This is so wrong. Big Business will police itself, as long as you don't bail it out. Your recession is proof that having the government control the interest rate, encourage home ownership, and in general meddle with the economy only messes it up. Leave business to businesses. They know what they are doing.
Name me one successful corporation that isn't run by billionares. That's how the free market works, you idiot. You prefer to shop with companies run by broke losers?
I connect my computer to my TV, but the biggest problem is now I need my keyboard on my lap to act as a remote. Anyone have a better solution? Can I buy a remote for my computer?
> Actually, it's usually the OS that makes the computer obsolete.
Sorry, but this is 100% wrong. My engineering firm still runs Windows XP, but we have the most powerful desktop computers available and upgrade every 18 months. It is not the software, it is the hardware.
Have you even been to the Pirate Bay? They host torrents, which do not contain infringing material. But because you idiots keep attacking them, congratulations, in 2 weeks, TPB won't even carry torrents, just magnet links (which is a hash of the torrent file). How can you shut this down? You can copy the entire Pirate Bay into one thumb drive. The only way to kill the Pirate Bay is to 1) target _every_ file sharer in the world, or 2) shutdown the internet.
> Once again, the only way to defeat piracy is to attack
> the DEMAND side of the equation
This! Piracy is democratic: it only exists because people _want_ it to exist. The ratio of downloaders to uploaders is massive. It only takes one uploader, and you will never eliminate them all. The only way to combat piracy is reduce the number of downloaders.
Watch "Exit Through The Gift Shop" or "My Kid Could Paint That". Art is not about effort. You don't pay millions for a Warhol because it was difficult to create. If you want to pay based on effort, by a car. You pay for his name.
Dude, it is simple. Ask your self this question? Is it a replacement for the original? Yes? Then it is copyright infringement. No? Then it isn't.
So yes, to take a movie, colorize it, and try and distribute it is copyright infringement.
Of course, the law is much more idiotic and conviluted than this, so who knows if what I said is right. But in a sane world, this would be the only question.
That is tortuous logic. It is easier to just understand where the money comes from, because then you can understand motivation. "Why don't broadcasters make it easy to access their content -- I paid for it!" Wrong. They don't let you access their content because it is the sugar they use for you to consume advertisements. Once you understand how the model works, then you understand why it is the way it is.
I went to the Andy Warhol Museum. I had my 0.3 Megapixel flashless camera (this was 2002) and took a few pictures of some of his paintings. It was a weekday, no one was there, and some girl comes up to me and says, "No pictures." First, there was no signage anywhere that said no pictures. I guess it is just assumed. Second, THIS IS ANDY WARHOL. Most of his art is taken from popular images like celebrity photos, consumer products, and newspaper photos.
By the way, when you leave the Warhol museum, you exit through the gift shop.
WRONG. Wolverine made $85MM at the box office opening weekend. It fits in the bell curve perfectly: X1 ($54MM), X2 ($85MM), X3 ($103MM), W ($85MM), X4 ($55MM). Wolverine has the lowest lifetime to opening weekend ratio of all those movies, which means people went opening weekend because of buzz and then realized it was crap.
I, for one, would not have seen it in theatres if I hadn't seen the workprint. I didn't see X2 or X3 in theatres because of the reviews. I was curious to see how the final effects turned out on Wolverine.
The damages for leaking that print are actually negative, so they owe that guy money. (Of course, he still might be guilty of actual physical theft, too, which should be punished.)
When you are championing a cause, doing that which you discourage others from doing does two things:
1) Weakens you argument
2) Makes you look childish.
I've read a few reports talking about Chinese worker suicides. If you compare the suicide rate to the national rate, it is actually lower. So working at these business actually _lowers_ the rate.
> Not even close to being as "disgusting" as your daily
> piracy apologism here; like GOOGLE for instance- a
> website that had thousands of links to infringing material.
On the post: Real Scarcity Is An Important Part Of A Business Model; Artificial Scarcity Is A Terrible Business Model
Re: Piracy
We already have word for things. Stop making up your own.
On the post: Economist Notices That The US Is Getting Buried Under Costly, Useless Over-Regulation
Re: Re: Sarbanes-Oxley should be the first to go
On the post: FTC Reminds EPIC That Suing The FTC To Get It To Investigate Google Might Not Be The Best Idea
Re:
Name me one successful corporation that isn't run by billionares. That's how the free market works, you idiot. You prefer to shop with companies run by broke losers?
On the post: Smart TVs: Not Such A Smart Idea
Re:
On the post: Smart TVs: Not Such A Smart Idea
Re: Re:
Sorry, but this is 100% wrong. My engineering firm still runs Windows XP, but we have the most powerful desktop computers available and upgrade every 18 months. It is not the software, it is the hardware.
On the post: The Pirate Bay's Peter Sunde Questions Why We Let Dying Industries Dictate Terms Of Democracy
Re:
Have you even been to the Pirate Bay? They host torrents, which do not contain infringing material. But because you idiots keep attacking them, congratulations, in 2 weeks, TPB won't even carry torrents, just magnet links (which is a hash of the torrent file). How can you shut this down? You can copy the entire Pirate Bay into one thumb drive. The only way to kill the Pirate Bay is to 1) target _every_ file sharer in the world, or 2) shutdown the internet.
On the post: The Pirate Bay's Peter Sunde Questions Why We Let Dying Industries Dictate Terms Of Democracy
Re:
Because they make a product people want, and at least some people with pay for.
On the post: Evidence Shows That Megaupload Shutdown Had No Real Impact On Infringement
Re: Re:
> the DEMAND side of the equation
This! Piracy is democratic: it only exists because people _want_ it to exist. The ratio of downloaders to uploaders is massive. It only takes one uploader, and you will never eliminate them all. The only way to combat piracy is reduce the number of downloaders.
On the post: When Judges Are Determining Whether Or Not Art Should Exist... We Have A Problem
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: When Judges Are Determining Whether Or Not Art Should Exist... We Have A Problem
Re:
Dude, it is simple. Ask your self this question? Is it a replacement for the original? Yes? Then it is copyright infringement. No? Then it isn't.
So yes, to take a movie, colorize it, and try and distribute it is copyright infringement.
Of course, the law is much more idiotic and conviluted than this, so who knows if what I said is right. But in a sane world, this would be the only question.
On the post: Rather Than Bitching About The Failure Of SOPA/PIPA, Rupert Murdoch Should Take A Closer Look At His Own Policies
Re: Hes stupid to pay, and is supporting Murdocks riches !!!!
On the post: Rather Than Bitching About The Failure Of SOPA/PIPA, Rupert Murdoch Should Take A Closer Look At His Own Policies
Re: Re:
That is tortuous logic. It is easier to just understand where the money comes from, because then you can understand motivation. "Why don't broadcasters make it easy to access their content -- I paid for it!" Wrong. They don't let you access their content because it is the sugar they use for you to consume advertisements. Once you understand how the model works, then you understand why it is the way it is.
On the post: Once Again, If You're Trying To Save The $200 Million Movie, Perhaps You're Asking The Wrong Questions
Re: Did the crew get paid?
> Union jobs pay $15.00-22.00/hr (and up) with medical benefits
I think we have our answer. Look at any industry with costs going out of control, and you'll find a union.
On the post: Ownership Mentality: Art Gallery Prohibits Sketching
Irony
By the way, when you leave the Warhol museum, you exit through the gift shop.
On the post: Network TV Execs Discover What Pirates Always Knew: Making Stuff Available Online Is Good Marketing
Re:
I, for one, would not have seen it in theatres if I hadn't seen the workprint. I didn't see X2 or X3 in theatres because of the reviews. I was curious to see how the final effects turned out on Wolverine.
The damages for leaking that print are actually negative, so they owe that guy money. (Of course, he still might be guilty of actual physical theft, too, which should be punished.)
On the post: I'm Not A Fan Of This Craptastic Trademark Lawsuit
Re: Re: Re:
Saying that murder exists, and the death penalty doesn't really lower the murder rate as much as other methods, does not make me pro-murder.
On the post: Lamar Smith Caught Infringing On Photographer's Copyright
Re:
1) Weakens you argument
2) Makes you look childish.
Was that so hard to understand?
On the post: Exploring The Factories Where All Our Gadgets Are Made
Re: Re:
On the post: ICE Propaganda Film Pats Itself On The Back For Censoring The Web; Promises Much More To Come
Re: Re: Re:
> piracy apologism here; like GOOGLE for instance- a
> website that had thousands of links to infringing material.
ftfy
On the post: ICE Propaganda Film Pats Itself On The Back For Censoring The Web; Promises Much More To Come
Re: Re:
That idea was already debunked. "88.5 percent of Americans' consumer spending is on things made in the U.S."
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/business/2011/08/made-china-goods-only-small-sliver-us-consu mption-fed-finds/41233/
Next >>