Commercial or Non-commercial is an irrelevant and useless destinction. But... Natural Individual vs. Legal Entity -is- a useful destinction to make in a copyright reform context.
First, what has to be recogonized is the following:
1) Copyright is a limited distribution monopoly granted by the PEOPLE to individuals as a -mild- incentive to create.
2) The act of and requisite investment needed to -create- has never been easier or cheaper, thus implying a need to further weaken the -mild- incentive.
3) The Copyright Act of 1976's registration elimination and term extensions has proved to be a perfect model for stupid, short sighted legislation. Congress passed this bone-headed law thinking (correctly) that the coming digital age would create a flood of new works and any copyright registration function would never be able to keep pace, but rather than raise the bar on what should be protected by copyright, they lowered it. And then made it stick longer. Fools.
Intelligent copyright reform looks like this:
A) All Copyright is Registered and Serialized. This supports quick expiry verification and renewal in the digital age. Think of the domain name registry system as a potential model for this new registration system.
B) Much shorter terms. 5 years for single mode media, 8 years for multimedia works.
C) Copyright is no longer transferrable.
D) Registration fees are adjusted periodically to inflation. Entitys (Corporations, L.L.Cs, partnerships) pay 20 times the fee paid by Natural Individuals. The registrars get to keep a defined percentage of the fee.
E) Renewals are available but the fee quadruples for each successive renewal. Successive Entity renewals increase at 8 times the Natural Individual rate.
F) Non-Profit Entities may not obtain or hold Copyright. (Take that Scientology!)
I will continue to favor ala carte pricing for cable and sat television because the bundling defeats the consumer's ability to drive and shape EXACTLY what and HOW MUCH they are willing to pay for in a marketplace artificailly deprived of real competition. And I'd like to point out that until consumers are given this power, Cable and Sat seriously risk being side stepped by ala-carte internet based offerings, assuming that nonsense like bandwidth capping gets trashed in the marketplace or by law.
Bundling is a fundamentally immoral and coercive practice that makes customers angry. And I don't think anyone really expects $1 dollar channels. What we expect is to be able to keep the HomeShopping/WrestlingNow/500WaysToPaintABedroom dreck out of our faces.
With ala-carte pricing the old phrase "500 channels and not a damn thing to watch" just may fade from memory.
And...I'm still chewing on your assertion that TV programming is an infinite good.
Since Patent and Copyright are completely artifical, never found in nature, legal constructs cut from the "whole cloth" of our imaginations, why can we not revoke transferrability of these constructs?
What would be the down side of making Patent and Copyright non-transferrable?
Has anyone else noticed the reliably constant stream of stupid internet related laws, lawmaker statements and legal decisions that come from down under? What is it about the bottom half of the Commonwealth that has so much trouble understanding and coping with the Information Age?
Could it be too much beer, ya-think?
"The Land of Wonder...The Land Down Under."
Ummm...I 'Wonder' what nonsense I'll be hearing next outta these Fosters swilling kangaroo punchers.
Jeeez....These people **are** dumber than a bag of hammers.
Well, what with that substitute teacher being fired in Florida yesterday after being accused of, get this..."Wizardry", I suppose there must be something in the water these days that is actually making people stupid.
Uhhh...Ohhh... Am I becomming stupid too?
How do I know if I've become stupid?
Why don't I know how to tell if I've become stupid??
Yes Stevie has his...let's call them "personal challenges", but rumor has it that at last years company picnic, he came in first in the Chair-Toss event.
Before recently building an intel based "Hackentosh" computer at home I too read this provision in Apple's EULA.
So I went to the box my iPhone came in and I pulled out the Apple Logo sticker they included, and I slapped it on the side of the Shuttle case. "There!", I exclaimed, "An Apple-labeled computer if ever I saw one."
I think the language of the EULA is deliberately imprecise because the lawyer who wrote it likely was thinking of the IBM anti-trust kerfuffle that prevented hardware and software tying. An EULA more precisely worded would say Apple-manufactured. But see, he was clever because he realised there was a greater pitfall here in trying to produce a computer that complies with the SW license (Apple-labeled), yet still avoids Trademark infringement, which is easier to attck legally.
PsyStar is sidestepping this strategy and forcing the issue on the EULA's weak tying.
Another thought:
If copies of OS-X come with an Apple Logo sticker too, PsyStar could sell the PC with a naked HDD, a retail OS-X and a bootloader DVD and the following instructions:
1) Open Retail OS-X box, remove Apple Logo Sticker and apply to computer case. Write "Apple" on logo sticker.
The post goes to "Ethics in Action" which intersects tech at many levels. How tech evolves is often valved via the courts and the ballooning "Lawyersphere". Here's a case where a determined, wrongfully sued (and albeit well funded) plaintiff took the system to the mat and MADE it say it was sorry. Mike is clearly interested in ethics and I appreciate his posting these stories.
The ability to dispatch unopposed missives from ivory towers has passed. Today's audience wants a say in things and if you don't give it to them they will go elsewhere. This is one reason (amongst several) as to why newspapers are withering on the vine these days.
This is also why some of these journalists are angry. They are angry that their lofty bulwarks, esteemed (in thier minds anyway) positions on high of informational authority, are being undermined and challenged by...eee-Gad!...the audience!
Broadcast video journalism is next. As people become more literate and electronically socially engaged, they will be attracted to programming that allows them to comment, talk back, ridicule and argue. Even if these technologies are digital overlays on top of the broadcasted content mixed together at the home of the viewer without the permission of the broadcasted programming owners, it will happen.
This will then spawn new programming designed specifically to facilitate immediate audience feedback and participation.
People love to argue. Feel it. Embrace it. Make money off of it.
The only possible way for government to spur innovation is to GET OUT OF THE WAY. Reduce regulation. Reduce Capital Gains tax rates. Eliminate, reduce, streamline bureaucracy.
If the government really wants to spur future innovation, the single most concrete thing it can do is get out of the primary and secondary education business. Completely. Privatize this sector using vouchers. Our schools have become useless, inept institutions and monuments to failure.
Oh...but what I've suggested here is...boo-hoo-hoo...hard to do and will hurt people's feelings.
OK then, lets ignore the real problems and figure out how to force people to innovate.
When you're a liberal, every problem looks like a conservative.
On the post: What If Copyright Only Applied To Commercial Use?
Return to Registered Copyright
First, what has to be recogonized is the following:
1) Copyright is a limited distribution monopoly granted by the PEOPLE to individuals as a -mild- incentive to create.
2) The act of and requisite investment needed to -create- has never been easier or cheaper, thus implying a need to further weaken the -mild- incentive.
3) The Copyright Act of 1976's registration elimination and term extensions has proved to be a perfect model for stupid, short sighted legislation. Congress passed this bone-headed law thinking (correctly) that the coming digital age would create a flood of new works and any copyright registration function would never be able to keep pace, but rather than raise the bar on what should be protected by copyright, they lowered it. And then made it stick longer. Fools.
Intelligent copyright reform looks like this:
A) All Copyright is Registered and Serialized. This supports quick expiry verification and renewal in the digital age. Think of the domain name registry system as a potential model for this new registration system.
B) Much shorter terms. 5 years for single mode media, 8 years for multimedia works.
C) Copyright is no longer transferrable.
D) Registration fees are adjusted periodically to inflation. Entitys (Corporations, L.L.Cs, partnerships) pay 20 times the fee paid by Natural Individuals. The registrars get to keep a defined percentage of the fee.
E) Renewals are available but the fee quadruples for each successive renewal. Successive Entity renewals increase at 8 times the Natural Individual rate.
F) Non-Profit Entities may not obtain or hold Copyright. (Take that Scientology!)
Ok. That wasn't so hard, was it now?
On the post: CBC Held To Ransom Over Hockey Theme Song
I only hope that...
In fact, Dolores Claman should start visiting schools right now, if she can afford the gas money!
[Nelson]
Haaaa...Haaa!
[/Nelson]
On the post: iPhone Pricing Details: Getting iPhones To Unlock Just Got A Whole Lot Trickier
Note to Steve Jobs....
Quit being AT&T's bitch.
Grow a pair and sell unlocked iPhones.
What are the carriers gonna do? Turn down customers wanting service?
On the post: Advocates Of A La Carte Mandates Misunderstand Infinite Goods
Ummm...I still disagree, Tim.
Bundling is a fundamentally immoral and coercive practice that makes customers angry. And I don't think anyone really expects $1 dollar channels. What we expect is to be able to keep the HomeShopping/WrestlingNow/500WaysToPaintABedroom dreck out of our faces.
With ala-carte pricing the old phrase "500 channels and not a damn thing to watch" just may fade from memory.
And...I'm still chewing on your assertion that TV programming is an infinite good.
On the post: Cable Modem Patent Hoarder Accused Of Pretending To Enter The Market
Please educate me...
What would be the down side of making Patent and Copyright non-transferrable?
On the post: Ownership Doesn't Make Sense In Communications
Re: I kinda thought this might come up.
But what license would Jesus use?
On the post: MediaDefender's Denial Of Service Attack On Revision3
Re: Re: Gee..I'd really like..
This is first week of Business Law 101 stuff.
On the post: MediaDefender's Denial Of Service Attack On Revision3
Gee..I'd really like..
Here we have an ISP that must have a TOS policy that permits Denial-of-Service attacks.
Or did MediaDefender --LIE-- when they signed up?
No. I simply can't believe that a company hired by the RIAA/MPAA would ever lie. That wouldn't be ethical.
On the post: Blockbuster Thinks You'll Drive To A Store To Download A Movie?
Consumers can't be fooled.
How do -YOU- feel about vending machines? Always have a good experience with them? Not me. I hate the things.
If you are a retailer and you are replacing employees with machines at the checkouts, you are alienating your customers.
On the post: Australian Court Says Creating Your Own TV Program Listing Is Copyright Infringement
Re:
Now...I simply must hear more about the time you were punched by a Kangaroo.
??
On the post: Australian Court Says Creating Your Own TV Program Listing Is Copyright Infringement
What is with the Aussies???
Has anyone else noticed the reliably constant stream of stupid internet related laws, lawmaker statements and legal decisions that come from down under? What is it about the bottom half of the Commonwealth that has so much trouble understanding and coping with the Information Age?
Could it be too much beer, ya-think?
"The Land of Wonder...The Land Down Under."
Ummm...I 'Wonder' what nonsense I'll be hearing next outta these Fosters swilling kangaroo punchers.
On the post: Who Says Patent Lawsuits Aren't Sexy?
Ahhh.....
If its your birthday, just come out and -say- so. No need to hint around and be coy with us. We're your fans!
Let's all sing! Come on now...
Hap-py birth-day to you.
Hap-py birth-day to you.
Hap-py birth-day Dear Mikey....
Hap-py birth-day to you.
Ok, now don't forget, we each have to send a quarter to ASCAP.
On the post: RIAA, MPAA In Denial About The Death Of DRM
Ummmm...
Jeeez....These people **are** dumber than a bag of hammers.
Well, what with that substitute teacher being fired in Florida yesterday after being accused of, get this..."Wizardry", I suppose there must be something in the water these days that is actually making people stupid.
Uhhh...Ohhh... Am I becomming stupid too?
How do I know if I've become stupid?
Why don't I know how to tell if I've become stupid??
OH DAMN. I'm getting STUPID too!
On the post: Microsoft Agrees To Put A Copyright Cop On The Zune
Re: Is it just me
Yes Stevie has his...let's call them "personal challenges", but rumor has it that at last years company picnic, he came in first in the Chair-Toss event.
That oughtta count for something, huh?
On the post: Microsoft Agrees To Put A Copyright Cop On The Zune
This is not surprising....
Seriously, I can feel the stupid from here.
What? You don't believe me?
On the post: Will Psystar Represent A Key Case Concerning Enforceability Of EULAs?
The meaning of the word 'is' is attack...
So I went to the box my iPhone came in and I pulled out the Apple Logo sticker they included, and I slapped it on the side of the Shuttle case. "There!", I exclaimed, "An Apple-labeled computer if ever I saw one."
I think the language of the EULA is deliberately imprecise because the lawyer who wrote it likely was thinking of the IBM anti-trust kerfuffle that prevented hardware and software tying. An EULA more precisely worded would say Apple-manufactured. But see, he was clever because he realised there was a greater pitfall here in trying to produce a computer that complies with the SW license (Apple-labeled), yet still avoids Trademark infringement, which is easier to attck legally.
PsyStar is sidestepping this strategy and forcing the issue on the EULA's weak tying.
Another thought:
If copies of OS-X come with an Apple Logo sticker too, PsyStar could sell the PC with a naked HDD, a retail OS-X and a bootloader DVD and the following instructions:
1) Open Retail OS-X box, remove Apple Logo Sticker and apply to computer case. Write "Apple" on logo sticker.
2) Insert Bootloader DVD, start computer.
3) Face Cupertino, Raise middle finger.
On the post: Judge Apologizes, Pays $100k To Tom Siebel For Malicious Lawsuit
Re:
The post goes to "Ethics in Action" which intersects tech at many levels. How tech evolves is often valved via the courts and the ballooning "Lawyersphere". Here's a case where a determined, wrongfully sued (and albeit well funded) plaintiff took the system to the mat and MADE it say it was sorry. Mike is clearly interested in ethics and I appreciate his posting these stories.
On the post: Reporter Curses Out Sports Blogger -- Bemoaning That Blogs Are Filled With Cursing
The days of "Broadcast Journalism" are dead.
The ability to dispatch unopposed missives from ivory towers has passed. Today's audience wants a say in things and if you don't give it to them they will go elsewhere. This is one reason (amongst several) as to why newspapers are withering on the vine these days.
This is also why some of these journalists are angry. They are angry that their lofty bulwarks, esteemed (in thier minds anyway) positions on high of informational authority, are being undermined and challenged by...eee-Gad!...the audience!
Broadcast video journalism is next. As people become more literate and electronically socially engaged, they will be attracted to programming that allows them to comment, talk back, ridicule and argue. Even if these technologies are digital overlays on top of the broadcasted content mixed together at the home of the viewer without the permission of the broadcasted programming owners, it will happen.
This will then spawn new programming designed specifically to facilitate immediate audience feedback and participation.
People love to argue. Feel it. Embrace it. Make money off of it.
On the post: How Would A National Innovation Foundation Work?
Nuh-Uhh, don' go 'dare mahn
If the government really wants to spur future innovation, the single most concrete thing it can do is get out of the primary and secondary education business. Completely. Privatize this sector using vouchers. Our schools have become useless, inept institutions and monuments to failure.
Oh...but what I've suggested here is...boo-hoo-hoo...hard to do and will hurt people's feelings.
OK then, lets ignore the real problems and figure out how to force people to innovate.
When you're a liberal, every problem looks like a conservative.
On the post: Head Of Canadian Post Offices Says Satirical Top 10 List Is Libel
Careful Moya...
Oh, and pass the doughnuts, please.
Next >>