What the NCAA is really saying is "It's not OK unless you give me money". Would somebody just open a shop and sell T-Shirts with all of the top NCAA playes name and numbers on them. Then, the NCAA would have to stop being so stupid, or suspend all of their top players. So let's be "fans" of one school before a big game and make shirts for all of their top players, which would get them suspended before the game, and the other team is then granted a very easy win just playing all of the second string players.
Those "regulations" are supported by laws passed by congress.
And "Yes" the idea is to remove the corporate welfare. Take out protection of specific industries and companies and let the competition begin. "Real" anti-trust would be one of the "Ok" consumer protection areas and would/should limit the cases of oligarchy and monopoly.
Raw rampant capitalism was one of the conerstones of the founding of the United States. The government has stepped in so many times, that EVERY business is regulated to within inches of death. Except maybe a number of goals that can be counted on one hand, the government should just get out of the way and let "necessity, the mother of invention" take over again. Laws that actually protect consumers are OK, but otherwise, pretty much stay out of the way. Get rid of the milk supports, get rid of the "pay farmers to not grow crops", get rid of the import tariffs to protect non-efficient local industries, get rid of the steel import protections. Reduce the government and let the real competition of capitalism get involved again.
I missed where he said that we should also have a subsidy for scribes. I mean how rude is he. Those guys have been out of work for a long time, ever since Guttenberg got that blasted printing press working. I know, we should tax every writer that uses a printing press and send that money to the out of work scibes. Yeah, Yeah, that's the ticket...... stupid authors, using a printing press to make millions of copies of books and not one of them produced by a scribe. Remember all the fancy drop cap initial letters that were so artfully done. Now, they're just the usual printed letter. I feel very cheated.
Why can't you see that stepping over that imaginary line in the dirt SHOULD make it so that you can't watch the DVD you just bought. Are you so stupid that you can't see why that makes sense? (Insert facepalm and sarcasm mark here).
According to my recollection, the ORIGINAL purpose of patents was two fold. First, in an era where it could takes YEARS to get a product to a sizable market and make a a return on the investment, it was supposed to protect the inventor from others cashing in on the hard work it took to develope the product. The second purpose was to make a public record of the invention so that the knowledge was not lost.
Recent software patents are so broad and do not include any working sample (or even a conceived working sample) of what is supposed to be accomplished, that they are useless. With over 30 years in the software business, reading a current "software patent" is just a broad claim over an idea. In many cases, even the idea if vague except for the concept of a "system and method to -do something- over the Internet". Of course, mentioning "over the Internet" is the most important part. Since a reasonably intelligent person practiced in the art could not produce a workable product from the descriptions, the patent is useless as a store of knowledge. Since the "state of the art" in software has a lifecycle of 18 to 24 months, it is rediculus to lock up anything software related for 17 to 20 years. By the time the patent gets approved, in many cases, the softare has become shelfware.
Look at the "patent thicket" around mobile phones. Most of the patents seem so "obvious" to the practitioners of the art that they all come up with the same thing. That is not the purpose of patent protection (someone should be charged with RTFM about the non-obvious clause).
So, maybe not get rid of patents, but revisit their purpose. The Internet seems to be the store of knowledge and product cycles are measured in months not years. Its time to rethink the process.
I bet they won't pay for my bandwidth overages either.
I need a new router. My old Linksys is starting to be a little flaky. So, now, I will be going with re-purposing an old computer to pfSense. I had already started looking into how to set up a USB boot version of pfSense (and it can be done). So now, it will move up in priority. It used to be that Linksys had the most feature full routers and switches for the best price. They seriously started going downhill when the C-word company bought them. That C-word company seems to have taken the the worst of the corporate force-it-down-your-throat mentality and applied to consumers who have a choice to go elsewhere. From now on, my little piece of the world will receive recommendations to buy anything but C**** routers and switches so that they don't have their private info sold to the world. Having my network data monitored, collected and aggregated just doesn't do anything for me. If nothing else, it will use up my bandwidth to send it to them. In another one of those f***ing corporate money grabs, Comcast now has bandwidth caps. If my usage goes over I get charged more (and I'm betting that C**** won't repay me for the usage overages that they caused). I already block access to as many ad sites as I can, but I need to get to the router site for debugging issues. I guess I'm glad I ordered a TRENDNet gigabit switch now (24 port $109.00) for my house (and yes, I really do need a 24 port switch at home). I used to only buy Linksys. Now, they will be the only entry on my "don't buy from them" list.
What the TCA is really saying is that "THEY" want most of that content NOT found. How can they control "it" if anybody can find it. As some of the other commenters have mentioned, some people just love cat videos. Some people like to find out more about pink slime and how to avoid it (like anybody without a financial gain from it), BUT, if a search engine is available, you don't need TCA to point you in the right direction (for a fee). You don't need to buy a newspaper every day just to keep up on the pink slime controversy. Just "Google it" on the days that there is time to read up on it. Who is creating the next neat YouTube video. For a fee, TCA members want to be able to tell you about it.
If one day, say yesterday, I became interested in micro-hydroelectric power generation, I could research it with Google. I didn't have to go out of my way to go somewhere else (where would I go to find information on that - oh year, the library, which they also don't like), only to decide that it was too much trouble and not do anything about it. Without organizations like TCA to control and charge for information, their cozy jobs of collecting money and giving "some" of it to the rights holders (if they could ever be found) would go away.
At this point in time, you can see their true colors, just like a bully in school, they are not getting their way, so they bring out the name calling. Can you just hear the the jeer in their voice "Google, you are nothing but slime".
If they are manufactured overseas and are not covered by copyright (and hence the First Sale Doctrine) what copyright are they covered under that will prevent "printing my own" version of the textbooks (ignoring the watch issue).
Why aren't most or even more of the Senators asking these questions? I have the answer to that. They are politicians to be politicians. After the elections where they seem interested in the consittuency, they are only interested in being politicians. The people they are supposed to protect and serve are distant memories, at least until another election season rolls around. Then, you have their ear and are their best buddy once again, after all, must have that vote to get back on the gravy train.
Because if for no other reason than it is garuanteed by the constitution that formed this country to protect its citizens from big bad government. You know, like when we got rid of England? And, like the one we have now. You remember, freedom from unreasonable searches, like the ones without being charged with a crime. Yeah, those freedoms that were garuanteed by our constitution. Unfortunately, these basic human rights were only extended to our citizens, and based on statements by Homeland Security, only if you are actually IN the country (reference to the right to sieze and search ANY and ALL property at the border without the constitutional protections we are supposed to have).
This just in, Boston Strangler not guilty, its the Internets fault. Oh wait, the internet didn't exist then. So, is it TVs fault? Telephones? Video Games? Oh my, what ever can we blame it on, its certainly not his fault, right?
One of the things I find curious about discussions of social networks that is obviously missing (to me at least) is the very short history that is considered. Looking far enough back (before vast civilizations were possible - for example to native americans) and we will see that small communities were the norm. Where everybody knew everybody else, quite literally. Privacy was achieved by going out into the woods or field alone (or with the person you wanted to be alone with). With that as a basis and considering that in some cases people don't even know all other residents of the same building (let's face it, some large city apartment buildings could have hundreds of people living in it) any method of trying to connect with other human beings is a good thing. We are not really a society unless we connect with others and can learn from them.
It's a really good thing that Google is the only search engine on the Internet. That way, just issue one DMCA notice to Google and the offending material goes away. Oh wait, Google is not hosting the alleged infringing material, somebody else is. Oh wait, Google is not the only search engine either. So, instead of utilizing Google (oh, wait, using Google is free and you can't get anything for free, that's stealing according to RIAA logic), to find the offending sites that contain the alleged infringing material and issuing a DMCA takedown notice to them to remove the infringing material (which would remove it from all the other search engines they are not talking about (like Bing even since Microsoft doesn't even remove the links for the alleged infringement that they issue DMCA notices to Google for). No, instead lets complain that Google is still finding the alleged infringing material that the RIAA is not getting taken off of some other web site. For heaven's sake, I don't EVER want to be the messenger delivering to the RIAA. I bet they have a sign in all the offices, "SHOOT MESSENGERS ON SITE".
How long before the metaphorical foot starts hurting
I hope that Google has the good sense to let them shoot themselves in the metaphorical foot as often as they want. After all, the DMCA is never abused (despite evidence to the contrary) by them and "it is all good" they say. Or, is this really a diabolical plan to prove that they are being hurt by the pirates? After all, that "great" movie that they produced didn't do very well at the box office (for example It's a Wonderful Life and Attack of the Killer Tomatoes were box office flops but went on to become HUGELY popular movies - obviously for different reasons). BUT, if they can claim a movie failed at the box office and hide the fact that they took down all the reviews, directions to the theaters and trailers, then it must be because of pirates. Right?
On the post: Honey Badger Don't Care... Unless You're Cheering On A College Player With That Nickname
Re: Re: This is just overreach by the NCAA
On the post: Honey Badger Don't Care... Unless You're Cheering On A College Player With That Nickname
This is just overreach by the NCAA
On the post: Help Define How The US Government Promotes Innovation Over The Next Four Years
Re: Re: Get OUT of the way
And "Yes" the idea is to remove the corporate welfare. Take out protection of specific industries and companies and let the competition begin. "Real" anti-trust would be one of the "Ok" consumer protection areas and would/should limit the cases of oligarchy and monopoly.
On the post: Help Define How The US Government Promotes Innovation Over The Next Four Years
Get OUT of the way
On the post: Did You Know That Professional Writing Is Dying And Only Taxing The Public To Pay Writers Can Save It
Let's get back to the really old days
BRING BACK THE SCRIBES................
On the post: NZ Judge In Dotcom Extradition Case Speaks Out Against TPP & US Copyright Extremism
Re: Re:
On the post: NZ Judge In Dotcom Extradition Case Speaks Out Against TPP & US Copyright Extremism
OH, COME ON!
On the post: Dear Lamar Smith & House Judiciary: Have You Learned Nothing From SOPA?
Re: Re: What about public support?(correction)
Isn't that how it was written oh those many years ago?
On the post: Will The Failures Of SOPA & ACTA Highlight The End Of The MPAA & RIAA's Disproportionate Influence On Policy?
The short and long answer
Long: No, too much money to be had so they'll keep pushing on.
On the post: Judge Posner: Do Most Industries Even Need Patents?
If They Could Get Back to Their Purpose
Recent software patents are so broad and do not include any working sample (or even a conceived working sample) of what is supposed to be accomplished, that they are useless. With over 30 years in the software business, reading a current "software patent" is just a broad claim over an idea. In many cases, even the idea if vague except for the concept of a "system and method to -do something- over the Internet". Of course, mentioning "over the Internet" is the most important part. Since a reasonably intelligent person practiced in the art could not produce a workable product from the descriptions, the patent is useless as a store of knowledge. Since the "state of the art" in software has a lifecycle of 18 to 24 months, it is rediculus to lock up anything software related for 17 to 20 years. By the time the patent gets approved, in many cases, the softare has become shelfware.
Look at the "patent thicket" around mobile phones. Most of the patents seem so "obvious" to the practitioners of the art that they all come up with the same thing. That is not the purpose of patent protection (someone should be charged with RTFM about the non-obvious clause).
So, maybe not get rid of patents, but revisit their purpose. The Internet seems to be the store of knowledge and product cycles are measured in months not years. Its time to rethink the process.
On the post: Former Righthaven CEO Fights Back; Claims As The Manager Of The Manager Of Righthaven He's Still In Power
In the Theme of Naming these kinds of Actions........
On the post: You Don't Own What You Buy, Part 15,332: Cisco Forces Questionable New Firmware On Routers
I bet they won't pay for my bandwidth overages either.
On the post: Google Is To Pink Slime As Apples Are To Airplanes
The TCA = High School Bullys
If one day, say yesterday, I became interested in micro-hydroelectric power generation, I could research it with Google. I didn't have to go out of my way to go somewhere else (where would I go to find information on that - oh year, the library, which they also don't like), only to decide that it was too much trouble and not do anything about it. Without organizations like TCA to control and charge for information, their cozy jobs of collecting money and giving "some" of it to the rights holders (if they could ever be found) would go away.
At this point in time, you can see their true colors, just like a bully in school, they are not getting their way, so they bring out the name calling. Can you just hear the the jeer in their voice "Google, you are nothing but slime".
On the post: Why The Supreme Court Needs To Make Sure That Selling A Used iPad Isn't A Copyright Violation
Why just not the First Sale Part
On the post: Wyden & Udall Block FISA Amendments Act Until US Admits How Many Americans Are Being Spied On
Why are most of them Politicians
On the post: Wyden & Udall Block FISA Amendments Act Until US Admits How Many Americans Are Being Spied On
Re: Re:
On the post: Press Tries To Pin High Profile Killings On The Web & World Of Warcraft
Re: Re:
On the post: Don't Read Andrew Keen's Book - You'll Harm His Identity
Let's go even further back in history
On the post: RIAA Can't Figure Out Google's Takedown Tools; Blames Google
Why Issue the DMCA notice to Google at all
On the post: DMCA Notices So Stupid It Hurts
How long before the metaphorical foot starts hurting
Next >>