You know what I think... well I'm not going to tell you......well not until I get my IP copyrighted so you can't do anything with what I will say without my permission....so I'll be back later
Your right. If I own a car that doens't mean I can do whatever I want with it because eventually I will cross a line called public safety.
However I can repaint it, I can add NOS to it, I can change the tires, I can raise it or lower it, I can drop in a HEMI, .... on and on and on. I have changed the RP to something that is not what it was origionally sold as.
But what if I did the same thing to an album... no i'm not talking about dropping in twin turbos on an album. What I'm talking about is taking the origional songs, remixing them or slowing the tune down and making it a country song or turning it into industrial music.
Whats the difference?
At one point in time both the design of the auto and the lyrics and notes of the cd were somebodies IP, now in RP form. Why can I change one and not the other?
The root of the problem is that at one point in time all things were IP. Then somebody somewhere was pissed that somebody else took their idea of say the (getting hypothetical) catapult and made a better one. What does the originator do? He gets the king to make a law that only allows people to make catapults that fall within the design of the original and has to have permission to do so. Flash forward a few millenia.... does this mean that the US Army would have to ask permission to not only change the design of the original catapult but also ask permission to build one? (The tank being a descendent of the catapult.)
So simply put... This is about one person wanting to be more special then everybody else because they think the output from their brain is more special then the output of anybody else's brain.
Is the driver still choosing to use a distraction, cellphone or otherwise?
It's the driver who chooses to focus part of their attention on something other then driving. That is the problem... period.
Cleaning up the licensing system; more effective testing & effective regulation would keep the distractable/inept drivers from even being behind the wheel. People will cry unfair but... it's a privilage NOT a right!
So what I'd like to know is when will the government stop putting band-aids on the broken leg?
Yes, being a distracted driver is a bad thing... but a cellphone isn't the only distraction. What about iPod/mp3 player? Eating while driving? Make-up application while driving?
Why are cell phones being singled out?
The root issue is not the accessories or objects that distract us, it's the drivers who choose to allow themselves to be distracted with anything other then driving.
Stop allowing just about anybody to get a drivers license!
Fix the driver population and you'll make the roads safer!
On the post: Copying Is Not Theft
What I think
On the post: Is Intellectual Property A Violation Of Real Property?
Re:
Your right. If I own a car that doens't mean I can do whatever I want with it because eventually I will cross a line called public safety.
However I can repaint it, I can add NOS to it, I can change the tires, I can raise it or lower it, I can drop in a HEMI, .... on and on and on. I have changed the RP to something that is not what it was origionally sold as.
But what if I did the same thing to an album... no i'm not talking about dropping in twin turbos on an album. What I'm talking about is taking the origional songs, remixing them or slowing the tune down and making it a country song or turning it into industrial music.
Whats the difference?
At one point in time both the design of the auto and the lyrics and notes of the cd were somebodies IP, now in RP form. Why can I change one and not the other?
The root of the problem is that at one point in time all things were IP. Then somebody somewhere was pissed that somebody else took their idea of say the (getting hypothetical) catapult and made a better one. What does the originator do? He gets the king to make a law that only allows people to make catapults that fall within the design of the original and has to have permission to do so. Flash forward a few millenia.... does this mean that the US Army would have to ask permission to not only change the design of the original catapult but also ask permission to build one? (The tank being a descendent of the catapult.)
So simply put... This is about one person wanting to be more special then everybody else because they think the output from their brain is more special then the output of anybody else's brain.
On the post: Driving While Yakking Laws Looking More And More Like 'Help The Gov't Make Money' Laws
Re: Re: Band-aids for a broken system
It's the driver who chooses to focus part of their attention on something other then driving. That is the problem... period.
Cleaning up the licensing system; more effective testing & effective regulation would keep the distractable/inept drivers from even being behind the wheel. People will cry unfair but... it's a privilage NOT a right!
In fact according to science some people are just born a bad driver:
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20091029/Gene-variant-may-be-the-cause-for-bad-driving-UC- Irvine-neuroscientists.aspx
On the post: Driving While Yakking Laws Looking More And More Like 'Help The Gov't Make Money' Laws
@bdhoro
So does that mean outlawing manual transmission vehicles?
On the post: Driving While Yakking Laws Looking More And More Like 'Help The Gov't Make Money' Laws
Band-aids for a broken system
Yes, being a distracted driver is a bad thing... but a cellphone isn't the only distraction. What about iPod/mp3 player? Eating while driving? Make-up application while driving?
Why are cell phones being singled out?
The root issue is not the accessories or objects that distract us, it's the drivers who choose to allow themselves to be distracted with anything other then driving.
Stop allowing just about anybody to get a drivers license!
Fix the driver population and you'll make the roads safer!
Next >>