Clueless as ever, darryl? The internet truly is 'many to many.' Look at this site. MANY people post, and MANY people read, and reply. It is an ever-expanding discussion among an ever-growing group of people.
Now stop spiking the cool-aid so much, you're eradicating your few remaining brain cells.
We are the consumers. We get to determine how much ANY business makes. We vote with out dollars. If you don't like it, you're in the wrong line of work.
If you truly think an artist deserves to determine how much they earn, then you're living in a fantasy land. Grow up. Get out of mom's basement. Get a real job.
So, you have nothing constructive to add to the discussion in favor of this bill? Instead you're going to resort to the sort of sophomoric attacks we've come to expect from the pro-ip crowd? It's a sad day for you, isn't it, that you can only come back in this sort of manner.
How are we, the consumer, responsible for the constraining of artists' choice? We have the final choice of purchase. If we don't like what you've got, or how you're offering it, that's your problem. Continuing on the way you are is your choice. We aren't forcing you to change the way you are trying to force us to stay the same. Guess who wins in the long run?
Of course they get to decide, but that decision is 'do I want to do what the public will pay for, and be able to put food on my table,' or 'do I want to just do what I want to do and risk obscurity?'
See? Decisions! The market WILL help you decide what you SHOULD do.
It would seem to me that there is a vastly significant difference, here. Conflating them is apples and oranges.
One tends towards stifling specific founding principles of our country.
The other tends towards stifling the anti-competitive natures of ISPs.
Instead of regulating an industry in order to keep monopolies from cropping up (net neutrality), they're discussing regulating society to keep monopolies in business (so-called government-mandated anti-'piracy' measures).
Ahh, trying to be a sneaky one, are you? But considering the cultural works that should have been in the public domain, the medications that should have been released to the generic companies, etc.? Well, then, you should have had rights to those things by now. But you don't. So you have, indeed, lost.
Lamar Alexander (TN)
Michael Bennet (CO)
Roy Blunt (MO)
Scott Brown (MA)
Sherrod Brown (OH)
Thad Cochran (MS)
Bob Corker (TN)
Richard Durbin (IL)
Lindsey Graham (SC)
James Inhofe (OK)
Mike Lee (UT)
Claire McCaskill (MO)
Mark Pryor (AR)
James Risch (ID)
Marco Rubio (FL)
Richard Shelby (AL)
David Vitter (LA)
Sheldon Whitehouse (RI)
Free speech and due process are among the cornerstones of our nation and our system of law. ANY questions regarding them are meaningful, not specious. To make this sort of statement marks you. Marks you as one who does not think these things are important. That the rights and liberties of the many must be trampled by the few in the name of the Almighty Dollar. (Buck? Right.)
Putting money where your mouth is doesn't mean that you are right. It just means you have money to purchase a decision in your favor. As I love my country, I despise my government (Which is as it SHOULD BE!), and I argue that corporations are being given far too much power in our courts, our government, and our lives.
Coming from one lacking in any sort of talent, creativity, basic intelligence, common courtesy, or even the common sense to come out of a torrential downpour, I feel it safe to say that your comment is useless.
Maybe, just maybe, you'll be relevant or insightful. Someday.
On the post: Can We Kill Off This Myth That The Internet Is A Wild West That Needs To Be Tamed?
Re: Many to many ??? (what like a world war ?)
Now stop spiking the cool-aid so much, you're eradicating your few remaining brain cells.
On the post: New Report: IP Laws Are Crippling The EU Economy
Re:
On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Sony's Insane Fear Of 'Piracy' Means Many Movies Now Suck In Digital Theaters
Re:
On the post: Ron Wyden: Puts Hold On PROTECT IP, Temporarily Withdraws Amendment On The PATRIOT Act
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If you truly think an artist deserves to determine how much they earn, then you're living in a fantasy land. Grow up. Get out of mom's basement. Get a real job.
On the post: The 18 Senators Who Approve Breaking The Internet To Protect Hollywood
Re:
On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
See? Decisions! The market WILL help you decide what you SHOULD do.
On the post: Jake Gyllenhaal Threatening Websites For 'Defamation By Photoshop'?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Hrm?
On the post: Sarkozy's Attempt To Woo The Digerati Foreshadows The Coming Conflict Between Technology & Regulations
Re: Government regulation of the Internet
One tends towards stifling specific founding principles of our country.
The other tends towards stifling the anti-competitive natures of ISPs.
Instead of regulating an industry in order to keep monopolies from cropping up (net neutrality), they're discussing regulating society to keep monopolies in business (so-called government-mandated anti-'piracy' measures).
I'm sorry if you can't tell the difference.
On the post: Please Help Us Figure Out How Much The Public Has 'Lost' Due To Overprotective Anti-Copy Laws
Re:
On the post: Why We Haven't Seen Any Lawsuits Filed Against The Government Over Domain Seizures: Justice Department Stalling
Re: Re: Must have been too much contact with the Chinese
Dumbass.
On the post: Why We Haven't Seen Any Lawsuits Filed Against The Government Over Domain Seizures: Justice Department Stalling
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Why We Haven't Seen Any Lawsuits Filed Against The Government Over Domain Seizures: Justice Department Stalling
Re: Would an FOIA request help?
On the post: Oh Look, The Overall Music Industry In Canada Has Been Growing As Well...
Re: Inaccurate
Now, you might want to go back and reread the article that points to someone else's research. This isn't Mike's research, just his commentary on it.
Better yet!
[citation needed]
On the post: The Only Eight Senators Who Think Extending The Patriot Act Deserves More Discussion
Re:
Michael Bennet (CO)
Roy Blunt (MO)
Scott Brown (MA)
Sherrod Brown (OH)
Thad Cochran (MS)
Bob Corker (TN)
Richard Durbin (IL)
Lindsey Graham (SC)
James Inhofe (OK)
Mike Lee (UT)
Claire McCaskill (MO)
Mark Pryor (AR)
James Risch (ID)
Marco Rubio (FL)
Richard Shelby (AL)
David Vitter (LA)
Sheldon Whitehouse (RI)
On the post: Universal Music: We Need PROTECT IP Because Musicians Are Dying!
Re: Re: Re:
Putting money where your mouth is doesn't mean that you are right. It just means you have money to purchase a decision in your favor. As I love my country, I despise my government (Which is as it SHOULD BE!), and I argue that corporations are being given far too much power in our courts, our government, and our lives.
On the post: Brand Delusion
Re: HA HA HA... ohhhh !!
Maybe, just maybe, you'll be relevant or insightful. Someday.
On the post: Being Concerned With Free Speech Implications Of PROTECT IP Does Not Mean You Think You're Above The Law
Re: Re: Re:
Please explain to the class, good sir, how a natural right is 'undeserved' just because someone is not an American.
On the post: Google Points Out That PROTECT IP Would Be A 'Disastrous Precedent' For Free Speech
Re: Re: Re: NO, IP PROTECT would be distasterous for Google's profits
Next >>