Agreed. Monolithic systems are highly attractive to publishers looking for backwards-compatibility with 20th century thinking that went along with vertical integration (or at least direct control) of the distribution channel.
Sure, iPhones and iPads use modern, low-cost distribution (via Internet), but are demonstrably de-evolutionary for computer using society as they represent an artificial return to the "closed" systems development circa 1940's-1990's. Sure, they might run have JRE's and Adobe clients... you just can't use Java apps from their app store unless you have already consumed the hardware kool-aid. Most likely, they will also lock-down use of "open" apps on these devices as well, just like the Iphone.
This kind of virtual time-machine is perfect for the CEO who would just rather not learn anything new. They're just hoping people still like kool-aid.
So we supposedly shouldn't call the multi-national corporate oligarchy "capitalism". Okay. Any suggestions for a different term?
Many on this site feel that the definition of "fascism" is an accurate description for the modern states. However I still feel "mercantilism" is more accurate considering it is basically guilds of powerful businesses that drive lawmakers worldwide.
While I'm not one to harp on a company for taking proprietary software and making it available for free ("freeware"), I do agree there is a huge difference between open source "free software" and "freeware".
As stated elsewhere, open source software adds the benefit of being highly adaptable for any given implementation. The corporation benefits from the efforts of developers that worked on the project before they adopted the software, and the open source community benefits from continued evolution of the project as it is adapted from one environment to the next.
"Freeware" is locked-down. It works for one's environment, or it does not. "Beer for free" is not at all a bad thing, but if you can't tweak the recipe you might be left with a bitter aftertaste, if you are able to choke it down at all.
That's a highly plausible theory in the business world, Mike. I found the same head-in-the-sand spending mentality with pretty much every company I did business with or heard about through friends in the first half of 2009. When "the big guys" act panicked, the sheep do follow, to whatever end.
Of course, its never a good idea to leave an excess of funds in the budget, if the business unit and line managers have remote hopes of getting the same or better budget the next year.
I believe the problem here is that the meaning of the words "capitalist", "capitalism" and, especially, "free market" has been twisted to represent the type of economy and business environment today.
Unfortunately, we do not have a free market, we have old-school mercantilism updated for fiat currencies in a global exchange. The mechanism of essentially legislating a business model is no different today than it was in the 1850s.
"I'm predicting that the overwhelming majority of others will view this level playing field of "product and distribution protection regardless of format" as a reasonable path forward that actually PROTECTS and EXTENDS democracy"
You've sort of jumped off the "sanity boat" on that one, correlating 'copyright protectionism in the digital age' and democracy.
Also, the "we believe anything you tell us" support you seem to be counting on from the masses in all your posts is normally only dependable in healthy economic environments. The entertainment execs peeing their pants to get ACTA through so they can "cope" with the current economic situation would do well to consider that over 10% of the working families who normally have no time to care now suddenly have all the time in the world to read, and to comprehend, and to write their congresspersons.
I totally agree in principle. However, I worry that if they codified the prior art defense, the prior art defense would be nullified in most cases, just as the "fair use" defense was gutted by its inclusion in copyright reform.
Maybe, but I don't think they're that smart. My guess is they cannot tell the difference between a network (the Internet), an application or a server.
Apparently the French *do have to logon to so called "public free" networks, which must be an administrative nightmare for hotels, coffee shops and other (at least former) small scale service/access providers. So maybe you're right after all, and they think its reasonable to have every mom and pop shop with gratis WiFi access generate and audit one-off user names. Of course, as Mike points out, requiring ISP logon is just as impotent in effectively identifying and preventing access of a single entity as is IP address "association".
They cannot prevent sharing or hacking, and they cannot implement a "three strikes you're off" system without violating fundamental rights granted in the U.S. *and in the EU.
Yup. They call it a fiat currency, but I prefer the term "faith-based currency". Basically the value of the dollar reflects the faith that worldwide investors have in the U.S. Government's ability to pay its bills.
Besides, just thinking about it logically makes it ridiculous to think that iTunes has somehow limited new music discovery. For many, many, many people, it seems likely that it has increased new music discovery, and done so by taking the record labels somewhat (not entirely) out of that loop.
While I prefer other services, iTunes definitely has made a positive impact on music discovery. If iTunes were not being employed for discovery by a significant number of people, the record companies would not be begging for a payout every time someone "previews" a song on Apple's store.
And the belly-aching about letting Jobs beat them to the market continues unabated.
Well it isn't like the Murdoch empire actually practices journalism....
Precisely! And not practicing journalism is precisely the kind of journalism business partners and marketeers prefer.
If Summit thought someone was going to include their "work" in an article researched and written for *fans, they would not have put those pictures on the press page.
In what was billed as a 'luxury' apartment building (a specious claim to begin with), the owning company had a lock down deal with a sat tv provider. Of course the sat company had no justification whatsoever to upgrade their equipment and wiring since every unit with TV was forced to buy their crappy service.
Considering their years of happily (somewhat) doing business in China, I too suspect there are more... material conditions that have driven Google to its current stance.
However, much like the politics of war, raising and cementing a widely accepted (or lauded) moral impetus behind action could very well change the way people think in a positive way. It is almost predetermined that this case will end up being discussed, in some way, publicly by politicians in numerous countries. For me, it would be most welcome if the subject of Free Speech were paid more lip service by politicians and made it to their list of regularly prescribed "talking points".
Not that I believe there would be a direct, immediate and *real effort by any government to reverse the years of pillaging the core tenants of freedom of speech, but if the subject were given bandwidth... then it is possible a significant amount of "normal" people might take this issue back into their consciousness. Pitchforks and marches *do get government attention... unfortunately the issues of interest on the agenda today seem to me to be more topical than substantial.
On the post: Why Can't All These Ideas For Content On The iPad/Tablets Also Work On The Web?
Re: Control
Sure, iPhones and iPads use modern, low-cost distribution (via Internet), but are demonstrably de-evolutionary for computer using society as they represent an artificial return to the "closed" systems development circa 1940's-1990's. Sure, they might run have JRE's and Adobe clients... you just can't use Java apps from their app store unless you have already consumed the hardware kool-aid. Most likely, they will also lock-down use of "open" apps on these devices as well, just like the Iphone.
This kind of virtual time-machine is perfect for the CEO who would just rather not learn anything new. They're just hoping people still like kool-aid.
On the post: How Can The Music Industry Be Dead When More Music Is Being Produced And More Money Is Being Made?
Re: Re: Meaning vs. Media Meaning
Many on this site feel that the definition of "fascism" is an accurate description for the modern states. However I still feel "mercantilism" is more accurate considering it is basically guilds of powerful businesses that drive lawmakers worldwide.
On the post: CIOs Jumping On The Free Software Bandwagon
Re: Free Software vs Freeware
As stated elsewhere, open source software adds the benefit of being highly adaptable for any given implementation. The corporation benefits from the efforts of developers that worked on the project before they adopted the software, and the open source community benefits from continued evolution of the project as it is adapted from one environment to the next.
"Freeware" is locked-down. It works for one's environment, or it does not. "Beer for free" is not at all a bad thing, but if you can't tweak the recipe you might be left with a bitter aftertaste, if you are able to choke it down at all.
Free(dom) is such an abused term these days.
On the post: Don't Buy Into Any Reports On Q4 Online Ad Revenue Just Yet
Yes
Of course, its never a good idea to leave an excess of funds in the budget, if the business unit and line managers have remote hopes of getting the same or better budget the next year.
It's The Ostrich Effect
On the post: How Can The Music Industry Be Dead When More Music Is Being Produced And More Money Is Being Made?
Meaning vs. Media Meaning
Unfortunately, we do not have a free market, we have old-school mercantilism updated for fiat currencies in a global exchange. The mechanism of essentially legislating a business model is no different today than it was in the 1850s.
Free Capitalist loosely defined here.
On the post: Why Shouldn't Jurors Be Able To Use Technology To Do More Research?
Re: Wrong argument Mike
Well, at least with professional juries they are already identified, bought and paid for before the trial even starts.
On the post: Awkward Stock Photo Blog Hit With DMCA Claim
Re: Re: Stealing or sharing?
Oh, that's just precious!
Strike 3, you're out.
Sucker.
On the post: USTR: A Lot Of Misperception Over ACTA, But We Won't Clear It Up Or Anything
Re: Re: We, the People
You've sort of jumped off the "sanity boat" on that one, correlating 'copyright protectionism in the digital age' and democracy.
Also, the "we believe anything you tell us" support you seem to be counting on from the masses in all your posts is normally only dependable in healthy economic environments. The entertainment execs peeing their pants to get ACTA through so they can "cope" with the current economic situation would do well to consider that over 10% of the working families who normally have no time to care now suddenly have all the time in the world to read, and to comprehend, and to write their congresspersons.
On the post: Distributor Claims Microsoft Terminated Partnership After Reps Refused To Take Part In Sex/Drug Party
Re: Question:
On the post: Who Dat Holds The Trademark To Who Dat? NFL Threatens While WhoDat Inc. Asks Why?
Re: Prior art
On the post: IFPI Claims That Three Strikes Can Surgically Remove One Family Member From The Internet, But Not The Rest
Re: AOL
Apparently the French *do have to logon to so called "public free" networks, which must be an administrative nightmare for hotels, coffee shops and other (at least former) small scale service/access providers. So maybe you're right after all, and they think its reasonable to have every mom and pop shop with gratis WiFi access generate and audit one-off user names. Of course, as Mike points out, requiring ISP logon is just as impotent in effectively identifying and preventing access of a single entity as is IP address "association".
They cannot prevent sharing or hacking, and they cannot implement a "three strikes you're off" system without violating fundamental rights granted in the U.S. *and in the EU.
On the post: The Future Of Music Business Models (And Those Who Are Already There)
Re: Re: Re:
Damn... how do I fix that?
On the post: Intuit Lobbying The Government To Make It More Difficult To File Your Tax Returns
Re: Re: Re: Just Wondering
On the post: Unsubstantiated Claim: iTunes Success Makes It Harder To Discover New Music
discovery
While I prefer other services, iTunes definitely has made a positive impact on music discovery. If iTunes were not being employed for discovery by a significant number of people, the record companies would not be begging for a payout every time someone "previews" a song on Apple's store.
And the belly-aching about letting Jobs beat them to the market continues unabated.
On the post: The Future Of Music Business Models (And Those Who Are Already There)
Re:
It's a bit technical for those outside the industry, but I'll try to break it down.
Good_Musician=TRUE
Audience_Reached=0
while (talent != 0) {
play_music_somewhere_in_public_once()
foreach (person_listening_in_audience) {
Audience_Reached++
}
}
On the post: Summit Entertainment Shuts Down Twilight Fanzine For Infringement
Re: Re:
Precisely! And not practicing journalism is precisely the kind of journalism business partners and marketeers prefer.
If Summit thought someone was going to include their "work" in an article researched and written for *fans, they would not have put those pictures on the press page.
On the post: Landlords Can't Force You To Sign Up With One Cable Co... But Can Charge You Extra For Water If You Pick Wrong
I once had to move to get HD
At least I have my priorities straight.
On the post: Florida Not A Fan Of The Internet; Potentially Rules Out Lawyer Blogs
Re: First Amendment doesn't protect Advertising
Yes, and that line of reasoning would be correct for any entity not presently loathed by Rob Reiner.
On the post: Will Google Pull Out Of India, Australia And Other Countries Over Internet Censorship?
Re: Answer to your previous question
However, much like the politics of war, raising and cementing a widely accepted (or lauded) moral impetus behind action could very well change the way people think in a positive way. It is almost predetermined that this case will end up being discussed, in some way, publicly by politicians in numerous countries. For me, it would be most welcome if the subject of Free Speech were paid more lip service by politicians and made it to their list of regularly prescribed "talking points".
Not that I believe there would be a direct, immediate and *real effort by any government to reverse the years of pillaging the core tenants of freedom of speech, but if the subject were given bandwidth... then it is possible a significant amount of "normal" people might take this issue back into their consciousness. Pitchforks and marches *do get government attention... unfortunately the issues of interest on the agenda today seem to me to be more topical than substantial.
Well.. at least I can always hope.
On the post: UK Ministers 'Concede' Some Ridiculous Points in Digital Economy Bill In Attempt To Get Other Ridiculous Measures
Re:
Digital Economy Bill: Bigger, Longer, Uncut
Next >>