Seems to me that the Libertarians are themselves split on the issue of so-called "intellectual property". Against Monopoly does not support the concept of so-called "intellectual property". But then you have the Techology Liberation Front which tends to endorse so-called "intellectual property" including increased government involvement through legislative/regulatory protection.
The presumption in the US, it seems, is that the "seller" (under the concept of free speech) has a right to accost anyone they so chose to sell a product. It is the consumer who should have the ability to prevent the "seller" from interfering with them.
Free speech does not entitle anyone to inflict their message on the recipient. Furthermore, the recipient should not be forced to take proactive measures to avoid the message.
In accosting the consumer the "seller" is interfering with the consumer's free time and transferring a degree of liability on the consumer. Mike was FORCED by the publisher to dispose of the yellow book by putting it in the recycle bin. Had he not, given today's legal insanities, Mike might have been fined for "littering".
I am NOT involved in the use of public safety radios, so my thoughts are based on informal discussions. UHF radios have been typically open. Recent introductions of high tech UHF radios have added a proprietary (DRM) interface so that the police/fire/ambulance services are locked into the vendors product line.
This issue emerged in a discussion of what would happen should public service radio repeater towers became inoperative (hurricane for example). The response was that ALL radio communication would be disabled. Normally if a repeater goes down, you can continue to communicate via simplex. The ability to use Simplex as an alternative may been "disabled". Whether this is true or not, I don't know.
Finally, found an article that delves into many of the issues The Difference Between Trunked and Conventional Radio Systems. The article writes: "Most trunked radio systems rely on proprietary software. Unlike conventional (non-trunked) radios that allow various brands of radios to seamlessly communicate, most trunked radios contain software that is licensed exclusively by the manufacturer. Most trunking software is viewed as a trade secret by radio manufacturers. .... Interoperability with radio systems that use different trunking technology (different brand of equipment and/or different software versions) is usually not possible. .... Trunked radios cost between three and five times more than non-trunked radios over the life of the equipment."
The disastrous use of proprietary technologies is not limited to the content industry, but to the public sector's ability to use radio communication as well. The privatization of public safety radio system will be (is becoming) a nightmare.
I was having difficulty making the analogy where public institutions are becoming a revenue collection toll-booth for private entities. My daughters have received, on official university stationary, suggestions that we buy the products offered by this or that "exclusive" company. The letters of course were phrased in such a manner that we would be bad parents if we did not buy. Soon it will probably be included in the tuition bill and a violation of some law if we don't pay.
Coincidentally, Mike posted a picture illustrating and making fun of the concept of how public facilities are being denigrated: When The RIAA Is The 'Standard' For Evil. In that picture GM has licensed the use of an interstate highway solely for GM cars!!!!
It should not be the responsibility of any private entity, especially a university, to assume a police power. Given this trend, will the University be arresting students for buying a hamburger at a local greasy spoon rather getting an overly expensive veggieburger at the on-campus (monopoly) franchise?
WG wrote: "increasingly loaded with commercials". Not only that but we have cable channels that are now devoted to PAID programming. Clearly these are sources of revenue for the cable companies. Of course the cable companies have to pay to obtain entertainment content and to build the infrastructure. Nevertheless, I still wonder why the cable bill continues to go up for the consumer when these other sources of revenue are available to the cable companies. One could even argue that based on these sources of revenue, that the cable bill should decline. After all, a lot of good content used to be available for free through broadcast TV. The logical explanation of course (for why the cable bill is not declining) is "monopoly".
I have noticed a couple of times, when doing comparison shopping, that the same product can be priced differently on the same website!!!!
What really irks me are the "fake" websites that are built on demand when undertaking a product search. Turns out, in many cases, that they do not even have the product.
Considering that Linux and Open Office are free, one would expect more governments to use them. Especially with the budget problems most governments are now experiencing.
In fact, with Microsoft as the enterprise software vendor a lot of the expensive software provided is "useless" since the majority of government workers would seldom use it. Even MS Word, which is perhaps the most critical program, is seldom used to its full potential.
These companies may still sue for infringement. After all - it is always the "consumer" who is responsible for using the product in the "correct" manner. So if a patented seed gets onto your property, it is your responsibility to eradicate it. But then in eradicating the seeds you would then end-up being open to being sued for property destruction.
I then don't suppose Monsanto would accept the cost of having their seeds or grown plants returned to them!
The cartoon reminded me of the Monsanto Round-up controversy. Thandian News wrote: "Lawsuits were filed demanding that these crops be placed on hold until more research can be done. Farmers and environmentalists are concerned that the seeds from these plants will effect other crops, and could create weeds which are impossible to kill."
So if a company like Myraid and Monsanto insist that they have a property right to genes for the purpose of extorting revenue, they should also be liable for the damages caused by the "escape" of their so-called property.
Companies get all upset if you "infringe". They then threaten you with all sorts of lawsuits demanding excessive compensation for the supposed damage that they claim to have suffered. Yet when they "destroy" your data or "brick" your device; the universal response (blowing you off) is: "Not our problem, go pound sand.". It's amazing that our economy even works.
GeneralEmergency has a good comment. Here is another one, every company "offering" these onerous terms-of-service should have an authorized representative available to negotiate a contract. If they don't then the consumer should be free to revise the contract terms as they see fit.
Time to restore the meaning of "contract" to an agreement that defines both responsibilities and obligations for the parties involved.
When a company "abandons" a product, it should immediately fall into the public domain. In abandoning a product the company has made a statement that the product is essentially worthless. To reach out from the "grave" to extort revenue violates the concepts behind the free market system and copyright.
Products, should only "die" if the user community finds no further use in the product. Companies, especially with software, should not have the ability to unilaterally "kill" a product at their whim.
A common thread with many of the posts on TechDirt is the attempt of companies to establish tollbooths to extort revenue. Richard has pointed out, that it would be easy to get around these tollbooths. My concern, these tollbooths add nothing of value to our overall economy. They actually are a source of "friction" that is destructive to the economy.
Given the state of technology and data mining techniques a "duplicate" receipt could easily generated. Of course the companies have no interest in providing this type of customer service.
So here we are in a world where companies buy and sell personal information, were virtually every piece of electronics has a serial number, were we have sophisticated just-in-time ordering systems, where GPS technology allows our every move to be tracked, were telemarketers (junk mailers) can track you down, and there is a record of every financial (credit card) transaction ever made; and Sam's club can't (won't) generate a duplicate receipt!
With today's technology there should be no need for any receipt to document proof of purcahse.
Another indicator that those who have "economic power" seem to be able to direct the legal system for their benefit. The concept of "blind" justice and a "level" playing field are an illusion.
We seem, as a society, to be moving in the direction that holders of so-called intellectual property define what is right and wrong. Not only do they define what is right and wrong, but they also feel entitled to to take whatever disciplinary action they deem appropriate without regard to due process.
Define creating something "new". We seem to live in a world were some people believe that anything similar to an idea that they have had is infringement. Orson Scott Card has an excellent read on a frivolous lawsuit by J.K Rowling. Card writes: "Can you believe that J.K. Rowling is suing a small publisher because she claims their 10,000-copy edition of The Harry Potter Lexicon, a book about Rowling's hugely successful novel series, is just a "rearrangement" of her own material.". Orson goes on to write, pointing out the absurdity of Rowling's claim that "Well, heck, I feel like the plot of my novel Ender's Game was stolen by J.K. Rowling."
On the post: Just Calling Something Property, Doesn't Make It Property
Libertarians are Split
On the post: The End Of Taking Business Models For Granted
Artist Immunity From Technological Progress?
Content creators are also subject to technological innovation; so why all the shrill cries for "protection"?
If a business model is made obsolete by technology, to bad; the business expires. Time to evolve.
On the post: Yellow Pages Sues Seattle For New Law Letting People Opt-Out Of Getting The Phone Book
This is What is Wrong with US Marketing
Free speech does not entitle anyone to inflict their message on the recipient. Furthermore, the recipient should not be forced to take proactive measures to avoid the message.
In accosting the consumer the "seller" is interfering with the consumer's free time and transferring a degree of liability on the consumer. Mike was FORCED by the publisher to dispose of the yellow book by putting it in the recycle bin. Had he not, given today's legal insanities, Mike might have been fined for "littering".
On the post: UK Police Told To Text Instead Of Using Radios In Order To Save Money
Yes "DRM" installed of Public Safety Radios
This issue emerged in a discussion of what would happen should public service radio repeater towers became inoperative (hurricane for example). The response was that ALL radio communication would be disabled. Normally if a repeater goes down, you can continue to communicate via simplex. The ability to use Simplex as an alternative may been "disabled". Whether this is true or not, I don't know.
Finally, found an article that delves into many of the issues The Difference Between Trunked and Conventional Radio Systems. The article writes: "Most trunked radio systems rely on proprietary software. Unlike conventional (non-trunked) radios that allow various brands of radios to seamlessly communicate, most trunked radios contain software that is licensed exclusively by the manufacturer. Most trunking software is viewed as a trade secret by radio manufacturers. .... Interoperability with radio systems that use different trunking technology (different brand of equipment and/or different software versions) is usually not possible. .... Trunked radios cost between three and five times more than non-trunked radios over the life of the equipment."
The disastrous use of proprietary technologies is not limited to the content industry, but to the public sector's ability to use radio communication as well. The privatization of public safety radio system will be (is becoming) a nightmare.
On the post: University Promises To Report File Sharers To Police, Tells Students They Can Spend 5 Years In Jail
Re: Re: Re: Surveillance Run Amok
Coincidentally, Mike posted a picture illustrating and making fun of the concept of how public facilities are being denigrated: When The RIAA Is The 'Standard' For Evil. In that picture GM has licensed the use of an interstate highway solely for GM cars!!!!
On the post: University Promises To Report File Sharers To Police, Tells Students They Can Spend 5 Years In Jail
Surveillance Run Amok
On the post: Oh Look, More Cord Cutters: Time Warner Cable Loses 155,000 TV Subscribers
Where is the Subscription Money Going?
On the post: Does Capital One Offer Different Loan Rates Based On Your Browser Software?
Just Scratching the Surface
What really irks me are the "fake" websites that are built on demand when undertaking a product search. Turns out, in many cases, that they do not even have the product.
On the post: Google Sues The US Government For Only Considering Microsoft Solutions
The Linux Solution
In fact, with Microsoft as the enterprise software vendor a lot of the expensive software provided is "useless" since the majority of government workers would seldom use it. Even MS Word, which is perhaps the most critical program, is seldom used to its full potential.
On the post: Myriad Appeals, Says Gene Patents Should Be Allowed
Re: Re: Where Will the Liability End?
I then don't suppose Monsanto would accept the cost of having their seeds or grown plants returned to them!
On the post: Myriad Appeals, Says Gene Patents Should Be Allowed
Where Will the Liability End?
So if a company like Myraid and Monsanto insist that they have a property right to genes for the purpose of extorting revenue, they should also be liable for the damages caused by the "escape" of their so-called property.
On the post: Yet Another Reminder That You Don't Own Your Ebooks: B&N Nook Deletes Files, Blames User
Ye Olde Double Standard
On the post: Supreme Court Chief Justice Admits He Doesn't Read Online EULAs Or Other 'Fine Print'
Availablity of "Authorized" Representative
Time to restore the meaning of "contract" to an agreement that defines both responsibilities and obligations for the parties involved.
On the post: Square Enix Sends C&D To Developer Creating OpenCarmageddon
Orphan Works
Products, should only "die" if the user community finds no further use in the product. Companies, especially with software, should not have the ability to unilaterally "kill" a product at their whim.
On the post: AP Wants To Become The ASCAP Of News
False Value Creation
On the post: Broken Monitor Still Under Warranty, But Samsung Won't Fix It, Because You Don't Live In Canada
Where are the Database Guru's?
So here we are in a world where companies buy and sell personal information, were virtually every piece of electronics has a serial number, were we have sophisticated just-in-time ordering systems, where GPS technology allows our every move to be tracked, were telemarketers (junk mailers) can track you down, and there is a record of every financial (credit card) transaction ever made; and Sam's club can't (won't) generate a duplicate receipt!
With today's technology there should be no need for any receipt to document proof of purcahse.
On the post: Traders Convicted For Figuring Out Auto Trading Algorithm; How Is That Illegal?
Economic Power Defines the Law
On the post: If Fair Use Protects Free Speech, Shouldn't It Be Seen As Default Until Proven Otherwise?
Just Part of the Overall Trend
On the post: The Impossible Job Of Being The Copyright Czar
Re: Re: Come Again?
On the post: The Impossible Job Of Being The Copyright Czar
Re: Re: Come Again?
Next >>