Infringement can happen without plagiarism, as in this case which is what the OP was discussing and confused the 2. Plagiarism is infringement only if you copy as part of claiming you had written something.
Of course it's parody :) Though I wouldn't be surprised if someone seriously presented that either...
I wander just how many content creators who's sole income is from ads and yet never get any money because they get linked and quoted all the time, I mean with the logic presented to the point where Google news is a problem for established, well known places, surely it must be common and happen all the time for the little guys right? Obviously if people like bob can seriously say that this is big enough problem to the point that it requires new law making, it must be happening all the time beyond mere hypothetical.
So many times when I've posted a link and credited someone in forums about something I found interesting, until I was contacted very quickly by the creator saying I had drained them of their revenue. So many occasions I came close enough to bankrupting non-specific content creators of which their livelihood only consists of Google ads and gained no new regular readers from the posting nor had any before hand.
These days I refrain from posting links and crediting others until I get their permission, and even then only post the first sentence. Though I still wander - am I doing the right thing? I think about how much money they lose even from that one sentence and can't sleep at night.
Trust me guys - it happens all the time. Don't make the same mistakes I did. Don't post links on blogs or forums.
So I guess all that money for the deals they did to get it used was wasted, not to mention the Moonlight project (http://www.mono-project.com/Moonlight).
Well, there's a slight difference between Doom and other games is that John Carmack is a strong supporter of open source. You'll be able to find some means to play Doom for some time. He even used code others created from the Wolfenstein source for the iPhone port...
I would definitely think such an argument is - to put it bluntly - bullshit. They're argument only works so long as you assume they have bad accountants and generally idiotic employees to price in a way that doesn't already account for this so they can still make their development cost and a little extra back. This is of course assuming the no degradation argument actually stands up, which for many years it hasn't.
Either it only becomes true if you assume usable backup copies (which is not something that's always easy to do with consoles AFAIK), or the other extreme assuming that this wear and tear happens often and soon enough that you'd buy so early on that first hand copies are still being distributed (let alone cheap enough to compete with second hand as in every other market). This then assumes you're making low quality crap that breaks quickly, which would make people reticent to buy in the first place if it happened often enough.
If Brown's copyrighted material continues to earn money after he dies,then his heirs deserve the money earned from them.
In which case, feel free to send the money you get any time you sell any of your possessions, like chairs, tables, desks, DVD's, games (both board and video game variety) to the creators. If something continues to earn money after someone who created it died or even merely can be claimed to have made any money at all for any one in any way, the creators deserve it.
Though I'll assume you've never done this throughout your life. Time to start emptying that savings account...
For a start, you still have to buy the game to begin with - the extra servers effectively make it more valuable to someone knowing there are those kinds of servers should they want a change.
I've had a discussion about this elsewhere with someone who is setting out to make a GPL'd game that will have a subscription element, and we discussed all sorts of things that can be done to add to the subscription element to help make it more attractive. One aspect was kind of a cross promotion with merchandising (buy something from a store and you get a months subscription, with a subscription you get a slight discount on items from the store).
Re: Again !! Article based on false premise.. Ie Kodak was slow to change... FACTUALLY WRONG..
Kodak phrased it as a technology problem, not a business model/competition problem.
They thought of digital film making like any other advance in photography, and so waited and invested (with little return) until digital was as good or better than film.
The problem being the competition had already found uses for it in other areas, and people didn't mind not having super high quality pictures if it had other advantages, like convenience.
On the post: Another ISP Fighting US Copyright Group Subpoenas; Why Aren't More ISPs Protecting Your Privacy?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Another ISP Fighting US Copyright Group Subpoenas; Why Aren't More ISPs Protecting Your Privacy?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Judge Considering Innocent Infringement Provision For Cat Blogger Sued By Righthaven
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: At some point it's not fair use
On the post: Judge Considering Innocent Infringement Provision For Cat Blogger Sued By Righthaven
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Judge Considering Innocent Infringement Provision For Cat Blogger Sued By Righthaven
Re: Re: Re: At some point it's not fair use
I wander just how many content creators who's sole income is from ads and yet never get any money because they get linked and quoted all the time, I mean with the logic presented to the point where Google news is a problem for established, well known places, surely it must be common and happen all the time for the little guys right? Obviously if people like bob can seriously say that this is big enough problem to the point that it requires new law making, it must be happening all the time beyond mere hypothetical.
I doubt he'd be able to truly show that though.
On the post: Judge Considering Innocent Infringement Provision For Cat Blogger Sued By Righthaven
Re: At some point it's not fair use
These days I refrain from posting links and crediting others until I get their permission, and even then only post the first sentence. Though I still wander - am I doing the right thing? I think about how much money they lose even from that one sentence and can't sleep at night.
Trust me guys - it happens all the time. Don't make the same mistakes I did. Don't post links on blogs or forums.
On the post: Has Microsoft Extinguished Silverlight?
On the post: Would Photography Have Been Different If It Had Been Patented Up?
Re: patent system's main effects were to cause a falling out between the original inventors OH NO.. a tiff..
Not really surprising, but thanks for the confirmation.
On the post: Video Game Exec Claims Used Games 'Cheat' Developers
Re: Re: Re: Re: Old games
http://www.idsoftware.com/wolfenstein-3d-classic-platinum/wolfdevelopment.htm
On the post: Video Game Exec Claims Used Games 'Cheat' Developers
Re: Not the Same as Cars
Either it only becomes true if you assume usable backup copies (which is not something that's always easy to do with consoles AFAIK), or the other extreme assuming that this wear and tear happens often and soon enough that you'd buy so early on that first hand copies are still being distributed (let alone cheap enough to compete with second hand as in every other market). This then assumes you're making low quality crap that breaks quickly, which would make people reticent to buy in the first place if it happened often enough.
On the post: NY Times Comes Out In Favor Of Fixing Small Parts Of Copyright Law
Re: Re: Re: Don't complain, show the NY Times how it's done
Since when has he claimed Techdirt is any thing more than a blog?
On the post: NY Times Comes Out In Favor Of Fixing Small Parts Of Copyright Law
Re: Don't complain, show the NY Times how it's done
On the post: Why Big Companies Almost Never Notice Disruptive Innovation
Re:
On the post: Why Debates Over Copyright Get Bogged Down: Conflating Use With Payment
Re:
In which case, feel free to send the money you get any time you sell any of your possessions, like chairs, tables, desks, DVD's, games (both board and video game variety) to the creators. If something continues to earn money after someone who created it died or even merely can be claimed to have made any money at all for any one in any way, the creators deserve it.
Though I'll assume you've never done this throughout your life. Time to start emptying that savings account...
On the post: John Mellencamp: The Internet Is An Atomic Bomb For Music
Re: Re:
On the post: Blizzard Awarded $88M Default Judgment Against Unauthorized World Of Warcraft Host
Re:
On the post: Blizzard Awarded $88M Default Judgment Against Unauthorized World Of Warcraft Host
Re: Re: Ultima Analogy
I've had a discussion about this elsewhere with someone who is setting out to make a GPL'd game that will have a subscription element, and we discussed all sorts of things that can be done to add to the subscription element to help make it more attractive. One aspect was kind of a cross promotion with merchandising (buy something from a store and you get a months subscription, with a subscription you get a slight discount on items from the store).
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1442535
On the post: Blizzard Awarded $88M Default Judgment Against Unauthorized World Of Warcraft Host
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Why Waiting Until A New Business Model Is Proven Doesn't Work
Re: Again !! Article based on false premise.. Ie Kodak was slow to change... FACTUALLY WRONG..
They thought of digital film making like any other advance in photography, and so waited and invested (with little return) until digital was as good or better than film.
The problem being the competition had already found uses for it in other areas, and people didn't mind not having super high quality pictures if it had other advantages, like convenience.
On the post: Why Are Entertainment Industry Spokespeople So Scared To Debate Critics?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: why?
Next >>