Problem with the Content Tyrants is that they want to try and control media like a communist society would. They need to keep in mind that we have a free-market system right now.
So far, international bankers haven't yet accomplished their goal of tyranny for the whole earth.
So until that point, you media companies need to compete in what's called "the free market".
This means, if you want people to buy your stuff - then charge a fair price and provide a good value.
But here's the real funny thing about this whole situation and along with that the involvement of Government and others. This whole situation CLEARLY is a prime example of WHY we will never have 'alternate energy' - and that is a DIRECT smack in the face to innovation.
Let's say someone came out with a pretty much "free" source of energy - what do you think would happen?
The power companies, the oil, coal, natural gas industries would immediately come out and start trying to use IP law and whatever SOPA bill they will push through this year on December 31st to BLOCK any alternative energy efforts.
And that is why humanity suffers so. If they would actually let these things out of the cage, in the end, massive profit would be made because the economy would be thriving like crazy. Historically economies have always done best when people are free to innovate and create, that can in fact be proven, historically.
But as usual some narrow minded greedy narcissistic mentally sick people somehow have this overwhelming sense that they NEED control, I suppose it's because of a bad childhood or bad parents, dunno. Of course, the world doesn't recognize this as a 'mental illness'. In *any* other conceptual setting the overwhelming need to have MORE AND MORE AND MORE of something that you already have plenty of is considered insanity - but when it comes to money, it's considered 'success', lol.
United States Patent Application 20080288276
Kind Code A1
Harris; Richard D. November 20, 2008
"A system for survey data acquisition and analysis, including: at least one central processing system, including a storage device, a processing device and a communication device; and at least one portable computing device, including: a display device configured to visually display content to a user, the content comprising at least one survey question; an input device for receiving survey data input by the user in response to the at least one survey question; a processing device for processing the survey data input by the user; and a communication device in communication with the communication device of the at least one central processing system for transmitting or receiving data. The processing device of the at least one central processing system processes survey data received from the at least one portable computing device. Further methods and processes for survey data acquisition and analysis are also disclosed. "
So - in this case, isn't the WIPO in violation here?
" compiling said knowledge and information into data objects, said data objects defining logic trees that represent the cumulative knowledge and information regarding a plurality of situations that are expected to be encountered by said users;
storing said data objects in a central database in a network; and
providing electronic access to said database with a plurality of client devices, said client devices being adapted to store locally a copy of each of said data objects for offline utilization by said users with said client devices wherein changes to any of said data objects stored in said central database are automatically reflected in said local copies of said changed data objects through a synchronization process that occurs whenever said client device accesses services provided by said network."
Aren't they supposed to 'protect IP' and not outright steal it for use on their own web site?
Broadcast TV and Radio have survived for quite some time - serving up content to consumers for 'free'. Sure, there are advertisements, but there are on Google/Facebook too and people use them like nuts.
People are well aware that any media now can be duplicated with pretty much no effort as many times as you want with no loss of quality.
So they need a new business model or they will loose - simple as that. Even if they could somehow mystically stop piracy via the web, it won't change much of anything, people still know that $15.00 for a DVD or a digital download is a rip-off, plain and simple.
I block torrent at home now - I don't get any thing free from torrent, but yet I haven't bought anymore movies than I would have if I could download anything I want for free. See - many movies are *barely* worth the time to even freely download, and many I just haven't seen.
I don't buy movies or music that I haven't sampled yet first, at least in 98% of cases. How many of you own movies or music and just bought it without seeing it or hearing it first? Usually the only time I'll do that is if I really like a specific artist, even then it's quite rare. Usually I'm prompted to buy a physical disc ****AFTER**** I am familiar with what's on it - like anyone with common sense.
Sometimes I feel like we are in the middle ages still.
NO, had we been - Newton, DaVinci, and Galileo's inventions might have been sent cease and desist orders and they might well have just gave up on creating new stuff, heh.
Content users and creators had it better then - and government, well - every day it gets a bit more feudal.
I bet... in 1945, many book companies weren't 'comfortable with TV', and perhaps in 1920, many other companies were 'comfortable with radio'.
You know MPAA/RIAA - there will *always* be criminals - much of the media you put out deals and even glamorizes just that: Scarface, Good fellows and fine examples.
But there are many people who are more than willing to pay a fair price for digital media - I'm sorry, but you can't keep gouging per title, but you can make up for it in sheer quantity of sales. You have a goldmine, just not the savvy to mine it.
First, the name of the site in and of itself encourages the posting only of “dirt,” that is material which is potentially defamatory or an invasion of the subject’s privacy.
And so that doesn't apply to 'TheDirt.com' how then? Shouldn't that apply to both domain names? lol
What 'logic'..
I'm also curious about this then...
The judge twists and turns himself into contortions to try to come up with a reason to say that TheDirty.com is liable for comments made on the site.
What if.. instead of on a web site, someone *in court* said - on public record the *exact* same thing as this commenter on the web - would the court itself be liable as well then, for libel?
Dodd is a prime example of 'politics' in this country. Get in office to screw taxpayers and consumers to make a big corporation a buck. If you do well enough, perhaps the corporation will hire you as it's own private whore.
Piracy and so called rouge websites are just a red herring for the media conglomerates to get what they really want, to turn the Internet into a broadcast medium where they are the sole gatekeepers and can control all of the content available there (and giving them the ability to charge what the want for it).
I think you are right - it's the best innovation that media of any type has ever encountered and they are mad they don't own the rights to all of it.
The day the media industries control the web so happens to be the same day I'm not interested in using the web anymore.
On the post: UK Report Blames The Internet For Terrorism, Says ISPs Should Take Down Content
Here's a couple questions for you government types:
In who's hands have guns killed more people? In the hands of private citizens or in the hands of governments?
Who starts wars? Governments or people?
Now again - who are the terrorists?
On the post: People Realizing That It Wasn't Google Lobbying That Stopped PIPA/SOPA
So far, international bankers haven't yet accomplished their goal of tyranny for the whole earth.
So until that point, you media companies need to compete in what's called "the free market".
This means, if you want people to buy your stuff - then charge a fair price and provide a good value.
But here's the real funny thing about this whole situation and along with that the involvement of Government and others. This whole situation CLEARLY is a prime example of WHY we will never have 'alternate energy' - and that is a DIRECT smack in the face to innovation.
Let's say someone came out with a pretty much "free" source of energy - what do you think would happen?
The power companies, the oil, coal, natural gas industries would immediately come out and start trying to use IP law and whatever SOPA bill they will push through this year on December 31st to BLOCK any alternative energy efforts.
And that is why humanity suffers so. If they would actually let these things out of the cage, in the end, massive profit would be made because the economy would be thriving like crazy. Historically economies have always done best when people are free to innovate and create, that can in fact be proven, historically.
But as usual some narrow minded greedy narcissistic mentally sick people somehow have this overwhelming sense that they NEED control, I suppose it's because of a bad childhood or bad parents, dunno. Of course, the world doesn't recognize this as a 'mental illness'. In *any* other conceptual setting the overwhelming need to have MORE AND MORE AND MORE of something that you already have plenty of is considered insanity - but when it comes to money, it's considered 'success', lol.
Kinda silly if you really look at it.
On the post: The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Would Like To Know What You Think Of Them (Sorta)
United States Patent Application 20080288276
Kind Code A1
Harris; Richard D. November 20, 2008
"A system for survey data acquisition and analysis, including: at least one central processing system, including a storage device, a processing device and a communication device; and at least one portable computing device, including: a display device configured to visually display content to a user, the content comprising at least one survey question; an input device for receiving survey data input by the user in response to the at least one survey question; a processing device for processing the survey data input by the user; and a communication device in communication with the communication device of the at least one central processing system for transmitting or receiving data. The processing device of the at least one central processing system processes survey data received from the at least one portable computing device. Further methods and processes for survey data acquisition and analysis are also disclosed. "
So - in this case, isn't the WIPO in violation here?
On the post: The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Would Like To Know What You Think Of Them (Sorta)
http://www.google.com/patents/US20020147850
" compiling said knowledge and information into data objects, said data objects defining logic trees that represent the cumulative knowledge and information regarding a plurality of situations that are expected to be encountered by said users;
storing said data objects in a central database in a network; and
providing electronic access to said database with a plurality of client devices, said client devices being adapted to store locally a copy of each of said data objects for offline utilization by said users with said client devices wherein changes to any of said data objects stored in said central database are automatically reflected in said local copies of said changed data objects through a synchronization process that occurs whenever said client device accesses services provided by said network."
Aren't they supposed to 'protect IP' and not outright steal it for use on their own web site?
Seriously now.
On the post: Hollywood Wants To Kill Piracy? No Problem: Just Offer Something Better
People are well aware that any media now can be duplicated with pretty much no effort as many times as you want with no loss of quality.
So they need a new business model or they will loose - simple as that. Even if they could somehow mystically stop piracy via the web, it won't change much of anything, people still know that $15.00 for a DVD or a digital download is a rip-off, plain and simple.
I block torrent at home now - I don't get any thing free from torrent, but yet I haven't bought anymore movies than I would have if I could download anything I want for free. See - many movies are *barely* worth the time to even freely download, and many I just haven't seen.
I don't buy movies or music that I haven't sampled yet first, at least in 98% of cases. How many of you own movies or music and just bought it without seeing it or hearing it first? Usually the only time I'll do that is if I really like a specific artist, even then it's quite rare. Usually I'm prompted to buy a physical disc ****AFTER**** I am familiar with what's on it - like anyone with common sense.
On the post: Bulgarian MPs Wear Anonymous/Guy Fawkes Masks To Protest ACTA
On the post: ICE Seizes 300 More Sites; Can't Have People Watching Super Bowl Ads Without Permission
On the post: Homeland Security Denies Entrance To UK Tourist Because Of Twitter Joke
lol
On the post: Saying You Can't Compete With Free Is Saying You Can't Compete Period
They are free to the consumer, no?
On the post: Knowledge Is A Universal Natural Resource -- And Locking It Up Hurts Everyone
NO, had we been - Newton, DaVinci, and Galileo's inventions might have been sent cease and desist orders and they might well have just gave up on creating new stuff, heh.
Content users and creators had it better then - and government, well - every day it gets a bit more feudal.
On the post: An Infographic Showing Just How Frequently Hollywood Has Cried Wolf About 'Piracy'
On the post: MPAA Exec Admits: 'We're Not Comfortable With The Internet'
You know MPAA/RIAA - there will *always* be criminals - much of the media you put out deals and even glamorizes just that: Scarface, Good fellows and fine examples.
But there are many people who are more than willing to pay a fair price for digital media - I'm sorry, but you can't keep gouging per title, but you can make up for it in sheer quantity of sales. You have a goldmine, just not the savvy to mine it.
On the post: Apparently, If Your Domain Has 'Dirt' In The Name, Section 230 Safe Harbors Don't Apply (Uh Oh...)
And so that doesn't apply to 'TheDirt.com' how then? Shouldn't that apply to both domain names? lol
What 'logic'..
I'm also curious about this then...
The judge twists and turns himself into contortions to try to come up with a reason to say that TheDirty.com is liable for comments made on the site.
What if.. instead of on a web site, someone *in court* said - on public record the *exact* same thing as this commenter on the web - would the court itself be liable as well then, for libel?
On the post: Do Pirate Sites Really Make That Much Money? Um... No
On the post: Ownership Mentality: Art Gallery Prohibits Sketching
I can understand no flash photography, but the rest - especially the sketching, is outright obscene.
Well, I guess any Art Students in Chicago should find another museum to check out. I'm sure some adjacent city has one..
On the post: MPAA Directly & Publicly Threatens Politicians Who Aren't Corrupt Enough To Stay Bought
On the post: The Pirate Bay Press Release On SOPA: We Are The New Hollywood
On the post: Bakery Creates TSA-Safe Cupcakes After TSA Defends Its Confiscation Of 'Dangerous' Cupcakes
On the post: Tim O'Reilly Explains Where The Federal Gov't Has Gone Wrong On SOPA/PIPA: Solving The Wrong Problem
I think you are right - it's the best innovation that media of any type has ever encountered and they are mad they don't own the rights to all of it.
The day the media industries control the web so happens to be the same day I'm not interested in using the web anymore.
On the post: White House Comes Out Against The Approach In SOPA/PIPA In Response To Online Petition
DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER!!
DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER!!
DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER!!
DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER!!
Next >>