Re: Re: Re: Re: Response to: That One Guy on Jun 11th, 2014 @ 4:37am
when Chicago PD switched from revolvers (6 rounds) to semi-autos (15 rounds or more) that the average shots fired per incident went from 2 to 12.
I remember reading something like that too. However, 12 seems a little excessive for a single officer in a single incident. I'd have to see the data to figure out whether it was really comparing apples-to-apples. Four officers firing three rounds each would be quite different than one officer firing 12 rounds.
While they can be done smoothly, they require repositioning of the hands at least - getting back on target quickly after a re-load takes lots of practice too.
They shouldn't. Reloading should be as fluid and with one hand as possible, with no looking. The gun remains on target the whole time. If you are repositioning your hands, you are doing it wrong. The only time you should remove your trigger hand from the gun is when you put it back in your holster. The trick is practicing this over and over until it becomes easy.
As Michael said, it's not that difficult. Competitive shooters (I used to be one) can easily have split times, i.e., time between successive shots on the same target, of 0.25 seconds for targets out to several yards. Yes, that's 4 rounds in a second *and* getting good hits on target.
The police qualifications I am familiar with are 3 shots in 2 seconds. Well below the 4 shots a second for normal competition shooters. 2 seconds doesn't sound like a very long time until you qualify...then it seems like ages. I suspect competition shooters have the same problem at a much greater scale for a second.
Also as Michael said, it is very difficult to do this accurately.
Depends on how close you are to the target. Most out-of-battery exercises are about 3 yds from the target (which actually isn't a very bad distance.) At that range, pointing the gun at the target is all the aiming you really need and you can get very close to the center of the milk-bottle without much effort. For competition shooters, 3 yds is the bare minimum and most of them like 5-10 yds. At that range, front-site-picture and accuracy are far more important.
Re: Re: Response to: That One Guy on Jun 11th, 2014 @ 4:37am
Furthermore I suspect he would have dropped is second, partly expended magazine and reloaded when the shooting stopped, and inserted his third, and possibly final, fully loaded 17 round mag.
Quite possible.
In the "olden days" the firearms instructors would push their students to "count your rounds" and would give disciplinary actions to anyone who dropped live rounds or kept firing after their gun was dry (a real problem when you had five or six shot revolver, hence Clint Eastwood's famous line.)
With semi-automatic weapons, the slide goes back when the magazine is dry, so it was easier, if you're paying attention, to know that you need to reload, but it still happens. Throw in adrenalin and fog of war, and you could very easily reload on a partial magazine.
Re: Response to: That One Guy on Jun 11th, 2014 @ 4:37am
49 rounds in 20 seconds is crazy.
Well within the required time limit for qualifications of a police officer. The standard is 3 shots in 2 seconds. Someone who spends the required range time and is firearms qualified can do this easily (if they can find a range that will allow them to do this, since most public ranges don't look kindly at "rapid firing.")
He reloaded twice and still emptied multiple clips (not knowing his specific gun model, 2+ reloads would be typical for a police sidearm).
Out-of-battery exercises are also required for qualifications.
He's just firing wildly with complete disregard to ...everything.
I've had a number of different cable providers over the years in a number of different places, and Comcast is the worst of the lot by a good margin.
I've only had one, and it isn't Comcast or TWC. It is actually one of the better cable providers. They are up pretty high on Netflix's speed list, and I've not had too much of a problem with them over the years (except, of course, when their network goes down and I have to call them and let them know, which seems to happen every couple of months, and they tend to treat me like an idiot and assume that it is something wrong with my computer or modem.)
I'd gladly ditch them if I could get my broadband from someone -- anyone -- else (I don't care one whit about cable TV itself).
I'd drop mine in a heartbeat, *FOR EXACTLY THIS REASON.* I am a cable-cutter. I want internet; I want it at a decent speed when I ask for it (and while I may be a "power user", the actual statistics from my router suggests that I am not;) and I don't want to play games with them.
What really bothers me is that they always seem to take the roach motel model for everything they do...they make it really damn easy to sign up for stuff but then it takes an act of god to get them to remove and/or stop charging you for services you don't want. When I cut the cable, they kept trying to get me to switch to basic cable. Then, when I finally got them to actually cut the cable, they told me that I still got the local channels through their line, and they would still charge me for those channels (even though they are available for free OTA.) When I threatened to drop them entirely, they removed the local-channels only item from the bill and raised my internet cost by $10 (not bundled, so I get to pay more.)
Unfortunately, my distance from the phone company (which I hate far more than my cable provider,) is such that I can get sub-1mbps DSL or crappy wifi/wimax speeds. No FIOS, and AT&T came by recently trying to sell me 4G Broadband with lame caps as part of their "U-Verse" so I know that even they know DSL isn't much of an option to me.
Also - let's point out that Netflix is just the canary. The problem is pervasive.
Thanks Michael, exactly.
The problem boils down to Verizon's use of an asterisk next to their "up-to 25 mBps." They promise the customer a maximum limit of 25 mBps (like everyone else in the industry,) but rarely can they provide 2.5 mBps per customer. As others have said here, the FTC should really get involved at this point and mandate that ISPs be at least 2 standard deviations or below of their average speed, instead of pushing the maximum theoretical speed, which is all but unobtainable even in the best of conditions. This problem is only going to get worse and like their current views on cable-cutting (as in, it isn't happening in their eyes, even though everyone else knows it is,) they are going to go through a lot more canaries before they realize the air is bad.
OpenSSL is commercial software that provide a source code. LibreSSL will truly be open source and a drop-in replacement for OpenSSL with a solid experienced team.
OpenSSL is no more commercial than OpenBSD is. You are welcome to pay for support from OpenSSL in the same way that you are to pay for support from OpenBSD.
They are both distributed using a BSD or BSD-derivative license.
Ok, now what about the other 6 exploits that do NOT require both clients and servers to be vulnerable?
There were 5 other ones, not 6. And most of them were DoS attacks. And most of the other ones were not common configurations and thus only affected a small portion of the users.
All we can hope now is for a horrible death and LibreSSL to come out soon.
And LibReSSL will have flaws discovered in it too. Theo is a wonderful programmer, but he is one man, with a small team that is spread out over many software branches. And his reputation speaks for itself, but there are still flaws discovered occasionally in OpenBSD/OpenSSH/etc.
Writing software isn't easy. But instead of bitching and moaning, why don't you help out. OpenSSL hasn't been a mess since day 1 because it was a mess, it has been a mess since day one because it was 2 guys writing software to scratch an itch and there was nothing else around at the time that could solve, and instead of pitching in and helping out, people just leeched on it.
Is it a big flaw, yes. Nobody is dismissing it. Apply the patch and move on.
This of course on a day when ANOTHER problem with OpenSSL is found, making millions of sites vulnerable again to a man in the middle attack.
There will always be flaws discovered in stuff, at least until computers take over the writing of stuff.
Also, read the vulnerability report, both the client and the server need to be running vulnerable versions of OpenSSL (which isn't likely to be the case unless the web browser you use is compiled against OpenSSL,) and the attacker has to be in the middle of the stream in order to perform the attack. Significantly more difficult to accomplish than just asking the server to give you the contents of its memory. Really nasty? Absolutely. Earth shattering to the point that we should just turn off our computers and descend to the dark ages. Probably not.
I have always dreaded commenting here because my work could see it if they wanted to.
Chances are, they still know. Mine certainly does, but then again, they know everything anyway (and I really don't go out of my way to hide it from them.) It isn't like I can hide my Techdirt window whenever my boss comes in when he can just go to Techdirt himself and look up my profile and see everything. Little less of an issue for ACs.
HTTPS doesn't hide the end-points, only the traffic. Piping it though a VPN or Proxy or via SSH-forwarding through an AWS/Hosting Service host might help as well, though it may raise questions and may be more trouble than it is worth. Depends on why you are hiding your comments from work.
Which would demonstrate very little valuable information for the consumers...When it comes to streaming media, latency is less important than bandwidth.
Maybe, but it would also show you where the loading is on the network. If I have four gateways to the internet, and my routes are set up to load each gateway with 1/4 of the traffic, if I see a ton of dropped packets on a particular gateway, it may show me that the traffic through that particular gateway is being saturated, while the others are not. I'd certainly like to see what type of traffic is saturating that link (because it is probably a lot of huge packets.) Maybe adjust the policies to spread out the load a little better? But then again, I care about providing network service to my customers, not establishing a tollbooth so I can protect my dying cable business model.
But if I was an ISP that didn't want Netflix to work properly until I get paid, I'd purposefully throw all my streaming traffic to Netflix on my slowest, most congested link. Seeing latency times routing directly to Netflix vs routing through a VPN to Netflix might give you a really good idea of what is going on, as some people have been able to show their traffic lagging when going directly to Netflix, while transiting normally through a VPN (despite the added overhead of the VPN.) And Level 3 already showed at least with Comcast that there was some evidence that this was going on.
I was going to ignore this latest round of little stupid spats that have been going back and forth -- except that now it appears that Verizon has taken it up a level and actually issued a cease and desist to Netflix sayng it should no longer blame Verizon when the network is clogged.
I, for one, would love to see this go to court. These ISPs keep playing the role of mob-boss ("That is sure a nice looking good or service you got there, would be a shame if something should a' happen to it,") and pushing to tax everyone for access to their network. It would be nice to see them get slammed by the courts when it is revealed that they did, in-fact, saturate their links and throttle connections to Netflix in order to receive favorable benefits from the abuse of their monopoly status.
One thing we don't currently have is court mandated discovery to base our understanding of what happened, but instead just the well developed investigation of third parties to show that something hokey is going on.
With ABP (AdBlock+) turned on, everything is working fine. With ABP off, I am also getting errors on passive ads. Thought I turned ABP off for Techdirt, but apparently it was still running.
Umm, no, when you sign up for the 'Cult of Masnick/TD' you should have received a stuffed shoulder parrot, an eye-patch, and a shirt with 'ARRR!' super-imposed over a trinity of Floppy disc, CD, and computer.
Yeah, but shhhhh... That is only for us insiders. Don't let the A/C know that. (I say, proudly wearing my this shirt has been seized/motherf*cking eagle shirt hidden under my business attire at work. Yes, I am doing it wrong.)
Plus, there's a multiplayer version where you can play as the Slender Man. That's got to be something.
There is even an MMO with Slender Men. Well, Enderman. Been playing it for quite some time and I am quite disappointed at how many of the days I could be doing something productive are instead spent in Minecraft.
heh, I was gonna comment if he has ever seen the movie hackers that actually used known hacks in the movie.
I don't remember hackers ever showing "real hacks" but I can't think of anyone I work with which didn't go giddy when they saw Trinity using nmap on a movie that was somehow related to the movie Matrix (which some people refer to as Matrix 2.)
All I can remember about Hackers, other than a young Angelina Jolie, is a graphical operating system that looked like Tron 2.0 (and amazingly similar to the "It's Unix...I know Unix" operating system on Jurassic Park) and a collapsible skateboard.
Just goes to show that copyright isn't about protecting the rights of artists and creators at all. It's only about getting a bigger piece of the pi.
I was going to bash you over the head for conflating copyright and trademark infringement, but this two-bit intellectual property lawyer actually is confusing the two! Trademark infringement is not Copyright infringement, and an intellectual property lawyer should know the difference between the two, unless this guy isn't actually an intellectual property lawyer.
I'm surprised you still have a job. Where I work (a major ISP), you wouldn't.
Could you let us know what ISP you work for so we can avoid using it? k thx.
Certainly, I'd rather work for a manager who properly applied logic, such as risk assessment and mitigation instead of a manager who shoots the messenger and dismisses all risk with "it can't be done because nobody who would do it wants to buy our expensive software." You can only insert your head up your ass so far. The fact that his manager decided to come around with logic over emotion is commendable. Sadly, there are quite a few companies out there whose managers care more about saving face than protecting their employees, business processes, and customers from known flaws in their software.
The term for a copyright should about 15 years and is non-renewable.
I'd be quite alright with copyright being renewable indefinitely, so long as the government collects taxes on the property (if they want to treat intellectual property like physical property, then they should pay for it like physical property.) At some point, it will no longer be profitable to keep the IP, and it would become public domain the moment they don't pay taxes on it (just like other forms of property, i.e. real-estate, automobiles, etc..) The taxes could go to fund public works (which would not be copyrightable,) and to build a publicly accessible database (free-of-charge) for all works currently under copyright and their licensing terms (cutting out the waste involved with clearing copyrights.)
On the post: Six Officers Charged In Police Pursuit That Ended With 137 Shots Being Fired At Suspects In A Little Over 20 Seconds
Re: Re: Re: Re: Response to: That One Guy on Jun 11th, 2014 @ 4:37am
I remember reading something like that too. However, 12 seems a little excessive for a single officer in a single incident. I'd have to see the data to figure out whether it was really comparing apples-to-apples. Four officers firing three rounds each would be quite different than one officer firing 12 rounds.
On the post: Six Officers Charged In Police Pursuit That Ended With 137 Shots Being Fired At Suspects In A Little Over 20 Seconds
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 47 rounds
They shouldn't. Reloading should be as fluid and with one hand as possible, with no looking. The gun remains on target the whole time. If you are repositioning your hands, you are doing it wrong. The only time you should remove your trigger hand from the gun is when you put it back in your holster. The trick is practicing this over and over until it becomes easy.
On the post: Six Officers Charged In Police Pursuit That Ended With 137 Shots Being Fired At Suspects In A Little Over 20 Seconds
Re: Re: Re: Re: 47 rounds
The police qualifications I am familiar with are 3 shots in 2 seconds. Well below the 4 shots a second for normal competition shooters. 2 seconds doesn't sound like a very long time until you qualify...then it seems like ages. I suspect competition shooters have the same problem at a much greater scale for a second.
Also as Michael said, it is very difficult to do this accurately.
Depends on how close you are to the target. Most out-of-battery exercises are about 3 yds from the target (which actually isn't a very bad distance.) At that range, pointing the gun at the target is all the aiming you really need and you can get very close to the center of the milk-bottle without much effort. For competition shooters, 3 yds is the bare minimum and most of them like 5-10 yds. At that range, front-site-picture and accuracy are far more important.
On the post: Six Officers Charged In Police Pursuit That Ended With 137 Shots Being Fired At Suspects In A Little Over 20 Seconds
Re: Re: Response to: That One Guy on Jun 11th, 2014 @ 4:37am
Quite possible.
In the "olden days" the firearms instructors would push their students to "count your rounds" and would give disciplinary actions to anyone who dropped live rounds or kept firing after their gun was dry (a real problem when you had five or six shot revolver, hence Clint Eastwood's famous line.)
With semi-automatic weapons, the slide goes back when the magazine is dry, so it was easier, if you're paying attention, to know that you need to reload, but it still happens. Throw in adrenalin and fog of war, and you could very easily reload on a partial magazine.
On the post: Six Officers Charged In Police Pursuit That Ended With 137 Shots Being Fired At Suspects In A Little Over 20 Seconds
Re: Response to: That One Guy on Jun 11th, 2014 @ 4:37am
Well within the required time limit for qualifications of a police officer. The standard is 3 shots in 2 seconds. Someone who spends the required range time and is firearms qualified can do this easily (if they can find a range that will allow them to do this, since most public ranges don't look kindly at "rapid firing.")
He reloaded twice and still emptied multiple clips (not knowing his specific gun model, 2+ reloads would be typical for a police sidearm).
Out-of-battery exercises are also required for qualifications.
He's just firing wildly with complete disregard to ...everything.
Probably not. Unnecessary, yes. Cold blooded murder, yes. Complete disregard to everything, absolutely. Wildly, probably not.
On the post: More Than Half Of All People Want To Ditch Their Cable Provider, If Only They Could
Re: Not a suprise
I've only had one, and it isn't Comcast or TWC. It is actually one of the better cable providers. They are up pretty high on Netflix's speed list, and I've not had too much of a problem with them over the years (except, of course, when their network goes down and I have to call them and let them know, which seems to happen every couple of months, and they tend to treat me like an idiot and assume that it is something wrong with my computer or modem.)
I'd gladly ditch them if I could get my broadband from someone -- anyone -- else (I don't care one whit about cable TV itself).
I'd drop mine in a heartbeat, *FOR EXACTLY THIS REASON.* I am a cable-cutter. I want internet; I want it at a decent speed when I ask for it (and while I may be a "power user", the actual statistics from my router suggests that I am not;) and I don't want to play games with them.
What really bothers me is that they always seem to take the roach motel model for everything they do...they make it really damn easy to sign up for stuff but then it takes an act of god to get them to remove and/or stop charging you for services you don't want. When I cut the cable, they kept trying to get me to switch to basic cable. Then, when I finally got them to actually cut the cable, they told me that I still got the local channels through their line, and they would still charge me for those channels (even though they are available for free OTA.) When I threatened to drop them entirely, they removed the local-channels only item from the bill and raised my internet cost by $10 (not bundled, so I get to pay more.)
Unfortunately, my distance from the phone company (which I hate far more than my cable provider,) is such that I can get sub-1mbps DSL or crappy wifi/wimax speeds. No FIOS, and AT&T came by recently trying to sell me 4G Broadband with lame caps as part of their "U-Verse" so I know that even they know DSL isn't much of an option to me.
On the post: Yes, Verizon Is At Fault In Netflix Dispute; It's Not Delivering What It Sold Customers
Re: Re: Re:
Thanks Michael, exactly.
The problem boils down to Verizon's use of an asterisk next to their "up-to 25 mBps." They promise the customer a maximum limit of 25 mBps (like everyone else in the industry,) but rarely can they provide 2.5 mBps per customer. As others have said here, the FTC should really get involved at this point and mandate that ISPs be at least 2 standard deviations or below of their average speed, instead of pushing the maximum theoretical speed, which is all but unobtainable even in the best of conditions. This problem is only going to get worse and like their current views on cable-cutting (as in, it isn't happening in their eyes, even though everyone else knows it is,) they are going to go through a lot more canaries before they realize the air is bad.
On the post: WordPress.com Makes SSL Enabled By Default
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: openSSL
OpenSSL is no more commercial than OpenBSD is. You are welcome to pay for support from OpenSSL in the same way that you are to pay for support from OpenBSD.
They are both distributed using a BSD or BSD-derivative license.
On the post: WordPress.com Makes SSL Enabled By Default
Re: Re: Re: openSSL
There were 5 other ones, not 6. And most of them were DoS attacks. And most of the other ones were not common configurations and thus only affected a small portion of the users.
All we can hope now is for a horrible death and LibreSSL to come out soon.
And LibReSSL will have flaws discovered in it too. Theo is a wonderful programmer, but he is one man, with a small team that is spread out over many software branches. And his reputation speaks for itself, but there are still flaws discovered occasionally in OpenBSD/OpenSSH/etc.
Writing software isn't easy. But instead of bitching and moaning, why don't you help out. OpenSSL hasn't been a mess since day 1 because it was a mess, it has been a mess since day one because it was 2 guys writing software to scratch an itch and there was nothing else around at the time that could solve, and instead of pitching in and helping out, people just leeched on it.
Is it a big flaw, yes. Nobody is dismissing it. Apply the patch and move on.
On the post: WordPress.com Makes SSL Enabled By Default
Re: openSSL
There will always be flaws discovered in stuff, at least until computers take over the writing of stuff.
Also, read the vulnerability report, both the client and the server need to be running vulnerable versions of OpenSSL (which isn't likely to be the case unless the web browser you use is compiled against OpenSSL,) and the attacker has to be in the middle of the stream in order to perform the attack. Significantly more difficult to accomplish than just asking the server to give you the contents of its memory. Really nasty? Absolutely. Earth shattering to the point that we should just turn off our computers and descend to the dark ages. Probably not.
On the post: Techdirt Is Now 100% SSL
Re: As someone who posts from work...
Chances are, they still know. Mine certainly does, but then again, they know everything anyway (and I really don't go out of my way to hide it from them.) It isn't like I can hide my Techdirt window whenever my boss comes in when he can just go to Techdirt himself and look up my profile and see everything. Little less of an issue for ACs.
HTTPS doesn't hide the end-points, only the traffic. Piping it though a VPN or Proxy or via SSH-forwarding through an AWS/Hosting Service host might help as well, though it may raise questions and may be more trouble than it is worth. Depends on why you are hiding your comments from work.
On the post: Verizon Sends Netflix A Cease & Desist, Saying It Can't Blame Verizon For Clogged Networks
Re: Re: Re: Good...
Maybe, but it would also show you where the loading is on the network. If I have four gateways to the internet, and my routes are set up to load each gateway with 1/4 of the traffic, if I see a ton of dropped packets on a particular gateway, it may show me that the traffic through that particular gateway is being saturated, while the others are not. I'd certainly like to see what type of traffic is saturating that link (because it is probably a lot of huge packets.) Maybe adjust the policies to spread out the load a little better? But then again, I care about providing network service to my customers, not establishing a tollbooth so I can protect my dying cable business model.
But if I was an ISP that didn't want Netflix to work properly until I get paid, I'd purposefully throw all my streaming traffic to Netflix on my slowest, most congested link. Seeing latency times routing directly to Netflix vs routing through a VPN to Netflix might give you a really good idea of what is going on, as some people have been able to show their traffic lagging when going directly to Netflix, while transiting normally through a VPN (despite the added overhead of the VPN.) And Level 3 already showed at least with Comcast that there was some evidence that this was going on.
On the post: Verizon Sends Netflix A Cease & Desist, Saying It Can't Blame Verizon For Clogged Networks
Good...
I, for one, would love to see this go to court. These ISPs keep playing the role of mob-boss ("That is sure a nice looking good or service you got there, would be a shame if something should a' happen to it,") and pushing to tax everyone for access to their network. It would be nice to see them get slammed by the courts when it is revealed that they did, in-fact, saturate their links and throttle connections to Netflix in order to receive favorable benefits from the abuse of their monopoly status.
One thing we don't currently have is court mandated discovery to base our understanding of what happened, but instead just the well developed investigation of third parties to show that something hokey is going on.
On the post: Techdirt Is Now 100% SSL
Re: Re: Re: Not 100% yet
With ABP (AdBlock+) turned on, everything is working fine. With ABP off, I am also getting errors on passive ads. Thought I turned ABP off for Techdirt, but apparently it was still running.
Non-encrypted address appears to be http://www.assoc-amazon.com/[..].
On the post: Creepypasta Feels Compelled To State That Its Stories Are Fiction & It's Not A Satanic Cult; Thanks Everyone...
Re: Re:
Yeah, but shhhhh... That is only for us insiders. Don't let the A/C know that. (I say, proudly wearing my this shirt has been seized/motherf*cking eagle shirt hidden under my business attire at work. Yes, I am doing it wrong.)
On the post: Everyone Go Crazy: Prepare To Blame The Internet For Murder-Inducing Ghost Stories
Re: Re: Maybe...
There is even an MMO with Slender Men. Well, Enderman. Been playing it for quite some time and I am quite disappointed at how many of the days I could be doing something productive are instead spent in Minecraft.
On the post: Glenn Beck Claims Watch Dogs Is Teaching Children How To Hack The Public For Realz
Re: Re: Beck is right.
I don't remember hackers ever showing "real hacks" but I can't think of anyone I work with which didn't go giddy when they saw Trinity using nmap on a movie that was somehow related to the movie Matrix (which some people refer to as Matrix 2.)
All I can remember about Hackers, other than a young Angelina Jolie, is a graphical operating system that looked like Tron 2.0 (and amazingly similar to the "It's Unix...I know Unix" operating system on Jurassic Park) and a collapsible skateboard.
On the post: Trademark Holder Sends Cease-And-Desist To Zazzle Over Products Using 3,000-Year-Old Greek Letter
Re:
I was going to bash you over the head for conflating copyright and trademark infringement, but this two-bit intellectual property lawyer actually is confusing the two! Trademark infringement is not Copyright infringement, and an intellectual property lawyer should know the difference between the two, unless this guy isn't actually an intellectual property lawyer.
On the post: Popular Wiretapping Tool Used By Law Enforcement Includes Backdoor With Hardcoded Password
Re: Re: Usually management
Could you let us know what ISP you work for so we can avoid using it? k thx.
Certainly, I'd rather work for a manager who properly applied logic, such as risk assessment and mitigation instead of a manager who shoots the messenger and dismisses all risk with "it can't be done because nobody who would do it wants to buy our expensive software." You can only insert your head up your ass so far. The fact that his manager decided to come around with logic over emotion is commendable. Sadly, there are quite a few companies out there whose managers care more about saving face than protecting their employees, business processes, and customers from known flaws in their software.
On the post: The Web Is In The Public Domain... But The Document That Put It There Is Locked Up By Copyright
Re: Automatic Copyrights
I'd be quite alright with copyright being renewable indefinitely, so long as the government collects taxes on the property (if they want to treat intellectual property like physical property, then they should pay for it like physical property.) At some point, it will no longer be profitable to keep the IP, and it would become public domain the moment they don't pay taxes on it (just like other forms of property, i.e. real-estate, automobiles, etc..) The taxes could go to fund public works (which would not be copyrightable,) and to build a publicly accessible database (free-of-charge) for all works currently under copyright and their licensing terms (cutting out the waste involved with clearing copyrights.)
Next >>