I can only imagine the hilarity that will ensue. In fact, I kind of fear what some people might link to when doing that. There is scary disturbing potential beyond the Rick Roll.
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 14 Mar 2012 @ 10:49am
If copyrights are property and theft results in the loss of property, then why are copyright infringement penalties inline with theft?
If I steal a physical cd, I will get a few hundred dollars in fines and depending on previous convictions and or other things I stole, I could get some time in jail, but for petty shoplifting it is often not very long.
However, if I download that same cd, I am on the hook for potentially millions of dollars in fines.
So if IP maximalists want to continue to associate copyright infringement with theft and copyright with property, then they need to agree to bring penalties inline with actual theft.
Borenstein created the email attachment protocol, not for monetary gain, but to better the world. Inventors throughout history have followed that same philosophy. The availability of patents does not change those people's minds.
The world is a better place today because he did not seek a patent. Had he sought a patent, the world would be a very different and probably worse world than it is.
Pretty much all software patents have no real monetary potential. The only real monetary potential for software patents is in licensing fees and patent lawsuits. That is not how real innovation is born.
I have read the updates and yes you are right. Mojang gets to use the name for this game in all its versions. That is what the conflict was about though, the naming rights of this game. Not sequels or other games.
That said, I have updated the story with the information and the link to Joystiq.
Trademark does. That was what this was all about. Under trademark law, when someone applies for a mark, other groups with similar trademarks can challenge that registration. That is what Bethesda did in this case.
However, someone successfully getting a trademark does not mean that other groups with similar marks already registered are infringing. They are in the clear.
From what it saounds like, this is "Mojang can continue to name its game 'Scrolls', so long as it does not seek a trademark for it. Bethesda keeps its 'The Elder Scrolls' trademark."
All of those things could be said with or without this slogan, and have actually already been said. So I still don't see why that makes this slogan bad.
I really don't see the problem with the wording. I think it could have been just as effective as "Don't tread on the Internet" with the accompanying snake.
I also don't see how this wording could be turned against anyone. It is making the statement that the internet is fine how it is and we should be messing it up. How is that bad?
If it's acceptable for Youtube to be "too big to check", then the patent system can also be "too big to review".
I don't think this line means what you want it to mean. In that you have failed in your attempt to rebut Mike's article.
Youtube is too big to check from Youtube's end. Why? Because everything under the sun that has been fixed in a medium since 1923 is automatically covered by copyright. It is mathematically impossible for Youtube to compare everything uploaded to every single thing created since 1923 and at the same time judge whether it is infringement or not.
On the other hand, it is perfectly acceptable for the owner of a copyright to do the policing for that owner's own copyrights.
Same thing here with software patents. It is mathematically impossible for a software developer to compare their software with every software patent for infringement. However, the owner of the software patent is free to police its own software patents.
As for a solution, I think some minor changes can be made for both areas of IP law. However, you and your ilk are not interested in any real solutions. You only want increase while logic, common sense and sanity call for rolling IP law back.
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 12 Mar 2012 @ 12:49pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What I am getting at is that you claim to want to end misinformation campaigns, but it seems for only the side the won this particular debate. You want those who fought against SOPA/PIPA to stop using misinformation (which I agree with you on that point) but are neglecting the massive amount of misinformation coming from the pro-SOPA/PIPA side of the debate.
What is troubling is that you think it is such a huge issue that people were latching onto the original language of the bills even after many of the more troubling parts were amended out, but seem to have no problem with the fact that the bills in question were written and proposed based on the very lies and misinformation spouted by the likes of the MPAA and the RIAA.
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 12 Mar 2012 @ 10:21am
Re: Re: Re:
Regardless, the amended bills were still bad, still unbalanced to the detriment of the public and still needed to be killed.
Another problem was the nature in which the bills were amended. They were amended in private with no input except by those that were lobbying for the bills to begin with. That still screams abuse.
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 12 Mar 2012 @ 10:07am
Re:
I am going to have to agree with DCX2 here. Does it really matter who is sending in the information from where? I don't think so. If it results in better legislation then it was good advice.
As it stands right now, we the people aren't being heard on any regular basis. Just a few months ago, I was told that if I wasn't flying out to Washington DC and booking an appointment with my representative every time I needed to voice my opinion, then my opinion doesn't matter. What made such a statement worse was the fact that my Congressman and Senator's responses to my letters seemed to hold that as a truth.
Contrary to popular troll belief, these people are elected to represent the people, not special interests. Legislation should be considered on its impact for all people in the US, not just those who spend millions lobbying the government every year. SOPA failed because it was not carefully weighed and balanced to the benefit of all the US. That is why any further legislation following it will fail.
It is time to stop the closed minded and closed off legislative process.
Edgar Rice Burroughs. Copyright was created to encourage artists and writers to continue to create. With a copyright of life plus 70 years, Burroughs should be still writing books today. However, he has been dead for nearly 70 years now.
I believe the covers were designed to mimic many Sci-fi and Fantasy covers from many classic sci-fi and fantasy books. Many of those books had covers featuring overtly sexualized women. It was a stylistic choice of Dynamite. While ERB may consider that damaging to their brand, the key here is whether they have a brand that is protected by trademark in this case.
At least one of the books I own has a publishers note in it, whereby ERB "renewed" their copyright...but no note about how long for.
You mentioned that your books were printed in 1963, at that time I believe copyright was 25 years with an optional 25 year renewal. That could be what it is referring to.
There is definitely going to be a number of high profile cases like this if copyright sticks to its current term lengths. As you have pointed out, Disney is massively litigious and will fight tooth an nail to 1) lengthen copyright to continue to protect Mickey or 2) attempt to use trademark to protect their brand around Mickey.
I hope that this ERB case reaches a point that it would effectively negate any future attempt at using trademark law to block the use of public domain material. That would hurt Disney's ability to follow the same path with regard to Mickey.
Thanks for sharing this. I was aware that ERB does this on a regular basis and it is great that you were able to defend yourself without being forced into a court for it.
As I said above, getting 50,000 signatures does not mean it becomes law. It means that the proposal will be viewed by the parlament. They can still reject it if they want.
On the post: Does Anyone Who Develops New Products In Hollywood Ask 'Would I Ever Actually Use This?'
Re:
On the post: Thinking Of Copyright As Property Is As Natural As Thinking Of Smells As Property
If I steal a physical cd, I will get a few hundred dollars in fines and depending on previous convictions and or other things I stole, I could get some time in jail, but for petty shoplifting it is often not very long.
However, if I download that same cd, I am on the hook for potentially millions of dollars in fines.
So if IP maximalists want to continue to associate copyright infringement with theft and copyright with property, then they need to agree to bring penalties inline with actual theft.
On the post: Celebrating 20 Years Of Patent-Free Email Attachments
Re:
Borenstein created the email attachment protocol, not for monetary gain, but to better the world. Inventors throughout history have followed that same philosophy. The availability of patents does not change those people's minds.
The world is a better place today because he did not seek a patent. Had he sought a patent, the world would be a very different and probably worse world than it is.
Pretty much all software patents have no real monetary potential. The only real monetary potential for software patents is in licensing fees and patent lawsuits. That is not how real innovation is born.
On the post: Valve's Comprehensive Strategy Shows How To Go From Fee To Free... And Increase Revenue Twelve-fold
Re: Re:
On the post: Mojang and Bethesda Reach A Settlement In 'Scrolls' Trademark Dispute
Re:
That said, I have updated the story with the information and the link to Joystiq.
On the post: Mojang and Bethesda Reach A Settlement In 'Scrolls' Trademark Dispute
Re: My point of view
However, someone successfully getting a trademark does not mean that other groups with similar marks already registered are infringing. They are in the clear.
On the post: Mojang and Bethesda Reach A Settlement In 'Scrolls' Trademark Dispute
Re: Scrolls
On the post: Help Fund A 'Don't Mess With The Internet' Billboard In Lamar Smith's District
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Help Fund A 'Don't Mess With The Internet' Billboard In Lamar Smith's District
Re:
I also don't see how this wording could be turned against anyone. It is making the statement that the internet is fine how it is and we should be messing it up. How is that bad?
On the post: Why It's Mathematically Impossible To Avoid Infringing On Software Patents
Re:
I don't think this line means what you want it to mean. In that you have failed in your attempt to rebut Mike's article.
Youtube is too big to check from Youtube's end. Why? Because everything under the sun that has been fixed in a medium since 1923 is automatically covered by copyright. It is mathematically impossible for Youtube to compare everything uploaded to every single thing created since 1923 and at the same time judge whether it is infringement or not.
On the other hand, it is perfectly acceptable for the owner of a copyright to do the policing for that owner's own copyrights.
Same thing here with software patents. It is mathematically impossible for a software developer to compare their software with every software patent for infringement. However, the owner of the software patent is free to police its own software patents.
As for a solution, I think some minor changes can be made for both areas of IP law. However, you and your ilk are not interested in any real solutions. You only want increase while logic, common sense and sanity call for rolling IP law back.
On the post: 'Don't Get SOPA'd' Is The New Mantra On Capitol Hill
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What is troubling is that you think it is such a huge issue that people were latching onto the original language of the bills even after many of the more troubling parts were amended out, but seem to have no problem with the fact that the bills in question were written and proposed based on the very lies and misinformation spouted by the likes of the MPAA and the RIAA.
On the post: 'Don't Get SOPA'd' Is The New Mantra On Capitol Hill
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Then why haven't the supporters of SOPA/PIPA shut up yet?
On the post: 'Don't Get SOPA'd' Is The New Mantra On Capitol Hill
Re: Re: Re:
Another problem was the nature in which the bills were amended. They were amended in private with no input except by those that were lobbying for the bills to begin with. That still screams abuse.
On the post: 'Don't Get SOPA'd' Is The New Mantra On Capitol Hill
Re:
As it stands right now, we the people aren't being heard on any regular basis. Just a few months ago, I was told that if I wasn't flying out to Washington DC and booking an appointment with my representative every time I needed to voice my opinion, then my opinion doesn't matter. What made such a statement worse was the fact that my Congressman and Senator's responses to my letters seemed to hold that as a truth.
Contrary to popular troll belief, these people are elected to represent the people, not special interests. Legislation should be considered on its impact for all people in the US, not just those who spend millions lobbying the government every year. SOPA failed because it was not carefully weighed and balanced to the benefit of all the US. That is why any further legislation following it will fail.
It is time to stop the closed minded and closed off legislative process.
On the post: 'Don't Get SOPA'd' Is The New Mantra On Capitol Hill
Re:
On the post: Edgar Rice Burroughs Inc. Using Trademark Law To Prevent The Use Of Public Domain Stories
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Edgar Rice Burroughs Inc. Using Trademark Law To Prevent The Use Of Public Domain Stories
Re:
At least one of the books I own has a publishers note in it, whereby ERB "renewed" their copyright...but no note about how long for.
You mentioned that your books were printed in 1963, at that time I believe copyright was 25 years with an optional 25 year renewal. That could be what it is referring to.
On the post: Edgar Rice Burroughs Inc. Using Trademark Law To Prevent The Use Of Public Domain Stories
Re: Disney gearing up to do the same?
I hope that this ERB case reaches a point that it would effectively negate any future attempt at using trademark law to block the use of public domain material. That would hurt Disney's ability to follow the same path with regard to Mickey.
On the post: Edgar Rice Burroughs Inc. Using Trademark Law To Prevent The Use Of Public Domain Stories
Re: ERB Inc. has a history of this
On the post: Finnish Act Lets The Public Send Bills To Parliament, Volunteer Group Makes It Easy
Re: Removing the Middleman
Next >>