It's not a license, it's a tool.
It's not a tax, it's a penalty.
It's not a penalty, it's a tax.
It's not high, it's just not close to the ground.
We're not falling, we're just going down really quickly.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Good News, Sort of Bad News, and Bad News
A warrant is used to collect evidence or arrest a suspect, a subpoena is used to require testimony, a court order is a court demanding some specific action.
Fair use is ALWAYS legal, no matter who doesn't like it. The only reason there is any gray area is because the copyright moguls refuse to allow their flunkies to codify fair use.
Because codified fair use would declare certain uses beyond their control, which is all the current system is about.
Also, if the first 2 seconds are ok, why aren't the next 49? Why is a legal use suddenly illegal if I do it twice, when each use would be legal on it's own?
Yet, even if natural property rights are not infringed on by stronger parties (the ones with more money, political power, guns; the monopolists, in other words), you STILL have to work your whole life to eat and survive.
In that light, you are totally correct. I went to see the Hobbit. It was full of teens, tweens and grownups, and after the previews were over, every phone in the place went dark. I was towards the back, and there were NEVER any errant glows to distract me.
What's wrong with it is that the dear politician doesn't know what he's talking about, per usual. Like your quote stated, white spaces are used to reduce interference between TV channels, and less so, radio stations. Signals in the white spaces of sufficient strength to be useful for communication will interfere with both the higher AND lower channel. The whitespace signal will get interference from the surrounding frequencies, also. There are mechanical devices for reducing interference (filters), but TV signals are strong. To counteract those signals, filter sizes get prohibitively large, quickly.
Everything you say is true, or plausible. I don't see how that detracts from the success of their experiment, nor how it somehow invalidates the conclusion that fans can be a bigger driving force for success than promotion, if they are allowed to be.
Also, the POINT of the concert was to hit a smaller venue, so that local fans would be able to attend. So, no. A central point would have defeated the purpose, as Folkestone and York are ~250 miles from each other, and Stoke a similar distance from either.
Fair use does not now, nor has it ever, required attribution. What you are talking about is "plagiarism," and that is a concept that only has immediate teeth in academia. While plagiarized work will (eventually) hurt your reputation, as long as it is within the foggy and treacherous bounds of fair use, it is legal. Just stupid.
Sorry, but your analogy fails in one important aspect: When the apartment is in use, there is wear and tear that occur. Also, the landlord is unable to give use of that apartment to another person. So, while it would be nice to give that apartment to the first person on the street without a house, there are only so many houses to go around. That is "scarcity."
Intangible goods (songs, videos, writings AKA 'culture), on the other hand, experience no wear and tear, and are infinitely reproducible at original quality. CDs, DVDs, books and the like are finite and perishable, but the content is not. Unlike apples, oranges and apartments, these intangible goods can be shared among ALL people who can access them with no loss in quality and no reduction in inventory.
No, those of us who pay attention to you, due to boredom or intestinal discomfort, are quite comfortable admitting that what we practice is a form of censorship.
The question that we ask is: So what?
Techdirt is allowed to (truly) censor any comments they wish, and not only is it legal, it's usually ethical. This is their backyard. What they don't like does NOT have to be tolerated.
Instead, they (as far as I can tell) allow themselves only the same powers as their audience. Unless I am mistaken, EVERYONE only gets one vote.
Even then, the content is easily available. You (or your ilk) keep comparing it to finding a censored book in it's difficulty. It's more like putting a blacked out cover on a porno mag. You're free to look, but if you don't want to see it, it's not staring you in the face.
Remember, free speech does not guarantee consequence-free speech. And in this case, the consequences are small indeed.
On the post: Copyright Explained Musically
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Interesting
It's not a tax, it's a penalty.
It's not a penalty, it's a tax.
It's not high, it's just not close to the ground.
We're not falling, we're just going down really quickly.
On the post: Google Explains How It Handles Government Requests For Data; Why Don't More Companies Do This?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Good News, Sort of Bad News, and Bad News
On the post: DailyDirt: Going To Space
Re: Re: where do commercial space companies fit...
On the post: Sony Issues The 'Bob Dylan Copyright Collection Volume' Solely To Extend Copyright On Dylan's Work
Point by point.
They are NOT breaking the law, they got the law changed to suit their desires.
Rock stars do NOT buy nice houses off of royalties, they buy them from ADVANCES. They usually never see royalties in the amounts they are truly due.
And I believe, rereading your transparently counter-able arguments, that I have just been trolled by someone who agrees with me.
On the post: Classic Function Creep As EU Police May Gain Access To Asylum Seekers Fingerprint Database
Re: I'm unable to see cause for concern here.
And, most importantly:
What the fucking fuck does Google have to do with a database on asylum seekers being twisted to this first of most likely many new purposes?
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re:
We can be a vile species sometimes.
On the post: Kraftwerk's 12-Year Lawsuit Over A 2-Second Sample Comes To A Bizarre End
Re: whats 2 seconds have to do with it ??
Because codified fair use would declare certain uses beyond their control, which is all the current system is about.
Also, if the first 2 seconds are ok, why aren't the next 49? Why is a legal use suddenly illegal if I do it twice, when each use would be legal on it's own?
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: “How can it be a natural right if it requires a government for it to exist?”
On the post: Apple's Blocks Popular Kickstarter Project [Updated]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Stupid reason, cheap PR stunt for Kickstarter rival
Except he IS issuing refunds, including refunds for credit card and Kickstarter fees.
So. Yeah.
On the post: Rather Than Punishing Moviegoing Texters, Why Not Provide Incentives For Them To Put Down Their Phones?
Re:
On the post: Congressional Reps More Focused On Short Term Cash Over Long Term Innovation
Re: What's wrong with the white spaces?
On the post: Will Disney Block Star Wars Fan-Made Content?
Re:
Damn. How do 13-year-olds even find this site?
On the post: Crowdsourcing A Live Show Lets Fans Spread The Word About How Awesome You Are
Re:
Really?
Everything you say is true, or plausible. I don't see how that detracts from the success of their experiment, nor how it somehow invalidates the conclusion that fans can be a bigger driving force for success than promotion, if they are allowed to be.
Also, the POINT of the concert was to hit a smaller venue, so that local fans would be able to attend. So, no. A central point would have defeated the purpose, as Folkestone and York are ~250 miles from each other, and Stoke a similar distance from either.
On the post: Just As Key 3D Printing Patents Get Closer To Expiring, Intellectual Ventures Patents 3D Printing DRM
Re: Just wait...
On the post: Copyright As Censorship: Author Removes Blog Post After Being Threatened For Quoting 4 Sentences
Re: References, Footnotes, Attribution
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Intangible goods (songs, videos, writings AKA 'culture), on the other hand, experience no wear and tear, and are infinitely reproducible at original quality. CDs, DVDs, books and the like are finite and perishable, but the content is not. Unlike apples, oranges and apartments, these intangible goods can be shared among ALL people who can access them with no loss in quality and no reduction in inventory.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The question that we ask is: So what?
Techdirt is allowed to (truly) censor any comments they wish, and not only is it legal, it's usually ethical. This is their backyard. What they don't like does NOT have to be tolerated.
Instead, they (as far as I can tell) allow themselves only the same powers as their audience. Unless I am mistaken, EVERYONE only gets one vote.
Even then, the content is easily available. You (or your ilk) keep comparing it to finding a censored book in it's difficulty. It's more like putting a blacked out cover on a porno mag. You're free to look, but if you don't want to see it, it's not staring you in the face.
Remember, free speech does not guarantee consequence-free speech. And in this case, the consequences are small indeed.
On the post: Life Imitates Conan O'Brien As Samsung 'Opens Apple Store'
Re: Re: Re: Other thing it proves....
Next >>