If you fall into a "safe harbor," then what you are doing is entirely legal. Also, let's try not to forget that the DMCA, which creates those safe harbors, is one of those copyright laws you're talking about.
Which narrow group? The narrow group of people who admit to "unauthorized" streaming/downloading in a country where it is so socially acceptable that a political party was formed to ensure it stayed legal? That narrow group?
If "journalism" requires strict adherence to a code of ethics, and a process of editing and revision that includes at least two people, then why is there such a history of NONE of those three people doing any fact checking? The "editing process" of which you are speaking is usually just grammar and syntax checking.
And you don't have to be a "journalist" to be a newspaper writer, which is what the job can be more accurately called. You just have to have experience writing for newspapers.
The "code of ethics" you refer to may have existed some time in the past, but, like cowboys, the period it truly existed was short. "Yellow journalism" was occurring up into the 20th century, so I'm assuming it started some time after that. Of course, since the establishment of tabloids, the only fact checking done is the bare minimum required to defend against a lawsuit. In America, that is a single source who has told you that you can trust them. The defense is "I had no reason not to believe them," essentially.
As for any legal repercussions for lies that are printed, well. Yeah, already got those. Defamation laws, anyone? If anything, it's easier to press suit against an individual.
Well, they think they should make more. Not just more than zero, which is what they think unauthorized viewing gets them, but more than the imaginary number they think not earning means they've lost.
That's the problem with equating physical objects with truly infinite objects. Physical objects are consumed after production, while infinite objects are not. Oxygen bars cost money because the production of their product is ongoing, as well as getting access to the physical location.
Once art is created, it can be consumed by all without ever losing it's luster. In fact, it gains value (to society) as more people consume it, since with a larger audience it becomes relevant to a greater number of people.
However, access to art is only limited (naturally, anyways) BEFORE it is created. Once it's created, you need to monetize other things. A person doesn't buy a picture, they buy a painting. You don't buy a story, you buy a book.
You don't buy a movie, you buy the (relative) assurance that you won't get your pants sued off...
Interesting. I frequent this site BECAUSE he shares many of my beliefs.
Frankly, if not for the dissidents (not trolls, but truly dissenting voices), all that would be going on around here would be masturbatory choir-preaching. Dissenting opinions, when voiced as more than insult, give us a chance to examine and state, not just our beliefs, but why we believe them, and why you should, too.
And even if not a single one of you self-hating Techdirt supporters ever change your mind, someone out there is wondering why this stuff matters. And all your insults just make them more likely to shy from your side, and ignore any real points you make.
Well, any points you would make, if you ever made any.
On the post: Chinese Internet Users Relish Irony Of SOPA's Great Firewall Of America
Re:
On the post: Entertainment Industry Still Can't Get Grassroots Support For SOPA/PIPA, Resorts To Trying To Buy Support
Re:
On the post: Famed Patent Troll Smacked Down Over 'Anonymous' Threat Letter
Re: Re: Re: Chekhov??
Unfortunately, Mr Big Content is, I suspect, like OOTB. By which I mean, he actually believes the dreck he spews.
On the post: Famed Patent Troll Smacked Down Over 'Anonymous' Threat Letter
Re: Chekhov??
On the post: As Expected, SOPA Supporters Hate More Reasonable Alternative
Re: I think they don't like the process
Like "pirate" instead of "infringer."
On the post: How Labels Pulling Out Of Spotify Are Doing Massive Harm To Themselves
Re:
Yet, it is actually the label pulling their artists off, en masse.
No, wait, it's actually the DISTRIBUTOR, per the article, pulling over 200 labels off of spotify.
On the post: ICE Seizes Another 150 Domains As SOPA/PIPA Debate Heats Up
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Small question
Hmmm. Somehow I doubt that.
On the post: Swedish Study Shows File Sharing And Music Buying Go Hand-In-Hand
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Spain, Greece, etc.
On the post: Aaron deOliveira's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re:
On the post: Finns And Norwegians Argue Over Who Owns The Northern Lights
Re:
On the post: Swedish Study Shows File Sharing And Music Buying Go Hand-In-Hand
Re: Re:
On the post: The Real 'Scandal' Over Zynga Stock Options Is Over Misleading Reporting
Re: Carrying water for Zynga because it's against SOPA!
Basic reading comprehension, FTW
On the post: New Head Of UK's Newspaper Regulators Thinks Bloggers Are A Bigger Problem Than Phone Hacking Tabloids?
Re: "Bloggers" not the problem.
And you don't have to be a "journalist" to be a newspaper writer, which is what the job can be more accurately called. You just have to have experience writing for newspapers.
The "code of ethics" you refer to may have existed some time in the past, but, like cowboys, the period it truly existed was short. "Yellow journalism" was occurring up into the 20th century, so I'm assuming it started some time after that. Of course, since the establishment of tabloids, the only fact checking done is the bare minimum required to defend against a lawsuit. In America, that is a single source who has told you that you can trust them. The defense is "I had no reason not to believe them," essentially.
As for any legal repercussions for lies that are printed, well. Yeah, already got those. Defamation laws, anyone? If anything, it's easier to press suit against an individual.
On the post: House Judiciary Committee Denies That Its SOPA Hearing Is Stacked In Any Way
Re:
On the post: Viacom: Pass SOPA Or Spongebob Dies
Re:
On the post: Luma Labs Discontinues Popular Product Line After Competitor Gets A Patent... Despite Prior Art Going Back Over A Century
Re:
I dunno. Call me cynical, but this seems like a good way to cancel a product line without being "the bad guy."
On the post: Luma Labs Discontinues Popular Product Line After Competitor Gets A Patent... Despite Prior Art Going Back Over A Century
Re: Re: No Standards for Innovation
It just doesn't deserve a patent.
On the post: Misleading Metaphors That Drive The War On Online Sharing
Re: Re: Re: Re: IP Is Not Property
Once art is created, it can be consumed by all without ever losing it's luster. In fact, it gains value (to society) as more people consume it, since with a larger audience it becomes relevant to a greater number of people.
However, access to art is only limited (naturally, anyways) BEFORE it is created. Once it's created, you need to monetize other things. A person doesn't buy a picture, they buy a painting. You don't buy a story, you buy a book.
You don't buy a movie, you buy the (relative) assurance that you won't get your pants sued off...
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Re: "astroturfing"
Frankly, if not for the dissidents (not trolls, but truly dissenting voices), all that would be going on around here would be masturbatory choir-preaching. Dissenting opinions, when voiced as more than insult, give us a chance to examine and state, not just our beliefs, but why we believe them, and why you should, too.
And even if not a single one of you self-hating Techdirt supporters ever change your mind, someone out there is wondering why this stuff matters. And all your insults just make them more likely to shy from your side, and ignore any real points you make.
Well, any points you would make, if you ever made any.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Re: "astroturfing"
Next >>