Actually Tracphone has a problem like this. Tracphone sells the phones for less than what they cost to make and then makes its money on customers putting minutes on them. A lot of foreigners scoop up the phones and ship them home and sell them at a profit.
The story should mention an ABC memo where the network asked its producers why they were licensing foreign shows when they could just steal the ideas and develop their own shows based on the concept. Look at CBS with its version of a Sherlock Homes series next fall that was obviously inspired by Stephen Moffitt's new take on Holmes for the BBC.
This is what happens when the government gets involved. Rather than actually looking over someone's qualifications, it just demands a certification whether that certification means anything or not. A lot of these regulations were also pushed for by teacher unions to try to keep the number of applicants down. It's been so effective that many large cities actually can't fill the number of teacher openings they have.
In Massachusetts the requirements have been increased to the point that someone who may already be teaching would have to take full-time courses for a year to obtain certification. Many people don't have that luxury.
For a lot of people, the only option is private schools where they prize knowledge and experience over how many education courses someone has taken. Discipline is also much better at private schools since the schools can actually kick out disruptive students, so working at a private school can be easier although the pay is usually less.
Also, like a lot of commenters, I don't see how Mike's wife was hired by the Chicago Schools without all the necessary paperwork. In fact, I don't see how she could have even applied without submitting all the forms I'm sure they required her to submit.
All lawyers file these kind of motions. Every defense lawyer will file a motion to dismiss every charge against his client, the prosecution will counter with every argument they can make. It's all just typical stuff.
However, if you make too many ridiculous arguments, a judge will get angry at you and it could taint your whole case. So I say to the US attorneys, keep it up! Get the judge angry at you and he might toss the whole case!
I once walked by an art gallery and saw some poorly painted canvases of Marvel and DC superheroes in the window. The artist was definitely NOT a comic book artist. But I wondered how the gallery had the right to sell something like that. I know that real comic book artists who do artwork for fans always feel they have to keep their heads down for fear Marvel and DC might stop them from doing fan artwork. Now, at least, there's a court case that legitimizes it.
This is a typical tactic that media companies have been using for decades. When they don't get what they want, they just keep hammering away trying to find a loophole or keep lobbying Congress to change the laws. A copyright expert has pointed out there's been something like 22 changes to copyright law over the past 40 years and the media industries still say they need more protection. It should also be pointed out that as a whole, media is raking more money than ever. Any losses individual companies experience are usually due to mismanagement and bad decisions.
It reminds me of the story about Will Wheaton visiting Congress when it was trying to pass SOPA and PIPA. Congressmen told him he was the first person they met who was against the laws. Apparently, Congress does nothing but meet with lobbyists all day, every day and it's not even aware that someone might be against the laws it passes.
Number of books printed has increased each decade...
For the people trying to come up with a conspiracy theory about why there's a dip in books in print post-1923, the number of titles printed has risen each decade, so that makes the dip even more pronounced.
As a general comment, probably 95% of everything ever published never gets reprinted until it enters the public domain. It's crazy that the US keeps extending the copyright period just to keep a handful of works out of the public domain.
I keep remembering what Randy Jackson pointed out some time ago -- that when the record labels began merging and consolidating in the early 2000s, they cut the number of artists under contract from 32,000 to 12,000 and then expected CD sale numbers to be the same. If those 20,000 artists sold a measly 10,000 CDs each, the industry itself cut sales by 200 million CDs or more in pursuit of profits. Dropping an Elvis Costello doesn't necessarily mean those fans are going to buy a Bruno Mars CD instead. In all likelihood, you've lost a customer forever, and that's what happened. The industry did the wrong thing at the wrong time and did it to itself.
I've been thinking of this for some time, but I would love to see a "collaborators" section in the copyright law that would allow people to alter a work, clearly label it as a mash-up or some such term so it would not be confused with the original, and then have something like 90% of any income derived from it go to the original copyright holders and 10% go to the remixer. Maybe you could license it through the Copyright Clearance Center. The 10% would be just enough of a financial incentive to get people working on such projects and it would allow these projects to be legally exhibited. As Brent pointed out, a re-edit of a work might drive people to buy the original, resulting in even more revenue for everyone involved. The whole point of public domain was to enable people to do this after a reasonable amount of time. But where the US felt that 20 years was a long enough time in the 1800s, and 56 years in the 1900s, now we have 95-150 year time periods in the 2000s, which is not a reasonable amount of time. This kind of addition to the copyright law might bring the spirit of public domain back to the law, but at the same time assuring that copyright holders would still make money for 95+ years!
The government will force the facility to collect it. It will be just another fee on the list of fees, but of course it will create a huge source of income for the record companies, not the artist.
If the poem was published and copyrighted in 1909, it went into the public domain in 1937, unless it was renewed, in which case it went into the public domain in 1965. If the poem was used as a song, the same time periods apply. Copyright back then was 28 years with a renewal for another 28 years. If the song was recorded and sold, the recording will go into the public domain in 2067 due to the fact that sound recordings were governed by state laws and not federal laws until recently.
This was discussed some months ago, but I agree. I think Google should buy ALL the record companies (I think $10 billion would do it) and make music free on the Internet (but of course sell advertising and marketing data on individuals' likes and dislikes). The result would be totally disruptive and would create a new business model.
This is sort of like the way the banking system had computers sign mortgage documents. No one actually read the applications, computers just dished out the loans. Here computers are just issuing takedown noticed. It's lucky the entire SFGate website wasn't taken down for infringing on the Chronicle film.
I think the best way to sum up Edison is to say that he used existing scientific principals to make consumer products which he then protected viciously using patent law. (For example, he would hire Pinkerton guards to go around and head-bust filmmakers caught using French-made Lumiere cameras.) With sound recording, lots of people knew that sound waves could be made to make a pen or a needle move, Edison had to come up with the engineering expertise to turn it into a usable consumer product. If you read the Wiki article on his cylinder recorder, it took him 10 years before he "perfected" it, basically giving up on tin foil and using wax as the recording medium. With motion picture cameras and projectors, however, it's pretty sure that Edison representatives saw the Lumiere devices in operation in Paris and Edison rushed to patent it in the US to monopolize that business. So Edison used a variety of methods to make money. He invented when he needed to, refined products when someone else invented them, and stole when he could.
That would be way too easy and helpful! As you know now, Webmasters and YouTubers usually find out by accident that their stuff has been taken down and then they have to fight to get it back up.
I think Google's correct, a lot of writers would like to just have their books read rather than withheld from the public. I heard a writer say he really didn't care that his copyright extended 70 years beyond his death, but he would like to be paid for his current work! One expert estimated that 75% of copyrighted works never renewed their copyright when the term was 28 years. The present copyright law only protects media corporations wanting to hang onto their stuff for as long as possible (I'm looking at you Mickey Mouse!)
This is an outstanding article. The only thing you left out was how does Warner Bros. make money from all of this? Instead of Warners getting 90% of the artist's money, you've got the artist keeping 100% of his money!
It's all about money. If you just post yourself singing a song on YouTube, nobody cares. But the minute you create a YouTube channel and try to get some of YouTube's ad revenue, then someone will care!
On the post: Apple Store Refuses To Sell To American Citizens Speaking Farsi In Case They Might Send iPhone To Iran
Tracphone
On the post: CBS Mocks Its Own Failed Copyright Lawsuit By Sarcastically Announcing New 'Completely Original' Show 'Dancing On The Stars'
ABC
On the post: A Broken System: Einstein Wouldn't Have Been 'Qualified' To Teach High School Physics
Government Involvement
In Massachusetts the requirements have been increased to the point that someone who may already be teaching would have to take full-time courses for a year to obtain certification. Many people don't have that luxury.
For a lot of people, the only option is private schools where they prize knowledge and experience over how many education courses someone has taken. Discipline is also much better at private schools since the schools can actually kick out disruptive students, so working at a private school can be easier although the pay is usually less.
Also, like a lot of commenters, I don't see how Mike's wife was hired by the Chicago Schools without all the necessary paperwork. In fact, I don't see how she could have even applied without submitting all the forms I'm sure they required her to submit.
On the post: US Continues To Try To Block Megaupload From Using Its Lawyers, Pretends It Has Jurisdiction Over The World
Typical Tactics
However, if you make too many ridiculous arguments, a judge will get angry at you and it could taint your whole case. So I say to the US attorneys, keep it up! Get the judge angry at you and he might toss the whole case!
On the post: Big Ruling Says Using Trademarks In Artistic Works Can Be Protected Under The First Amendment
Super Heroes
On the post: Australian ISP: Negotiating With Hollywood Over Copyright Is Like Talking To A Brick Wall
Typical tactic
On the post: Australian Gov't Chooses 'Consumer Advocate' For Secret Anti-Piracy Meetings: The Chairman Of The Copyright Council
Will Wheaton
On the post: Copyright Extension: A Way To Protect Hollywood From Having To Compete With The Past
Number of books printed has increased each decade...
As a general comment, probably 95% of everything ever published never gets reprinted until it enters the public domain. It's crazy that the US keeps extending the copyright period just to keep a handful of works out of the public domain.
On the post: RIAA To Congress: We're Finally Innovating... Now Go Shut Down Pirate Sites
Artists Cut
On the post: Fan-Made Movie Edits: Another Cultural Loss At The Hands Of Copyright
New Copyright System
On the post: Canada Approves New Music Tariffs; Weddings Cost Double If You Dance
Re: So...
On the post: The Ridiculous Hoops Mad Men Had To Jump Through To Use Part Of A Beatles Song
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Why Would Google Offer $1B For Music Rights? Because The Return Could Be Much Bigger
Buy them ALL!
On the post: Fox Issues DMCA Takedown To Google Over SF Chronicle Article... Claiming It Was The Movie 'Chronicle'
Banking System
On the post: Recorded Sound? Yeah, Edison Didn't Invent That Either
Interesting discussion
On the post: Greece Stares Into the Abyss; Meanwhile, Local Music And Audiovisual Collecting Society Gets Court Order To Block Web Sites
Not Greece
On the post: Google Lifts The Veil On Copyright Takedowns: Reveals Detailed Data On Who Requests Link Removals
Re: Idea for Google
On the post: Google Points Out That What The Authors Guild Wants And What Authors Want Are Two Very Different Things
Agree with Google
On the post: The Future Of Music Business Models (And Those Who Are Already There)
Outstanding Article!
On the post: How Can You Tell If Uploading Your Cover Song To YouTube Is Infringing? You Can't
Money
Next >>