Doesn't SEEM fair???? You have got to be kidding me. The Apple v Samsung case was a civil issue. The US v Publishers issue was a CRIMINAL issue.
It doesn't seem fair it absolutely IS NOT fair. Conspiring to artificially inflate prices does far more harm to consumers than violating a few "patents" does to Apple.
Fair would be if the DOJ were to use the jury award from the Samsung case as a measure to determine the penalty for Apple in this case.
"I certainly hope there is benefit from innovation/invention beyond the ability to own said creation. Otherwise I'm not sure why the first caveman tied a pointy rock onto a stick in the first place."
That was actually the first attempt at IP enforcement. The caveman tied a pointy rock to a stick and then charged all the other cavemen a fee to make their own. They all gladly paid and then killed the inventor. IP enforcement was not attempted again for many millennia.
"You bitched about the scanners, you bitched about the screeners... I am assuming you will only be happy when air travel in the US is as risky as standing in a Syrian street with a target on your head."
Did I read that analogy correctly?
Ummmm isn't the problem in Syria the government attacking the civilians?
"Finding the optimal strategy for maximizing income
is then not (necessarily) just "giving the viewer
what he wants"
Holy Batshit economics!
How is not giving the viewer what he wants, not optimal? Keeping all eyes on your monetized content is the goal presumably. Soooo not streaming your monetized content to viewer who will just watch it elsewhere on the web is smart how?
But but but... They need to pay. Wait, it's paid for already. Ummmm we haven't figured out how to better monetize the streaming service? Ummmm it's just not right? What about the children?
As much as I love laughing at the TSA, if you read the article you find that the TSA actually acted professionally and sanely.
It was Delta and the local transit cops that turned out to be completely clueless and/or racist. I'm guessing that the TSA was already aware of Arijit's condition and saw no reason to bother him further.
Let them sort out how best to protect their revenue streams. While they are working on that I will continue to use all the free alternatives that stream their programming.
Guess what? We the consumer now understand the safe harbor law and that we are not doing anything illegal by linking to infringing material.
I'm wondering how pissing off the paying customers is protecting the revenue stream. It must work like trickle-down economics.
"What you don't seem to understand that it isn't just growing pains, it's reality setting in. It's the point where people who are less than honest come in, and start shearing the sheep. Most of it for the moment is unintentional, but it is almost inevitable that, over time, the scam rate goes up until the concept is almost unusable."
I think you just described the gatekeeper business model perfectly.
It's not entirely a joke. I was highlighting how silly they sound when they say that it's too expensive to store 2TB of data.
ICE gets millions to enforce IP laws, so why is the DEA having problems storing a few TB of evidence. Personally I would rather the DEA get more funding for data storage than ICE for IP enforcement.
Maybe the DEA should ask the NSA for some extra storage space.
It's not entirely a joke. I was highlighting how silly they sound when they say that it's too expensive to store 2TB of data.
ICE gets millions to enforce IP laws, so why is the DEA having problems storing a few TB of evidence. Personally I would rather the DEA get more funding for data storage than ICE for IP enforcement.
Maybe the DEA should ask the NSA for some extra storage space.
Conservatives have to legislate behavior. If it's not against the law they feel compelled to watch porn, listen to explicit lyrics, have abortions, smoke pot, etc.
Porn is not a multi-billion dollar industry because no one wants to see it.
Comments like this always leave me scratching my head. Let's look at it rationally.
Company A makes a good alarm system and ships units that are slightly harder to copy. Company B makes shoddy counterfeits which are presumably sold by an offshore VAR (value added reseller). Company A then accepts responsibility and repairs Company B's product when it fails.
Somehow the leap in logic is that the sleaziest company wins in an unregulated capitalist market. While there are plenty of arguments for government regulation, this isn't a very good one. Quality products often do far better in the marketplace regardless of regulations, no matter how much sleazy competition is out there. Because consumers want products that work.
The only way a shoddy copy can survive is when the lack of quality is acceptable to the consumer because of the cost saving.
The entire point of this article is to show that blatantly ripping someone off can backfire horribly if the core fan base finds out. These pens had a particular fanbase that the copier tried to exploit but the connection to the content creator was far stronger than the copier anticipated.
This is an example of how sick greed can make a human being. $365 million subtracted from $2.4 billion or $1.2 billion STILL leaves you with an EXCEPTIONALLY large amount of cash.
Renouncing your citizenship over taxes on these sums of money doesn't make someone evil, it makes them idiotic or borderline insane.
The statutory damages for infringement were clearly designed to compensate commercial levels of infringement, which is probably why we never heard of lawsuits against consumers for sharing music and movies before.
Digital file sharing DOES resemble commercial infringement once its on the network, but to the end user it just looks like sharing a file.
If you are a judge in these cases, I can see where it would be difficult to come to a fair ruling. From the file sharers point of view, there is generally no intent to profit, but from the content creator's point of view there is definitely an impact on sales. Are statutory damages even remotely reasonable? NO they are not.
"This is an unfortunate attitude for people to take because it really doesn't matter who you are and if you 'need the money.' "
Ummm yes, it does matter who you are AND if you need the money or not. I hardly suspect that Sony or Microsoft or Warner Bros. would have much success with any sort of Kickstarter campaign. Although, if the return on a donation were perceived to be significantly higher than the donation, then I supposed that just about any person/company could run a successful Kickstarter campaign.
Try this one on Mr. MPAA. When I, the older consumer, pay to see a movie at the theater, I feel almost no obligation to wait months to pay to view it again at home.
Window all you want. Whine about the starving artists all you want. Once I've paid for the first experience, I feel NO obligation to pay you again. BECAUSE, I'm old enough to remember that once you paid to see a movie, you just had to wait a year or two to see it on TV for FREE. There were NO other options once it left the theaters. Sorry that the tech left you behind. Good luck with that.
No the DVD is not dead, neither are CDs, Cassettes, Vinyl, 8-track, 8mm, or even reel-to-reel.
Yes you can still buy all of those.
So you have obviously missed the point. Yes we know DVDs are still a gravy train, but the writing is on the wall and no one seems to care. The point you missed is that the game changed, its not just the medium that's changed, but the reproduction and distribution system as well.
On the post: First Round Of Ebook Price Fixing Settlements Are Announced
Re: Doesn't seem fair????
It doesn't seem fair it absolutely IS NOT fair. Conspiring to artificially inflate prices does far more harm to consumers than violating a few "patents" does to Apple.
Fair would be if the DOJ were to use the jury award from the Samsung case as a measure to determine the penalty for Apple in this case.
On the post: Crime Inc. Produces Thoughtful, Nuanced Episode About Piracy (Haha, Just Kidding! Cue Scary Music)
Poor gatekeepers
I wonder if they are going to show us some poor guy who can no longer afford his summer house or the payments on his new Bentley.
On the post: Want To Know How Weak The GOP's Internet Freedom Platform Is? The MPAA Loves It
Re: Really? Yes really
That was actually the first attempt at IP enforcement. The caveman tied a pointy rock to a stick and then charged all the other cavemen a fee to make their own. They all gladly paid and then killed the inventor. IP enforcement was not attempted again for many millennia.
On the post: The TSA's Infamous 'Behavior Detection' In Action: Mandatory 'Chats' About Every Detail Of Your Trip
Re: ???
Did I read that analogy correctly?
Ummmm isn't the problem in Syria the government attacking the civilians?
On the post: Doctor Who Travels Through Time To Stop Australian Pirates By Giving Them What They Want
Re: Huh???
is then not (necessarily) just "giving the viewer
what he wants"
Holy Batshit economics!
How is not giving the viewer what he wants, not optimal? Keeping all eyes on your monetized content is the goal presumably. Soooo not streaming your monetized content to viewer who will just watch it elsewhere on the web is smart how?
But but but... They need to pay. Wait, it's paid for already. Ummmm we haven't figured out how to better monetize the streaming service? Ummmm it's just not right? What about the children?
On the post: Two Years Later, Lobbying By Microsoft & IBM Creates Loophole In New Zealand To Allow Software Patents
Demand???
On the post: TSA Declares Themselves Fashion & Funny Police
This one wasn't the TSA
It was Delta and the local transit cops that turned out to be completely clueless and/or racist. I'm guessing that the TSA was already aware of Arijit's condition and saw no reason to bother him further.
On the post: HBO Go Goes Everywhere... Except Your TV Set
Who Cares?
Guess what? We the consumer now understand the safe harbor law and that we are not doing anything illegal by linking to infringing material.
I'm wondering how pissing off the paying customers is protecting the revenue stream. It must work like trickle-down economics.
On the post: The Inevitable Crowdfunding Backlash When People Realize Projects Fail & Change
Re: Perfect
I think you just described the gatekeeper business model perfectly.
On the post: DEA Gets Lawsuit Dismissed Because It Couldn't Cope With Two Terabytes Of Evidence
Re: Re: Ask Google
ICE gets millions to enforce IP laws, so why is the DEA having problems storing a few TB of evidence. Personally I would rather the DEA get more funding for data storage than ICE for IP enforcement.
Maybe the DEA should ask the NSA for some extra storage space.
On the post: DEA Gets Lawsuit Dismissed Because It Couldn't Cope With Two Terabytes Of Evidence
Re: Re: Ask Google
ICE gets millions to enforce IP laws, so why is the DEA having problems storing a few TB of evidence. Personally I would rather the DEA get more funding for data storage than ICE for IP enforcement.
Maybe the DEA should ask the NSA for some extra storage space.
On the post: GOP Platform May Include Internet Freedom Language... But Also Wants Crackdown On Internet Porn
Conservatives lack the ability to turn shit off
Porn is not a multi-billion dollar industry because no one wants to see it.
On the post: DEA Gets Lawsuit Dismissed Because It Couldn't Cope With Two Terabytes Of Evidence
Ask Google
So that's 100TB of space for free. Well sorta, Google is willing to foot the bill.
Oh and they could all get hotmail accounts too, for another 100TB or so of storage.
On the post: Pen vs. Pen: Dealing With A Copycat By Naming & Shaming
Re: Same excrement 'nother sol
Company A makes a good alarm system and ships units that are slightly harder to copy. Company B makes shoddy counterfeits which are presumably sold by an offshore VAR (value added reseller). Company A then accepts responsibility and repairs Company B's product when it fails.
Somehow the leap in logic is that the sleaziest company wins in an unregulated capitalist market. While there are plenty of arguments for government regulation, this isn't a very good one. Quality products often do far better in the marketplace regardless of regulations, no matter how much sleazy competition is out there. Because consumers want products that work.
The only way a shoddy copy can survive is when the lack of quality is acceptable to the consumer because of the cost saving.
The entire point of this article is to show that blatantly ripping someone off can backfire horribly if the core fan base finds out. These pens had a particular fanbase that the copier tried to exploit but the connection to the content creator was far stronger than the copier anticipated.
On the post: Facebook's Lower Stock Price Means Saverin Doubled Tax Bill By Leaving The Country
Sick
Renouncing your citizenship over taxes on these sums of money doesn't make someone evil, it makes them idiotic or borderline insane.
On the post: District Court: $675,000 For Non-commercially Sharing 30 Songs Is Perfectly Reasonable
Apples and Oranges
Digital file sharing DOES resemble commercial infringement once its on the network, but to the end user it just looks like sharing a file.
If you are a judge in these cases, I can see where it would be difficult to come to a fair ruling. From the file sharers point of view, there is generally no intent to profit, but from the content creator's point of view there is definitely an impact on sales. Are statutory damages even remotely reasonable? NO they are not.
On the post: District Court: $675,000 For Non-commercially Sharing 30 Songs Is Perfectly Reasonable
Re: easy answer
Let's go with 10 songs per CD and assume you've handed out 20 of those CDs. You owe a minimum of $6 million.
On the post: A 'Too Polished' Kickstarter Video Is No Substitute For Connecting With Fans
Huh???
Ummm yes, it does matter who you are AND if you need the money or not. I hardly suspect that Sony or Microsoft or Warner Bros. would have much success with any sort of Kickstarter campaign. Although, if the return on a donation were perceived to be significantly higher than the donation, then I supposed that just about any person/company could run a successful Kickstarter campaign.
On the post: The DVD Is Dying. Hollywood's Plan? Do Nothing And Cede Ground To File Sharing
Hey Hollywood! Listen up!
Window all you want. Whine about the starving artists all you want. Once I've paid for the first experience, I feel NO obligation to pay you again. BECAUSE, I'm old enough to remember that once you paid to see a movie, you just had to wait a year or two to see it on TV for FREE. There were NO other options once it left the theaters. Sorry that the tech left you behind. Good luck with that.
On the post: The DVD Is Dying. Hollywood's Plan? Do Nothing And Cede Ground To File Sharing
Re: The dvd is NOT dead.
Yes you can still buy all of those.
So you have obviously missed the point. Yes we know DVDs are still a gravy train, but the writing is on the wall and no one seems to care. The point you missed is that the game changed, its not just the medium that's changed, but the reproduction and distribution system as well.
Next >>