanity: Getting Worked Up Over One Company's Slight Change Of Opinion In The Creditworthiness Of The US
Re: Don't know what you're talking about again.
Since this whole debt ceiling/budget issue has blown-up there has been an immense amount of disinformation and word parsing to obfuscate what is really being said. The principle one being the phrase "debt reduction". There is NO proposed debt reduction. From what I can tell, the current plan of the Administration is to spend slightly less in the future than originally proposed. Since the Congress and the President have not proposed an honest or logical solution to deficit spending, a downgrade in the US credit rating would seem appropriate. (Even though the rating firms themselves have not exactly proven to be honest either.)
The misleading budget game plan exposed. As a quick allegorical summary. When Obama took office he proposed to buy an allegorical $100,000 luxury car, instead of (blame) Bush's $30,000 clunker of a car. The people get upset and begin to demand that Obama cut back on his proposed extravagant spending.
Obama comes back with a counter proposal to now buy a more modest $50,000 car. He then claims to have "saved" the American people $50,000. What is NOT mentioned is that he is still proposing to spend $20,000 more than originally proposed under (blame) Bush.
There will be NO reduction in the allegorical US credit card balance statement. If one keeps adding to their credit card balance, at some point - a lower credit score is justified.
On the post: Insanity: Getting Worked Up Over One Company's Slight Change Of Opinion In The Creditworthiness Of The US
Rating Firms Blew it Before
On the post: DailyDirt: The Space Shuttle Era Ends Soon...
Lost Vision
I believe that we should have a continued "manned" program, but that really isn't the point. We still could pursue an unmanned program. The point is that the US has lost focus and the will to make the space program a national effort.
On the post: Supreme Court Will Review The Patentability Of Medical Diagnostic Tests
Re: Another New Benefit
Patents are not longer about patenting a specific real device doing a specific task that would allow others to develop their own devices to do the same task. Patents are now about seizing control of an entire concept of accomplishing a "task" and then preventing any competitive alternatives from being implemented.
On the post: Sony Continues Suing People Who Help Others Modify Their PS3s
Re: Re: Who Owns Who
On the post: Sony Continues Suing People Who Help Others Modify Their PS3s
Customizing Your Car
On the post: Investors Speaking Up About Patents Harming Innovation
It's a Perception Issue
Consequently we are left with the motherhood perception that if you don't believe in "intellectual property" that you are depriving creators of their income and they will all starve to death.
People can be shown the "truth" as Galileo tried to do before an inquisition, but the "truth" may simply be deemed to heretical by the populace to be accepted. Not to mention that many of our politicians blindly accept the rationale of their contributory sponsors.
On the post: Apple Says That You Can't Give Away A 'Free' iPad Or iPhone In A Contest
Re: Consideration
On the post: Apple Says That You Can't Give Away A 'Free' iPad Or iPhone In A Contest
The Concept of "Sale" Vaporizing
On the post: Can We Just Admit That The Idea Of A 'Privacy Policy' Is A Failed Idea?
Intuit's Cumbersome Privacy Policy
Well, by the way it is structured, Intuit makes it complicated for the consumer to opt-out. First when when updating/upgrading there is NO indication that your prior privacy selection would remain in effect. Strike 1.
Second, when opting out, you have to re-enter all the information that you previously entered (from the act of registration and from prior years). Strike 2.
Third, when you opt out there is a confusing message concerning whether you would continue to actually receive valid program updates. I assume that Intuit wants you to believe that by opting out of marketing junk mail that you would no longer receive program updates. Strike 3.
Computers are supposed to make live easier by eliminating the necessity to re-certify your preferences and by eliminating the need to re-enter duplicate data. I assume that Intuit is abusing computer technology in the hopes that people won't re-certify their decision to opt-out.
On the positive side, I have not been receiving any spam from Intuit.
On the post: What 4th Amendment? Indiana Sheriff Says Random, Warrantless House To House Searches Are Okay
Re: OMG!
On the post: 4th Amendment? What 4th Amendment? Supremes Say Police Can Create Conditions To Enter Home Without A Warrant
The Sad Ending to the Flower Power Generation
As another example, TechDirt also posted RIAA Calls 4th Amendment Passe: Pushes For Warrantless Searches.
On the post: RIAA Calls 4th Amendment Passe: Pushes For Warrantless Searches
Re: ACLU
On the post: Antique Shop Takes Ownership Culture To New Level, Sues Over Lamps It Doesn't Own
Concept of "Sale" Being Elimnated
On the post: Trying To Limit Net Access, Dutch Telcos Accidentally Force Government To Speak Out On Net Neutrality
The Freedom to "Steal"
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Carry On Lugguge is a Security Threat
On the post: Replying To An Email Does Not Create A Contract (And Does Not Require Walmart Pay $600 Billion)
Re:
Next >>