Once again, there's more than two sides to an argument.
Also, I find it ironic that you talk to Senators all day and don't remember the one Senator who became infamous for wanting to destroy computers left and right.
And who could forget that once upon a time, copyprivilege was punishable by death?
Feel free to go ahead and debate them and minimize them all you want. I'm sure the point will be lost on you that this really isn't a huge issue to me, because the thoughts and opinions of one anonymous speaker wanting to Donkey Punch Beryll, doesn't mean that everyone in the world who supports filesharing, or speaks out against it, feels the same way.
I would suggest the EFF get involved. This is very important to them, to ensure justice on a case like this and showing ways that she's not an unbiased judge can severely dampen her credibility.
"I haven't seen proponents of the copyright or the Protect IP bill suggest killing pirate site operators or stating that judges who render copyright decisions they disagree with have group sex with animals. "
... Are you absolutely sure about this? I'm giving you your ONE chance to back away from this statement.
They reveal nothing. It's someone's expressed opinion albeit heavy on sarcasm.
It's neither someone's "character" nor mental faculties, when you can't understand a joke and want to justify demonizing someone's viewpoint in order to continue ad hominem attacks.
If anything most people figure things out by reverse engineering or individual research. I recall that James Watt's steam engine was reverse engineered and made more powerful after his death.
I recall that there has been a LARGE study about the patent trolls who build patent portfolios while making nothing.
And given that Microsoft makes more money suing Google's partners than making Win 7 better, there's a problem with the system.
The problems of the patent system have been discussed at length. They disclose nothing. If someone wants to learn, there are other methods than the patent.
Somehow, we're saying the same thing about products, but I just don't share the idea that the end product is the final say. I've seen arguments that some people prefer the BT method to streaming. Others have little access to the products in tangible forms. Sometimes the price is too expensive. There's a number of reasons that people want content from the **AA. But the fact that there's larger demand doesn't discount anything else from being produced despite that demand.
" But the point isn't the individual artists, but rather that a huge amount of the world wants what comes out of the record labels, what comes out of Hollywood, etc."
Please... Stop...
That is not, by any stretch, the *only* things that people want. What you're saying is that people advocate only **AA stuff with no regards to other content.
And that, by no means is the only case. It's as if the successes of Jamendo, Kickstarter, or even the Youtube stars is severely undermined.
What about the people that "pirate" authorized content?
This is the problem with the argument as I see it and what I'm criticizing. There is no absolute argument here. It's not "oh, people only want RIAA content, and this is proven by how many people have downloaded it versus Jamendo numbers". The RIAA numbers are a part of the music industry. The MPAA makes a few movies that are a part of a whole. Same as the people of Sun Dance or the consumers that pirate material, buy it for $1 on a website, pay for access through Netflix, or make new communities through the "rogue sites" which happen to show the same content and gather around certain movies and games being shared.
People are making content and finding ways to monetize it. Some are giving it away for free. Others are building platforms such as Machinima.com for videogames. Still others have success with working with new authors to market wares. The digital universe is very complex. It can't be simplified to just **AA or nothing.
"Of course a lawyer wrote it, just like virtually all of the other types of legal documents you may deal with every day. What does this have to do with anything?"
As has been shown, patent lawyers make the patent as vague as possible. But by no means does all of the "legalese" of this patent point out the obviousness of it.
Look at Claim 1. All you have to do is say "to make a costume able to fit a human adult up to 6 feet tall"
All of this extra stuff about a skeletal structure, hip bones connected to the thigh bones, the thigh bones connected to the hip bones, etc, aren't really necessary.
Finally, how much money goes to claim a patent while the person doesn't just go to make the costume? That's where the money would be better spent, anyway.
For example, I am quite happy to purchase a movie DVD and watch it at home, even if it is "DRM'ed" to the hilt. Does that limit some thingss I might want to do at a later date?
Well, that limits the time you spend on other projects...
Once I have seen a movie I tend not to watch it again.
Ok, but what about fans who watch movies 4-5 times in theaters? What about the people who purchase other goods related to a series or a movie? I like Scott Pilgrim. While I didn't pay for the books, I bought the movie and got the T-shirts. That's just one aspect I can think of right now. By no means is content the end product. There's plenty of products that can be bought for a series, a movie, book or anything else.
On the post: US Gov't Continues Indicting People For File Sharing; 5 Indicted For NinjaVideo
Odd...
On the post: Former RIAA Lobbyist, Now Judge, Says Lowest Possible Statutory Damages For Single Case Of Infringement Is $3,430
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Also, I find it ironic that you talk to Senators all day and don't remember the one Senator who became infamous for wanting to destroy computers left and right.
There have been death threats in filesharing.
And who could forget that once upon a time, copyprivilege was punishable by death?
Feel free to go ahead and debate them and minimize them all you want. I'm sure the point will be lost on you that this really isn't a huge issue to me, because the thoughts and opinions of one anonymous speaker wanting to Donkey Punch Beryll, doesn't mean that everyone in the world who supports filesharing, or speaks out against it, feels the same way.
On the post: Former RIAA Lobbyist, Now Judge, Says Lowest Possible Statutory Damages For Single Case Of Infringement Is $3,430
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Former RIAA Lobbyist, Now Judge, Says Lowest Possible Statutory Damages For Single Case Of Infringement Is $3,430
Re: Mike's title is FALSE.
Ootb just saved 50% by switching his name to Mr. Pot...
On the post: Former RIAA Lobbyist, Now Judge, Says Lowest Possible Statutory Damages For Single Case Of Infringement Is $3,430
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This may come to backfire on the plaintiff as well as Beryl...
On the post: US Gov't Continues Indicting People For File Sharing; 5 Indicted For NinjaVideo
My take
On the post: US Gov't Continues Indicting People For File Sharing; 5 Indicted For NinjaVideo
Re:
*sigh*
On the post: Former RIAA Lobbyist, Now Judge, Says Lowest Possible Statutory Damages For Single Case Of Infringement Is $3,430
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
... Are you absolutely sure about this? I'm giving you your ONE chance to back away from this statement.
On the post: Former RIAA Lobbyist, Now Judge, Says Lowest Possible Statutory Damages For Single Case Of Infringement Is $3,430
Re: Re: Re:
It's neither someone's "character" nor mental faculties, when you can't understand a joke and want to justify demonizing someone's viewpoint in order to continue ad hominem attacks.
That's all and nothing more.
On the post: Did Jim Henson Infringe on a Recently Approved Patent?
Re: Re: Reading this thread....
If anything most people figure things out by reverse engineering or individual research. I recall that James Watt's steam engine was reverse engineered and made more powerful after his death.
I recall that there has been a LARGE study about the patent trolls who build patent portfolios while making nothing.
And given that Microsoft makes more money suing Google's partners than making Win 7 better, there's a problem with the system.
I've also heard it said that taking down the patent system leads to more innovation in countries such as Sweden.
The problems of the patent system have been discussed at length. They disclose nothing. If someone wants to learn, there are other methods than the patent.
On the post: The Washington Declaration On Intellectual Property And The Public Interest... Which Politicians Will Ignore
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Here's Corey Smith from 2006
as of 9/11 - Status 75 seeds | 8 peers
Kendra Springer on Bittorrent vs her Jamendo page, has had less success.
People fileshare for various reasons and the growth of filesharing means alternative methods of finding content.
Somehow, we're saying the same thing about products, but I just don't share the idea that the end product is the final say. I've seen arguments that some people prefer the BT method to streaming. Others have little access to the products in tangible forms. Sometimes the price is too expensive. There's a number of reasons that people want content from the **AA. But the fact that there's larger demand doesn't discount anything else from being produced despite that demand.
On the post: That Anonymous Coward's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's why he's only doing porn cases now.
On the post: Photographs Are Mechanical Representations Of Facts, And Thus Should Have Only Thin Copyright Protection
Re: Re: Re: Re: Clearly you have little understanding of copyright law
On the post: Did Jim Henson Infringe on a Recently Approved Patent?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What are you trying to say?
On the post: The Washington Declaration On Intellectual Property And The Public Interest... Which Politicians Will Ignore
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Please... Stop...
That is not, by any stretch, the *only* things that people want. What you're saying is that people advocate only **AA stuff with no regards to other content.
And that, by no means is the only case. It's as if the successes of Jamendo, Kickstarter, or even the Youtube stars is severely undermined.
What about the people that "pirate" authorized content?
This is the problem with the argument as I see it and what I'm criticizing. There is no absolute argument here. It's not "oh, people only want RIAA content, and this is proven by how many people have downloaded it versus Jamendo numbers". The RIAA numbers are a part of the music industry. The MPAA makes a few movies that are a part of a whole. Same as the people of Sun Dance or the consumers that pirate material, buy it for $1 on a website, pay for access through Netflix, or make new communities through the "rogue sites" which happen to show the same content and gather around certain movies and games being shared.
People are making content and finding ways to monetize it. Some are giving it away for free. Others are building platforms such as Machinima.com for videogames. Still others have success with working with new authors to market wares. The digital universe is very complex. It can't be simplified to just **AA or nothing.
On the post: If A Kid Grabs Your Camera In The Street And Snaps Some Photos, Who Owns The Copyright
Re: Ownership
On the post: The Washington Declaration On Intellectual Property And The Public Interest... Which Politicians Will Ignore
Re: Re:
On the post: The Washington Declaration On Intellectual Property And The Public Interest... Which Politicians Will Ignore
Re: Re: Politicians Against Public Interests
Here's the idea, a Kickstarter for $500,000, pick up a Youtube page, and ignore all the rhetorical BS that goes on in the White House.
Find ways to support your platform through smaller donations instead of the legalized bribery.
In regards to answering emails, you could do it through Youtube once a month.
Congressmen should be responsible to their constituents, not the money.
On the post: Did Jim Henson Infringe on a Recently Approved Patent?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
As has been shown, patent lawyers make the patent as vague as possible. But by no means does all of the "legalese" of this patent point out the obviousness of it.
Look at Claim 1. All you have to do is say "to make a costume able to fit a human adult up to 6 feet tall"
All of this extra stuff about a skeletal structure, hip bones connected to the thigh bones, the thigh bones connected to the hip bones, etc, aren't really necessary.
Finally, how much money goes to claim a patent while the person doesn't just go to make the costume? That's where the money would be better spent, anyway.
On the post: The Washington Declaration On Intellectual Property And The Public Interest... Which Politicians Will Ignore
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, that limits the time you spend on other projects...
Once I have seen a movie I tend not to watch it again.
Ok, but what about fans who watch movies 4-5 times in theaters? What about the people who purchase other goods related to a series or a movie? I like Scott Pilgrim. While I didn't pay for the books, I bought the movie and got the T-shirts. That's just one aspect I can think of right now. By no means is content the end product. There's plenty of products that can be bought for a series, a movie, book or anything else.
Next >>